r 


n 

I 


THE 


CYCLO  P^DIA 


OF 


Temperance  and  Prohibition. 


A  Reference  Book  of  Facts,  Statistics,  and  General  Information 

on  All  Phases  of  the  Drink  Question,  the  Temperance 

Movement  and  the  Prohibition  Agitation. 


«_■:■  ■ 


FUNK    &   WAGNALLS. 

T  ^xTT^^xT  NEW  YORK. 

LONDON.  TORONTO. 

I  8  9  I . 


\ 


Printed  in  the  United  States.  All  rights  reserved. 


V\^^^,0 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  189?,  by 

FUNK    &    WAGNALI.S, 

In  the  Office  of  the  Librarian  of  Congress  at  Washington,  D.  C 

[Registered  at  Stationer's  Hall,'l.ondon,  Eng.l 


PREFACE. 


The  growing  prominence  of  the  drink  question  is  one  of  the  undoubted, 
indeed,  one  of  the  most  conspicuous,  facts  of  our  time.  Both  the  observer  of  affairs 
and  the  student  of  tendencies  must  testify  to  this;  and  the  understanding  of  it  is 
strengthened  by  comprehensiveness  and  dispassionateness  of  vievi^.  Throughout 
Continental  Europe  the  ablest  writers  are  discussing  the  evils  of  alcoholism  and 
devising  remedies.  Organized  effort  is  being  developed,  even  in  these  most  con- 
servative nations.  The  International  Conferences  "against  the  abuse  of  alcoholic 
liquors "  attract  many  of  the  leaders  of  thought  and  reform.  The  Brussels  Anti- 
Slavery  Conference,  representing  countries  in  which  the  liquor  traffic  is  practically 
unrestricted,  has  taken  American  legislation  as  a  pattern  and  incorporated  in  its 
general  act  for  Africa  a  chaj^ter  prohibiting  the  furnishing  of  spirits  to  native  races. 
And  this  action  is  not  without  Continental  precedents :  for  five  years  the  fishermen 
of  the  North  Sea  have  been  forbidden  to  purchase  or  carry  distilled  drink,  and  for 
a  longer  time  Prohibition  of  the  entire  liqiior  business  has  been  the  normal  policy 
of  the  Swedish  and  Norwegian  rural  communities.  In  England  and  all  English- 
speaking  countries  total  abstinence  is  no  longer  a  "  fad  "  but  a  mark  of  discretion 
and  intelligence;  the  Prohibitory  doctrine  is  no  longer  a  preposterous  creed  but  an 
economic  programme  that  begins  to  fairly  divide  public  sentiment,  parties,  Legisla- 
tures and  constituencies.  Organizations  having  annual  incomes  of  tens  of  thou- 
sands of  pounds  are  urging  advanced  measures  in  tlie  United  Kingdom.  The 
people  of  Scotland,  voting  by  the  plebiscite  system,  have  declared  by  overwhelming 
majorities  in  favor  of  clothing  the  citizens  with  power  to  outlaw  public  houses 
at  the  ballot-box.  1'wice  the  yeomanry  of  Great  Britain,  with  signal  earnestness  and 
enthusiasm,  have  rejected  the  proposition  to  bestow  compensation  for  cancelled 
licenses,  giving  the  weight  of  popular  indorsement  to  the  decree  of  the  highest 
Courts  of  England,  that  there  exists  no  such  thing  as  a  "  vested  right  "  in  the  liquor 
trade — a  significant  repetition   of  those  solemn  words  of  our  own  Supreme  Court ; 


IV 

"There  is  no  inherent  right  in  a  citizen  to  sell  intoxicating  liquors  by  retail;  it  is 
not  a  privilege  of  a  citizen  of  the  State  or  a  citizen  of  the  United  States."  In  the 
land  of  its  birth  the  temperance  movement,  despite  temporary  checks,  advances 
surely.  There  is  no  State  of  the  Union  where  liquor-selling  is  not  a  most  detestable 
vocation  and  rumseller  a  most  opprobrious  name.  Total  abstinence  for  the  indi- 
vidual is  splendidly  vindicated  by  its  results  everywhere ;  great  railroad  and  other 
corporations  require  it  in  their  employes ;  insurance  companies  discriminate  in  favor 
of  the  teetotaler  and  rank  the  liquor-maker  and  vendor  with  the  uncleanest  of  men ; 
the  Labor  leaders  take  public  pledges  of  abstinence,  denounce  alcohol  in  unmeas- 
ured language  and  cordially  advocate  Prohibitory  Amendments ;  the  churches  are 
all  but  unanimous  in  recommending  total  abstinence ;  the  Government  itself  bears 
witness  to  the  needlessness  and  hurtfulness  of  intoxicants  by  prohibiting  the  sale  of 
spirits  and  wines  in  the  canteens  and  by  the  post-traders  of  the  American  army,  by 
excluding  the  whole  traffic  from  public  buildings  and  grounds  and  by  forbidding, 
under  severe  penalties,  all  sales  to  Indians.  The  policy  of  Prohibition  by  the  State 
rests  on  broad  and  firm  foundations ;  the  evidence  of  its  beneficial  results  cannot  be 
controverted,  and  no  attempt  is  made  to  gainsay  it  by  fair  means;  while  the  abso- 
lute and  uniform  failure  of  the  compromise  system  of  High  License  attests  the 
fatuity  of  the  hope  that  some  solution  may  be  commanded  by  regulation. 

Tirelessness  of  argument  is  the  quality  of  the  propagandist ;  and  the  temperance 
reformers,  as  industrious  writers,  yield  to  none.  An  ample  literature  has  been  cre- 
ated for  the  illustration  and  promotion  of  their  cause.  The  works  of  Richardson, 
Lees  Kerr,  Eddy,  Pitman,  Dawson  Burns,  Farrar,  Oswald,  Gustafson,  Wheeler 
and  various  others,  are  examples  of  information,  authority  and  capacity  which  com- 
pare favorably  with  the  products  of  other  reform  movements.  It  is  characteristic 
of  the  really  important  and  candid  books  on  this  question  that,  with  the  rarest  ex- 
ceptions, they  either  advocate  radical  opinions  or  point  to  them.  This  cannot  be 
attributed  to  a  lack  of  resourcefulness  in  the  opposition,  which  has  talented  defend- 
ers and  svmpathizers.  The  facts  do  not  warrant  weighty  defense  of  dram-drink- 
ino-  or  the  dram  commerce:  this  truth  comes  as  forcibly  to  the  cautious  investiga- 
tor  as  it  does  to  the  citizen  at  his  fireside.  So  it  happens  that  the  counteractive 
works  are  of  little  significance.  Exception  must  be  made,  however,  for  some  of  the 
writino-s  of  conservative  men,  who,  while  not  justifying  but  indeed  abhorring  drunk- 
enness and  the  common  saloon,  are  unable  to  agree  to  certain  advanced  proposi- 
tions and  attack  them  with  courage  and  ability.  But  even  the  volumes  of  this 
class  or  the  ones  answering  to  the  test  conditions  that  we  have  indicated,  import- 
ance and  candor,  are  surprisingly  few. 

In  the  preparation  of  the  succeeding  pages  the  fruits  of  the  excellent  work  done 
by  others  have  been  of  great  and  constant  service.  This  Cyclopgedia  cannot  take  tbe 
place  of  any  of  the  standard  temperance  publications;  and  if  it  spreads  the  appre- 


hension  of  their  value  by  the  frequency  of  quotations  and  references,  no  small  part 
of  its  purpose  will  have  been  performed.  To  all  the  writers  mentioned  above,  and 
to  many  more,  the  editor  is  under  profound  obligations.  The  "  Temperance  His- 
tory "  of  Dr.  Dawson  Burns  has  supplied  much  of  the  historical  information.  Dr. 
Richard  Eddy's  two  admirable  volumes,  "  Alcohol  in  History  "  and  "  Alcohol  in  So- 
ciety," indispensable  to  everyone  who  seeks  the  best  results  of  literary  labor  in  the 
discussion  of  this  subject,  have  been  equally  useful.  And  the  "  Temperance  Cyclo- 
pasdia  "  of  the  Rev.  William  Reid  (composed  exclusively  of  extracts  and  citations) 
must  not  be  forgotten  in  alluding  to  the  chief  sources  of  help. 

The  central  aim  has  been,  while  particularizing  with  as  great  exhaustiveness  as 
possible  within  the  limits  fixed  by  the  publishers,  to  subordinate  minutas  to  outlines. 
The  aggregate  number  of  articles  may  seem  comparatively  small,  and  each  reflecting 
reader  will  probably  be  able  to  make  up  a  list  of  appropriate  topics  not  formally 
treated  under  separate  titles.  But  it  is  hoped  that  the  care  which  has  been  expended 
on  the  leading  articles,  and  the  effort  which  has  been  made  to  embrace  in  these  arti- 
cles the  legitimate  accessory  subjects,  will  be  satisfactory  recompense.  And  though 
numerous  branches  are  thus  considered  incidentally,  the  reader  will  be  able  to  locate 
them  by  due  use  of  the  Index.  In  such  a  work,  indeed,  where  so  many  details 
are  presented  accessorily,  the  Index  is  a  most  important  feature. 

Naturally,  the  practical  aspects  of  the  anti-liquor  agitation  are  made  most  con- 
spicuous— the  aspects  that  are  of  greatest  interest  to  the  public  and  that  excite  warm- 
est controversy.  The  results  of  the  three  leading  systems  of  liquor  legislation — 
State  Prohibition,  Local  Option  and  High  License — have  not  until  very  recently 
been  subjected  to  fair  and  comprehensive  analysis.  The  relative  qualities  of  these 
results  must  determine  the  future  of  the  Prohibition  struggle,  and  the  editor  has 
undertaken  to  show  the  main  truths  in  a  thorough  and  an  orderly  manner.  To  the 
chief  Prohibition  journal,  the  Voice,  credit  is  due  for  most  of  the  facts. 

It  was  at  first  intended  to  include  biographical  sketches  of  eminent  living  rep- 
resentatives of  the  temperance  cause,  and  a  great  deal  of  material  was  gathered  with 
this  purpose  in  view.  But  the  difficulty  of  discriminating  with  strictness  and  at 
the  same  time  with  delicacy  and  justice— a  difficulty  which  is  highly  perplexing  to 
all  compilers  of  cyclopaedias, —  was  so  serious  that  the  solution  seemed  to  be  in  the 
abandonment  of  this  part  of  the  enterprise.  The  only  exceptions  are  in  the  cases 
of  the  Presidential  and  Vice-Presidential  candidates  of  the  Prohibitionists.  Several 
prominent  men — notably  Rev.  George  B.  Cheever,  D.  D.,  author  of  "  Deacon  Giles's 
Distillery,"  and  Judge  Robert  C.  Pitman,  author  of  "  Alcohol  and  the  State," — 
have  died  while  the  book  has  been  in  press.  This  explains  the  omission  of  their 
biographies. 

The  cordial  thanks  of  the  editor  are  due  to  the  writers  of  contributed  articles 
and  to  the  many  who  have  co-operated  by  providing  valuable  information.     PartiaJ 


VI 

acknowledgment  for  services  is  made  in  tlie  text  and  the  footnotes.  It  is  fitting, 
however,  to  mention  more  conspicnously  a  few  to  whose  kindness  the  editor  is  espec- 
ially indebted.  These  are :  Hon.  James  Black,  Mrs.  Caroline  B.  Buell,  Mr.  John  N. 
Stearns,  Rev.  D.  C.  Babcock,  Rev.  John  A.  Brooks,  D.D.,  Hon.  John  P.  St.  John, 
Axel  Gustafson,  Mrs.  Mary  Clement  Leavitt,  Miss  Frances  E.  Willard,  Rev.  D.  W.  C. 
Huntington,  D.D.,  William  Hargreaves,  M.D.,  Mrs.  Mary  A.  Livermore,  Hon.  Benson 
J.  Lossing,  Rev.  Albert  G.  Lawson,  D.D.,  Mrs.  Mary  T.  Lathrap,  Rev.  A.  B.  Leonard, 
D.D.,  Joseph  Malins  (England),  Hon.  John  O'Donnell,  T.  C.  Richmond,  Rev.  John 
Russell,  Rev.  W.  W.  Satterlee,  Frank  J.  Sibley,  A.  A.  Stevens,  Hon.  Gideon  T.  Stew- 
art, Rev.  Green  Clay  Smith,  John  Lloyd  Thomas,  Prof.  Edwin  V.  Wright,  Rev. 
Henry  Ward,  D.D.,  Mrs.  Charlotte  F.  Woodbury  and  Miss  Mary  Allen  West.  Among 
the  others  who  have  rendered  appreciated  assistance  (not  acknowledged  in  the 
body  of  the  book)  are  Ryland  T.  Brown  (Indianapolis),  L.  J.  Beau  champ,  Rollo 
Kirk  Bryan,  Miss  Mary  A.  Baker  (Chicago),  Prof.  A.  C.  Bacone  (Indian  Territory), 
0.  R.  L.  Crozier  (Ann  Arbor),  J.  W.  Chickering  (Washington,  D.  C),  Mrs.  W.  F. 
Crafts,  Miss  Julia  Coleman,  Albert  Dodge,  Rev.  H.  A.  Delano,  Mrs.  Emma  P.  Ewing 
(Kansas  City),  Rev.  J.  B.  English  (New  York),  Mrs.  Nettie  B.  Fernald  (Plainfield, 
N.  J.),  H.  B.  Gibbud  (Syracuse,  N.  Y.),  C.  A.  Hammond  (Syracuse,  N.  Y.),  Mrs.  Mary 
H.  Hunt,  Mrs.  F.  McC.  Harris  (Brooklyn),  Mrs.  S.  M.  I.  Henry  (Evanston,  111.),  Rev. 
J.  B.  Helwig,  D.D.  (Springfield,  0.),  H.  W.  Hardy  (Lincoln,  Neb.),  R.  E.  Hudson 
(Alliance,  0.),  M.  L.  Holbrook,  M.D.  (Jersey  City),  Rev.  John  Hall,  D.D.,  Rev.  Henry 
B.  Hudson  (Brooklyn),  George  La  Monte  (Bound  Brook,  N.  J.),  Rev.  S.  A.  Morse 
(Rochester,  N.  Y.),  Hon.  Henry  B.  Metcalf.  Miss  Esther  Pugh,  Frederic  A.  Pike  (St. 
Paul),  Gen.  W.  F.  Singleton,  Charles  A.  Sherlin,  G.  B.  Thompson  (West  Pittston, 
Pa.),  Thomas  R.  Thompson  (New  Haven),  Rev.  C.  S.  Woodruff  (Montclair,  N.  J.) 
and  Prof.  W.  C.  Wilkinson. 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  TEMPERANCE 
AND  PROHIBITION. 


Absinthe. — See  Sptrttuous  Liquors. 

Adulteration. — The  art  of  adultera- 
tion is  practiced  by  no  other  class  of  man- 
ufacturers and  tradesmen  so  extensively 
and  unscrupulously  as  by  those  engaged 
in  the  liquor  traffic.  This  2:)eculiar  traffic, 
branded  by  public  opinion  as  disreputa- 
ble and  demoralizing,  offers  few  induce- 
ments to  conscientious  and  honorable  men. 
Those  disposed  to  produce  and  sell  genu- 
ine liquors  encounter  many  temptations 
and  serious  discouragements.  The  taste 
of  the  great  mass  of  drinkers  does  not  and 
cannot  discriminate  between  the  genuine 
and  the  spurious.  The  conscienceless 
manufacturers  and  sellers  engaged  in  the 
busiTiess,  with  a  full  understanding  of  its 
odious  nature,  are  ready  to  adoj)t  any 
means  that  will  promote  their  sole  object 
— to  amass  riches  swiftly;  and  the  honest 
maker  or  vendor  is  likely  to  find  no  buy- 
ers in  a  market  where  practically  every 
other  person  in  the  trade  is  enabled  and 
disposed  by  sharp  tricks  to  undersell  him. 
Equally  unencouraging  are  the  conditions 
encountered  by  those  who  wish  to  cater  in 
good  faith  to  more  exacting  appetites:  the 
resources  of  the  liquor-adulterating  art 
provide  means  for  imitating  the  costliest 
brands.  "  There  is  in  the  city,"  wrote 
Addison  in  the  TiiUlcr,  "a  certain  fra- 
ternity of  chemical  operators,  who  work 
underground  in  holes,  caverns,  and  dark 
retirements,  to  conceal  their  mysteries 
from  the  eye  and  observation  of  mankind. 
These  subterranean  philosophers  are  daily 
employed  in  the  transmutation  of  liquors, 
and  by  the  power  of  magical  drugs  and 
incantations  raising  under  the  streets  of 
London  the  choicest  x)roducts  of  the  hills 


and  valleys  of  France."  ^  And  in  our  own 
day,  so  eminent  an  authority  as  Dr.  Henry 
Letheby,  Ph.D.,  formerly  Medical  Officer 
of  Health  to  the  City  of  London,  says: 
"  A.  great  part  of  the  wine  of  France  and 
Germany  has  ceased  to  be  the  juice  of  tJie 
grajie  at  all.  In  point  of  fact,  the  pro- 
cesses of  blending,  softening,  fortifying, 
sweetening,  etc.,  etc.,  are  carried  on  to 
such  an  extent  that  it  is  hardly  possible 
to  obtain  a  sample  of  genuine  wine,  even 
at  first  hand."  ^ 

ADULTERATTON"   OF   WINES. 

Whenever  a  liquor  trafficker  becomes 
converted  to  temperance  principles,  he 
makes  haste  to  expose  the  terrible  adul- 
terations by  which  well-nigh  all  the  drink 
offered  for  consumption  is  falsified.  Major 
C.  B.  Gotten,  formerly  a  wholesale  liquor- 
dealer  of  New  York,  in  contributions  to 
the  Voice  in  1885,  gave  elaborate  informa- 
tion upon  this  subject,  based,  he  said, 
upon  "  twenty-five  years  of  my  own  per- 
sonal experience  as  a  manufacturer  of 
these  compounds." 

"  The  imitation  and  adulteration  of  foreign 
wines  in  this  country  (he  wrote)  has  become  a 
business  of  large  proportions.  From  1.250,000 
to  1,500.000  gallons  of  pure  spirits  is  used  in  the 
city  of  New  York  and  in  the  Eastern  cities  an- 
nually, in  addition  to  large  quantities  of  native 
and  Rhine  wine  and  Jersey  cider,  in  the  manu- 
facture of  fictitious  wines  of  all  kinds;  and  I 
think  I  may  sufely  estimate  the  value  of  these 
fraudulent  wines  at  seven  to  nine  millions  of 
dollars  annually.  In  the  manufacture  of  these 
wines,  six  distinct  principles  must  be  rigidly  ad- 
hered to:  tJie  bmiquet,  in  perfect  imitation  of  the 
genuine;  t?ie  alcohol,  thoroughly  deodorized  and 
of  standard  .strength;  water,  sugar,   a»trinqent 

1  The  TnllUr.  No.  1:^1. 

^  Encyclopaedia  Brittanica,  article  on  "  Adulteration." 


Adulteration.] 


8 


[Adulteration. 


and  acid  matters,  and  coloring.  On  the  proper 
adjustment  and  assimilation  of  these  dilferent 
ingredients  success  depends.  Perhaps  there  is  no 
business  requiring  more  close  and  unerring  judg- 
ment and  so  perfect  a  knowledge  of  chemical 
combinations  as  the  art — for  it  is  really  an  art — of 
making  perfect  fictitious  wines.  As  a  basis  for 
these  wines  we  use — as  1  have  already  said — 
pure  spirits  perfectly  deodorized,  in  connection, 
•sometimes,  with  cheap  native  wines  or  white 
Khiue  wines,  but  generally  with  Jersey  cider, 
the  juice  of  the  crab-apple  being  preferred. 
The  process  is  very  similar  to  making  wine 
from  the  grape,  and  its  i)erfection  depends  upon 
nearly  the  same  principles.  The  cider  is  taken 
direttly  from  the  piess  to  a  properly  arranged 
and  tempered  cellar,  and  carefully  carried 
tiirough  the  first  or  saccharine  fermentation  at  a 
temperature  of  60  F.  It  is  then  fined  and  drawn 
off  into  large  tanks,  and  when  still,  spirits,  crude 
tartar  and  othei-  ingredients  are  added  to  stop  the 
fermentation  This  forms  the  basis  for  nearly  all 
kinds  of  imitation  wiues.  The  basis  being  pre- 
pared, we  then  proceed  at  our  leisure  to  make 
up  our  stock.  We  want  some  particular  brand 
of  champagne,  for  instance.  Piper  Heidsieck. 
We  draw  from  one  of  the  large  tanks  into  a 
smaller  one.  called  a  mixer,  the  necessary 
amount  of  cider  for,  say,  100  baskets.  The 
liquid  is  brought  up  to  the  standard  alcoholic 
proof  with  pure  spirits,  then  we  add  the  flavor 
ings  and  coloring,  after  which  the  temperature 
is  raised  to  70^  or  72'  F.,  to  induce  the  second 
or  vinous  fermentation  After  this  is  effected, 
we  put  it  through  a  course  of  fining,  when  it 
becomes  a  bright,  rich,  sparkling  vinous  lifjuid. 
and  is  ready  for  bottling  It  is  then  drawn  off 
into  imported  champagne  bottles,  and  fully 
charged  with  carbonic  acid  gas.  Imported  vel- 
vet corks— each  cork  branded  on  the  inner  end 
with  the  name  of  the  sui)posed  foreign  wine 
maker  —  are  driven  in  by  machinery.  After  the 
bottles  have  been  duly  sealed,  wired,  capped 
and  stamped,  labels  in  exact  imitation  of  the 
genuine  arc  placed  upon  them,  and  the  bottles 
in  turn  are  packed  in  imported  baskets  or  in 
■cases  with  imported  straw.  Imitalionsof  the 
genuine  marks  and  numbers  arc  then  pinced 
upon  the  package,  and  the  deception  is  com- 
plete. By  this  process  any  brand  of  imported 
wine  is  successfully  imitated.  Suppose  we  want 
fifty  barrels  of  sherry.  We  draw  from  the  same 
tank  into  the  mixer  the  requisite  quantity  of 
cider,  which  is  brought  up  to  about  23"  to  24° 
alcoholic  proof  with  pure  spirits.  Then  for 
every  barrel  we  add  3  lbs.  mashed  Mnlaga 
raisins,  M  oz.  oil  of  bitter  almonds,  and  six  gal 
Ions  pure  sherry  wine.  After  this  mixture  has 
stood  two  or  three  days,  it  is  drawn  off  through 
a  strainer  into  another  tub.  when  it  is  fined  and 
made  ready  to  put  into  the  barreKs.  We  then 
send  an  imported  cask  to  our  cooper,  and  he 
makes  us  fifty  casks  exactly  like  the  sample. 
The  new  and  bright  barrels  are  then  put  into  a 
coloring  tub  and  come  out  dirty,  stained,  old- 
looking  barrels.  They  are  then  properly  branded, 
and  bogus  Custom  House  marks  are  placed  upon 
them,  and  again  art  has  triumphed  over  nature. 
And  so  we  go  through  the  whole  catalogue  of 
wines.  In  coloring  wines,  either  fictitious  or 
foreign,  when  deficient  ia  color,  we  use  for  a 


fawn  yellow  or  sherry  coior,  tincture  of  saffron, 
tumeric,  or  safflower ;  for  amber  or  deep  brown, 
burned  sugar  coloring.  Cochineal,  with  a  little 
alum,  gives  a  pink  color;  beetroot  and  red 
sauuders,  a  red  color;  the  extract  of  rhatany 
and  logwood,  and  the  juices  of  elder  berries  and 
bilberries  a  port  wine  color.  Sometimes  our 
wines  become  muddy — or  in  our  parlance, '  sick  ' 
— and  we  have  to  fine  or  '  recover '  them.  For 
this  purpose  we  use  the  white  of  an  egg,  isin- 
glass, hartshorn  shavings,  or  pale  sweet  glue ; 
for  heavy  wines,  sheep's  or  bullock's  blood. 
Gypsum  is  used  to  fine  muddy  white  wines, 
also  sugar  of  lead  and  bisulphate  of  potassium. 
When  we  find  a  lack  of  flavor,  we  use,  accord- 
ing to  circumstances,  burned  almonds  or  the  es 
sential  oil,  to  give  a  nutty  flavor  and  rhatany, 
hino,  oaksjiwdust  or  bark,  with  alum,  to  give 
astriugency.  To  impart  the  fine  flavors,  we  use 
orris  root,  orange  blo.ssoms,  neroli  violet  petals, 
vanilla,  cedrat,  sweetbrier,  cardamon  seeds, 
quinces,  eider-berries  or  cherry  laurel  When 
our  wines  need  iinjyrovmg,  we  use,  in  sherry. 
Madeira  and  port,  almond  flavorings,  rhatany  or 
catechu,  with  honey  or  glycerine  For  inusti 
Ti^-ss,  we  use  sweet  oil  or  almond  oil,  fresh  burned 
charcoal,  bread  toasted  black  or  bruised  mus 
tard  seed  For  ropiness,  the  bruised  berries  of 
the  mountain  ash.  catechu,  chalk,  milk  of  lime, 
and  calcined  oyster-shells  are  used,  and,  if  very 
bad,  we  use  litharge.  .  .  .  New  frauds  are 
being  constantly  developed  in  the  manufacture 
of  fictitious  wines,  and  the  business  of  prepar 
ing  these  poisonous  flavorings  has  attained  the 
dimensions  of  an  important  branch  of  trade. 
Thisiuew  industry  is  becoming  more  and  more 
important.  Tlicse  flavorings  of  a  complex  na 
ture  are  used  for  the  purpose  of  giving  wines 
particular  ho'ujuets.  By  addins;  a  small  quan- 
tity of  these  compounds,  new  and  fresh  wine 
may  be  converted  into  the  semblance  of  old 
wine  in  a  very  few  minutes,  or  certain  poor 
wines  may  be  made  to  resemble  tho.se  of  famous 
vintages  These  ethers,  designed  for  giving  the 
bouquet,  are  numbered  among  the  six  great 
cla.sses  of  materials  serving  for  the  adulteration 
or  fabrication  of  wines.  Establishments  for  the 
manufacture  of  these  flavorings  are  located  in 
London,  Pans,  New  York  and  other  large  cities, 
and  the  business  is  large  and  profitable."  ' 

Among  the  sitbstances  used  in  adulter- 
ating wines  are:  Aloes,  alum,  ambergris, 
acetic  acid,  acetic  ether,  benzine,  brim- 
stone, bitter  almonds,  bicarbonate  of  po- 
tassium, bisulphate  of  potassium,  Brazil 
wood,  creosote,  charcoal,  chalk,  copperas, 
catechu,  cudbear,  cochineal,  caustic  ])ot- 
ash,  cognac  oil,  cocculus  indicus,  elder- 
berry, essence  of  absinthe,  foxglove,  fusel 
oil,  glue,  glycerine,  gypsum,  henbane, 
hartshorn  shavings,  indigo,  juniper  ber- 
ries, lime,  logwood,  litharge,  marble  dust, 
muriatic  acid,  mountain  ash  berries,  nut- 
galls,  opium,  oak  bark,  plaster  of  Paris, 
prussic  acid,  quassia,  red  saunders-wood, 

»  The  Voice,  J»n.  22, 1885, 


Adulteration .  ] 


[Adulteration. 


red  beet-root,  strychnine,  sloe  leaves,  sper- 
maceti, star  anise,  sulphuric  acid,  sugar 
of  lead,  tansy,  tumeric,  tannic  acid  and 
wormwood. 

The  vineyards  of  the  great  wine-pro- 
ducing countries  have  been  devastated  for 
the  last  twenty  years  by  the  pliylloxera, 
and  it  is,  a  matter  of  record  that  the 
quantities  of  wine  actually  produced  in 
certain  famous  districts  have  been  vastly 
decreased  by  this  insect's  ravages;  yet 
wines  of  every  kind  and  name  have  be- 
come more  plentiful  than  before.  (See 
Phylloxera.)  It  has  long  been  noto- 
rious that  particular  countries,  like  En- 
gland and  the  United  States,  consume 
more  pretended  cliampagne,  port,  sherry, 
Madeira,  etc.,  than  the  districts  where 
these  special  kinds  of  wine  are  made 
yield,  1 

A  form  of  adulteration  very  generally 
in  use  among  the  makers  of  spurious 
wines  is  called  "  fortification."  To  a 
quantity  of  wine  raw  alcohol  is  added, 
and  the  strength  of  the  resulting  com- 
pound is  reduced  and  its  bulk  very  much 
increased  by  liberally  diluting  it  with 
water.  Thus  by  a  very  simple  process 
the  dishonest  dealer  swells  his  stock  and 
enhances  its  marketable  value.  No  secret 
is  made  of  the  "fortifying"  method. 
The  California  wine-makers,  while  adver- 
tising their  brands  as  "pure"  and 
"straight,"  have  been  so  bold  in  demand- 
ing cheap  alcohol  for  "  fortification  "  pur- 
poses that  they  have  made  a  political 
issue  of  the  matter;  and  during  the  Con- 
gressional session  of  1890  a  measure  was 
enacted  providing  that  spirits  required 
by  wine  manufacturers  in  their  business 
should  not  be  subject  to  the  Internal 
Revenue  tax,  Spain  formerly  imported 
from  England  about  1,600,000  gallons  of 
spirits  annually,  by  far  the  largest  part 
of  which  was  used  to  "  fortify  "  the  cele- 
brated Spanish  wines;  but  Germany 
offered  a  cheaper  article,  manufactured 
from  beets  and  potatoes,  and  the  adept 
Spanish  vintners  tlien  preferred  the  Ger- 
man alcohol  to  the  British,  ^ 

The  presence  of  the  most  deleterious 

'  Before  the  Select  Committee  on  Wines  (House  of  Com- 
mons, H6-2),  Cyrus  Kedding  stated  that  though  the  annual 
export  of  port  wine  amounted  to  only  20,000  pipes  no  less 
than  60,000  were  consumed,  a  goodly  amount  being  concocted 
out  of  Cape  wines,  cider  and  brandies,  etc.,  most  of  the 
spurious  being  loncoced  in  the  London  docks,  presumably 
for  exportation.— ^OM7irf<l«(ow  of  Death  (New  York,  ISb"), 
p.  48. 

'  On  the  authority  of  Mr.  Vizltelly,  British  Wine  Commis- 
uonertothe  Vienna  Exposition. 


substances  in  well-nigh  all  the  wine  offer- 
ed for  sale  has  been  repeatedly  shown  by 
careful  investigation,  A  striking  instance 
is  reported  by  George  Walker,  formerly 
United  States  Consul-General  at  Paris, 
The  Municipal  Laboratory  of  that  city, 
during  the  ten  months  ending  December, 
1881,  tested  3,001  samples  of  wines,  and 
found  1,731  to  be  "bad,"  991  "passable," 
and  only  279  "good."  (U.  S.  Consular 
reports,  vol.  6,  p.  559.) 

ADULTERATIONS   OF   MALT   LKJUORS. 

The  adulterations  of  malt  liquors, 
though  perhaps  not  executed  with  so  much 
nicety  as  is  needed  in  falsifying  wines, 
are  perpetrated  on  an  equally  extensive 
scale.  In  England  the  rascally  practices 
of  the  brewers  have  at  various  times  in 
the  last  200  years  occasioned  the  passage 
of  special  legislation  against  beer  adulter- 
ation. In  the  reign  of  Queen  Anne 
Parliament  passed  an  act  forbidding 
brewers,  under  severe  penalties,  to  employ 
cocculus  indicus  or  any  other  deleterious 
ingredients.  In  18 L7  the  Government 
found  it  necessary  to  establish  more  rigid 
provisions,  and  prohibited  the  use  of 
"  molasses,  honey,  licorice,  vitriol,  quassia, 
cocculus  indicus,  grains  of  paradise,  Guin- 
ia  pepper,  or  opium,  or  any  extract  or 
preparation  of  the  same,  or  any  substitute 
for  malt  or  hops,  under  a  })enalty  of  £200 ; 
and  no  chemist  or  vendor  of  drugs  was 
permitted  to  sell,  send  or  deliver  any  such 
things  to  a  brewer  or  retailer  of  beer 
under  a  penalty  of  £500,"  ^ 

The  cocculus  indicus  berry,  stronger 
than  alcohol  in  its  poisonous  action,  is  the 
favorite  adulterant  used  by  brewers  to 
give  fictitious  strength  to  their  product. 
The  growing  increase  in  the  importation 
of  cocculus  indicus  into  England  prompt- 
ed the  London  Lancet  to  say,  March  2, 
18G7: 

"If  it  be  true  that  we  English  consume 
about  900  000,000  gallons  of  beer  every  year— 
an  increase  of  about  40  per  cent  in  ten  years — 
ample  opportunity  must  exist  for  adulteration 
ii'  this  particular  article  of  general  and  every- 
dt  V  consumption.  It  has  been  asserted  over 
an  \  over  again  that  one  of  the  ingredients  is 
cocculus  indicus.  Though  we  are  not  aware 
of  tny  .ictual  proof  of  its  use.  there  is  the  must 
couc  usive  evidence  that  it  is  largely  sent  into 
this  c  )untry,  and  that  it  is  not  u.sed  for  medic- 
inal p  irposes.  What  becomes  of  it  ?  In  1865, 
9,400  bs.  were  imported,  enough  to  adulterate 
120  00  >  bbls.  of  beer;  and  in  an  old  treatise  we 
tiud  fbll  directions  given  for  its  employment  la 

3  £nc.  clopa^dia  Brittauica,  article  on  **  Adult«ration," 


Adulteration.] 


10 


[Adulteration. 


the  manufacture  of  porter.  The  only  inference 
that  we  can  possibly  draw  i-,  that  it  is  used  by 
the  brewers  surreptitiously.  Unfortunately 
there  is  no  duty  imposed  upon  the  drug,  which 
is  very  much  to  be  regretted.  As  it  is  not  em- 
ployed as  a  medicine,  and  is  known  to  possess 
most  deleterious  qualities,  and  suspected  to  be 
used  for  the  doctoring  of  beer,  it  seems  to  us 
most  advisable  to  call  attention  to  the  above 
facts  and  to  ask  that  some  steps  may  be  taken 
to  prevent  the  possibility  of  its  being  used  at  all 
in  England." 

Again  (Feb.  21,  1874),  the  Lancet,  com- 
menting on  a  statement  in  the  Pltanna- 
ceutkal  Journal  that  l,U(iG  bags  of  coc- 
CLthis  indicus  had  been  imported  in  a 
recent  month,  said  that  there  need  be  "  no 
hesitation  in  affirming  that  a  very  hirge 
portion  of  it  is  put  into  malt  liquor  to 
give  it  strength  and  headiness,  "  and  that 
"  a  viler  agent  could  not  well  be  intro- 
duced into  beer  than  the  berry,  the  stu- 
pefying effects  of  which  are  so  well  known 
that  it  is  frequently  used  to  kill  fish  and 
birds."  The  object  of  using  the  cocculus 
indicus  and  other  injurious  substances, 
like  picric  acid,  aloes,  quassia,  buckbean. 
gentian,  phosphoric  acid,  alum,  copperas, 
glycerine,  oil  of  vitriol,  sulpliate  of  iron, 
etc.,  is,  of  course,  to  give  the  maximum 
strength  and  flavor  to  the  beer  at  the 
minimum  cost. 

The  brewers  stoutly  resist  every  attempt 
to  legislate  against  adulteration.  In  1890 
the  United  (States  House  of  Kepresenta- 
tives  had  under  consideration  the  Turner 
bill,  prohibiting  the  use  by  brewers  of  any 
ingredients  otlier  than  malt,  hops  and 
yeast.  The  C!ommittee  on  Ways  and 
Means  granted  a  hearing  (June  12)  to 
persons  interested  in  the  measure,  and 
Col.  H.  H.  Finley,  arguing  in  favor  of 
its  passage,  cited  advertisements  of  vari- 
ous adulterants  that  hiwl  aj^peared  in  the 
Brewers^  Journal  (chief  organ  of  the 
brewing  interests  of  America).  At  this 
hearing  the  United  States  Brewers'  Asso- 
ciation was  represented  by  Dr.  Francis 
AVyatt,  a  chemist,  and  by  William  A.  Miles, 
Chairman  of  its  Executive  Committee,  and 
both  gentlemen  earnestly  opposed  the  b  11 
and  declared  that  the  brewers  wished  to 
avail  themselves  of  the  resources  of 
science  without  hindrance. 

ADULTERATION"    OF    SPIKITUOUS   LIQ  JORS. 

Spirituous  liquors  are  adulterat(  d  by 
using  inferior  alcohol  and  terrible  icids, 
especially  tannic,  acetic,  pyroligneo'is  and 
])yroxylic  acids,  and  the  oil  of  creosote, 


together  with  glucose,  essence  of  an- 
gelica, oil  of  vitriol,  etc.  In  the 
luitural  process  of  distillation  a  com- 
paratively long  period  is  required  for 
ageing  the  liquor,  but  by  unscrupulous 
means  the  distillers  are  able  to  artilicially 
ripen  their  spirits  and  thus  avoid  the 
necessity  of  keeping  them  for  several 
years.  The  whiskey  manufacturers  are 
constantly  striving  to  produce  the  maxi- 
mum quantity  of  whiskey  per  bushel  of 
grain.  Formerly  a  gallon  and  a  half  per 
bushel  was  the  average  amount  obtained, 
but  now  three,  four  and  five  gallons  are 
extracted  from  a  bushel.  Tliis  increase 
is  obtained  partly  by  ajiplying  a  higher 
heat  in  distilling  the  grain,  and  that 
necessarily  implies  a  much  greater  per- 
centage of  impurities  in  the  resulting 
liquor,  and  especially  a  larger  quantity  of 
fusel  oil.  Liquors  sold  as  brandy,  gin 
and  Jamacia  rum  are  almost  invariably 
fraudulent  articles,  vilely  compoundetl. 
"  The  greater  portion  of  the  brandy  of 
the  United  States,"  says  Dr.  William  A. 
Hammond,  "is  made  here  from  whiskey, 
and  nine-tenths  of  the  rest  is  manufactur- 
ed in  France  and  England  in  the  same 
way.  Liquors  called  brandies  are  thus 
made  which  are  not  worth  a  ninth  part 
as  much  as  brandy."  ^ 

'V\\Q  United  States  Consul  at  Bordeaux, 
in  1882,  George  Gilford,  made  a  detailed 
investigation  concerning  French  brandies, 
and  wrote,  in  an  official  report:  "All 
French  brandy  might  and  perhaps 
ought  to  be  excluded  from  the  United 
States  on  sanitary  grounds.  A  general 
measure  excluding  the  article  would  seem, 
therefore,  to  be  the  only  effective  defense 
against  the  admission  of  a  poison  for 
which  our  people  pay  one  or  two  million 
dollars  a  year,  besides  the  import  duty, 
which  in  the  case  of  an  impure  article  is 
over  100  per  cent,  of  its  invoice  value." 

Some  writers  and  speakers,  in  discuss- 
ing the  drink  question,  maintain  that 
the  enactment  and  rigid  enforcement  of 
laws  for  suppressing  adulterations  would 
go  far  towards  correcting  the  worst  evils 
of  the  liquor  traffic.  Accordingly  "  Pure 
Wine"  laws  have  been  passed  in  New 
York  and  I'alifornia,  and  various  provis- 
ions against  adulterations  are  contained 
in  the  statutes  of  other  States.  These 
measures  are  of  no  practical  value:  no 
prosecutions  are  conducted  under  them, 

1  Xreaiise  on  Uygiene  (New  Xork,  18C3),  pp.  553-4. 


Advent  Christian  Church.] 


11 


[Africa. 


aud  they  are  helpful  rather  tlian  harmful 
to  the  *'  trade,"  because  in  the  absence  of 
arrests  and  convictions  the  drink-dealers 
are  able  to  plausibly  claim  that  no  adul- 
terations are  practiced.  The  political 
power  of  the  liquor  men  is  sufficient  to 
2)revent  any  honest  crusade  by  the  author- 
ities ascainst  adulteration. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  organized  tem- 
jierance  people,  recognizing  that  the  active 
principle  of  evil  in  all  intoxicating  drinks 
is  alcohol  more  than  any  otlier  drug  or 
poison,  or  all  others  combined,  and  that 
an  extension  of  the  alcoholic  habit  would 
undoubtedly  result  if  tlie  public  could 
feel  assured  of  the  purity  of  the  liquors  on 
the  market,  have  generally  manifested 
indifference  to  the  demand  for  anti-adul- 
teration laws. 

Advent  Christian   Church,  —  No 

action  on  the  Prohibition  question  has 
been  taken  by  tlie  National  Association 
of  this  church  at  any  annual  meeting 
for  several  years.  Tliis  statement  is  made 
on  the  authority  of  the  editor  of  the 
World's  Crisis,  the  leading  denomina- 
tional organ. 

Africa.  —  The  home  of  aboriginal 
tribes,  the  greater  part  of  Africa  has 
been  comparatively  free  from  the  liquor 
curse  until  recent  years.  It  is  true  native 
intoxicants  have  been  and  are  prepared 
from  the  sap  of  the  j^alm  and  other  sub- 
stances, and  African  travelers  liave  de- 
scribed the  gross  debauchery  witnessed  at 
times ;  but  there  is  every  reason  to  believe 
that  the  African  native  did  not  acquire 
an  adequate  realization  of  the  corrupting 
power  of  alcoholic  stimulants  until 
brought  into  contact  with  the  traders  of 
Christian  nations.  In  the  portions  of 
the  continent  conquered  by  the  Moham- 
medans, and  ruled  by  them  for  centuries, 
the  advent  of  new  institutions  was  not 
attended  by  a  systematic  introduction  of 
tlie  drink  habit,  although  the  Moslem 
peoples  of  Africa  gradually  yielded  to  the 
alcohol  vice  and  (especially  in  Tunis, 
Tripoli  and  other  parts  of  the  Mediter- 
ranean coast)  became  free  drinkers. 
During  the  pre-Mohammedan  era  of 
civilization  in  Africa,  however,  intemper- 
ance was  prevalent  from  the  remotest 
ages. 

MEDITERRANEAN"   COAST   COUNTRIES. 

Egi/pt. — It  is  believed  that  the  ancient 
Egyptians  were  the  earliest  brewers,  and 


it  is  known  that  they  had  establishments 
for  the  manufacture  of  intoxicating  bev- 
erages several  centuries  before  Christ. 
The  Egyptian  monuments  picture  the 
wine-press  and  vineyard,  and  the  various 
aspects  of  intoxication.  Mohammedan 
dominion  in  Egypt  began  in  the  year 
G40  A.  I).,  and  continued  without  serious 
interruption  until  Bonaparte's  invasion 
in  1798.  The  country  then  began  to  lose 
its  purely  oriental  character,  and  none  of 
the  AVestern  innovations  were  regarded 
with  greater  solicitude  by  the  inhabitants 
than  the  wine  and  spirit  shops  established 
by  the  French.  Since  then,  enterprising 
tradesmen  from  all  European  nations 
have  overrun  Egypt;  and  in  every  city, 
most  of  the  large  towns  and  many  of  the 
smallest  villages,  there  are  places  devoted 
to  the  sale  of  liquors,  in  coimection  with 
other  merchandise.  Probably  a  majority 
of  the  liquor  traders  in  Egypt  at  present 
are  Greeks.  In  Cairo,  at  the  beginning 
of  1890,  there  were  1,320  cafes,  of  which 
180  were  kept  by  Europeans,  and  in  every 
one  of  these  European  shops  liquors  were 
for  sale;  while  of  tlie  1,140  cafes  kept  by 
natives,  only  287  had  liquors  in  stock. 
The  values  of  wines,  spirits  and  beer  im- 
ported into  the  country  for  ten  years  are 
given  as  follows:  1877,  1700,570;  1878, 
1821,565;  1879,1861,125;  1880,1921,720; 
1881,  $1,163,830;  1882,  $1,299,095;  1883, 
11,721,615;  1884,  11,733,605;  1885, 
$1,951,405;  1886,  $1,815,605.  These 
figures  are  only  approximate,  the  exact 
quantities  imported  not  being  known  to 
the  Custom  House  officials.  In  1884,  787 
cases  and  8,223  barrels  of  beer,  valued  at 
£20,215,  were  sent  by  the  British  Govern- 
ment for  the  use  of  the  Army  of  Occupa- 
tion, and  in  addition  to  these  quantities, 
a  great  deal  of  liquor  was  furnished  to 
the  army  by  contractors  and  others.  Of 
the  drinks  of  native  manufacture,  araka 
is  the  chief,  taking  its  name  from  a  word 
that  means  "to  sweat."  It  is  distilled 
from  grapes  or  dates,  and  the  propor- 
tion of  alcohol  contained  in  it  varies  from 
10  to  30  per  cent.  Another  common 
drink,  used  by  the  lower  classes  and  Nile 
boatmen,  is  hooza,  a  sort  of  beer  brewed 
from  wheat,  barley  or  bread.  The  worst 
intoxicant  in  Egypt  is  hasheesh,  obtained 
from  the  leaves  and  capsules  of  hemp, 
and  consumed  by  smoking.  It  is  estimat- 
ed that  about  two-thirds  of  the  insanity 
of  the  country  is  due  to  hasheesh.     The 


Africa.] 


12 


[Africa- 


importation  of  the  drug  is  prohibited, 
but  it  is  smuggled  through  the  Custom 
House  and  introduced  in  ingenious  ways. 
There  is  as  yet  no  Government  complicity 
with  the  liquor  traffic  in  Egypt,  and  no 
organized  "  liquor  power,"  the  sale  being 
practically  free.  But  with  the  increase 
of  the  foreign-born  population,  and  the 
growing  acceptance  of  Western  ideas  and 
customs  by  the  Copts  and  Mohammedans, 
the  liquor  drinking  habit  is  spreading. 
Several  temperance  societies  have  been 
established  in  connection  with  the  work 
of  the  American  missionaries,  but  aside 
from  them  there  are  no  organized  agen- 
cies for  counteracting  the  evil.  ^ 

Algeria,  etc. — In  the  other  countries  of 
Northern  Africa  bordering  on  the  Medi- 
terranean, the  injunctions  of  the  Koran 
against  the  use  of  intoxicants  are  treated 
with  small  respect  by  the  Mohammedans, 
and  the  constantly  growing  influence  of 
the  French  and  other  Europeans  is  uni- 
formly exercised  for  extending  the  liquor 
trade  in  all  its  branches.     The  common 
beverage  is  the  palm  wine,  obtained  from 
the  date  palm  by  means  of  incisions  made 
at  the  base  of  the  trunk.     This  drink  is 
intoxicating,  and  being  so  easily  procured 
is  used  by  well-nigh  everybody  and  works 
sad  havoc  among  the  people.     The  Jews 
in  Algeria,  Tunis,  Tripoli  and  Morocco 
are   extensively  engaged    in    the    drink 
traffic  and  in  wine  production.     Former- 
ly the  Algerian  farmers  were  content  to 
use    their    lands    for    cultivating    food 
staples,  but  discovering  from  the  experi- 
ence of  the  planters  of  Tunis  that  vini- 
culture was  much  more  profitable,  they 
have  devoted  themselves  to  it  in  recent 
years,  so  that  large  vineyards  have  been 
laid  out  in  both  countries,  and  the  grow- 
ing of  grapes  for  wine  is  rapidly  becom- 
ing the  chief  occupation  of  the  peasantry. 
The   Mohammedans   do   not   scruple  to 
participate  in  this  industry.     The   vine- 
yards of  the  Jews  of  Jerba  Island,  Tunis, 
produce   wines   which    connoisseurs    are 
said  to  compare  with  "those  of  Samos 
and  Santorin,"  while  the  wine  manufac- 
tured in  Algeria  has  been  for  years  more 
or  less  famous.     Large  companies  have 
been  formed  in  Algeria  to  clear  land  and 
plant  vineyards    thousands   of    acres   in 
area.     The  estimates  of  the  wine-yield  of 
Algeria  are  conflicting.     M.  Tisserand,  in 

'  For  the  particulars  about  Fpypt  the  editor  is  Indebted  to 
Rev.  J.  0.  Ashenhurst,  au  Americaa  missionary  at  Cairo. 


1885,  in  the  Journal  of  ihc  Statistical 
Society  (London),  placed  it  at  32,000,000 
imperial  gallons  for  the  year  1884.  In 
the  latest  edition  of  Mulhall  (188G)  it  is 
stated  that  the  Algerian  vintage  at  the 
time  of  that  publication  was  only  9,000,- 
000  gallons.  The  United  States  Consul 
at  Marseilles  (France),  in  a  report  dated 
Feb.  27,  1889,  placed  the  vintage  of  1888 
in  Algeria  at  72,072,788  gallons,  ranking 
that  country  after  Italy,  France,  Spain, 
Hungary,  Portugal,  Austria  and  IJussia 
among  the  wine-producing  nations  of  the 
globe.  It  is  probable  that  the  larger 
estimates  are  nearer  the  truth — at  least 
that  they  represent  more  reliably  than 
the  smaller  figures  the  quantities  of  stuff 
produced  and  sold  as  wine  in  Algeria. 
That  country  is  now  fully  controlled  by 
the  French,  whose  ingenuity  is  increas- 
ingly taxed  to  supply  the  world's  demand 
for  French  wines,  and  who  are  taking  ad- 
vantage to  the  utmost  of  the  capabilities 
of  their  African  provinces. 

MADEIRA,  THE   CANARIES   AND   AZORES. 

Madeira,  the  Canaries  and  the  Azores, 
the  important  islands  off  the  west  coast 
of  Africa,  are  celebrated  for  their  wines. 
In  the  16th  century  the  principal  industry 
of  the  Madeira  Islands  was  sugar-cane 
cultivation,  but  this  gradually  gave  way 
to  viniculture,  the  grape-vine  having  been 
introduced  from  Candia  in  the  15th  cen- 
tury. The  finer  grades  of  wines  produc- 
ed, known  as  dry  Madeira  and  malvoisie, 
soon  acquired  a  reputation,  and  in  1820, 
when  the  prosperity  of  the  Madeira  wine- 
makers  was  at  its  height,  the  total  yield 
was  2,050,000  gallons,  valued  at  about 
$2,500,000.  In  1852  the  oidium  attacked 
the  vineyards  and  did  great  injury,  and 
ten  or  twelve  years  later  the  phylloxera 
made  its  appearance,  and  again  the  vines 
were  wasted.  But  Madeira  continues  to 
export  wine,  or  wine  blended  with  the 
ordinary  white  wine  of  Portugal,  or  with 
cider  or  alcohol,  or  even  the  juice  of  the 
sugar-cane.  The  quantity  exported  in 
18843  was  353,000  gallons,  valued  at 
about  $640,000.  The  islanders  of  the 
Canaries  formerly  made  large  shipments 
of  excellent  sugar  to  Europe,  but  like 
their  Madeira  neighbors  they  turned 
their  attention  to  wines.  Their  vineyards 
have  been  ravaged  by  insects  within  the 
last  thirty  years.     There  have  been  simi- 

3  The  Earth  and  Its  Inhabitants,  vol.  3,  p.  503. 


Africa.] 


13 


[Africa. 


lar  Ticissitudes  in  the  Azores,  where,  up 
to  the  middle  of  the  present  century,  a 
white  wine  of  indifferent  quality  was 
abundant.  In  the  Azores  orange  groves 
have  replaced  the  ruined  vineyards,  but 
the  distilling  business  is  attaining  impor- 
tance, sweet  potatoes  and  yams  being 
used. 

EAST  AFRICAN"   COUNTRIES. 

Ahyssinia,  etc. — Along  the  Upper  Nile 
and  in  the  lake  regions  the  natives  have 
had  but  little  intercourse  with  the  com- 
mercial representatives  of  Christian  civil- 
ization, and  have  not  yet  experienced  the 
horrors  of  the  "white  man's  drink." 
Nearly  every  tribe  brews  a  rude  beer,  or 
prepares  a  beverage  of  some  sort,  but 
these  inland  people  have  lacked  oppor- 
tunities for  reducing  themselves  to  the 
depths  of  degradation  by  means  of  the 
most  potent  stimulants.  In  Kailaland 
the  common  cereals,  wheat,  barley  and 
haricots,  are  not  in  general  use  as  aliments 
for  man,  but  are  fed  to  cattle  and  con- 
verted into  beer.  In  Abyssinia  beer  is 
brewed  from  daknssa,  the  most  widely 
distributed  grain,  although  in  some  parts 
of  this  country  (especially  among  the 
Harrari)  an  intoxicant  is  prepared  from 
a  mixture  of  bark  and  dried  leaves.  In 
former  years  the  vine  (probably  trans- 
planted from  Europe)  was  extensively 
cultivated  in  Middle  Abyssinia.  Some  of 
the  wines  obtained  (notably  those  of  Ifag 
and  Koarata)  were  from  plants  brought  in 
by  the  Portuguese,  and  were  highly  esteem- 
ed. But  these  vines  were  nearly  all  de- 
stroyed by  the  odium.  It  is  said  by  some 
travelers  that  King  Theodore  co-operated 
with  this  insect  in  its  work,  uprooting 
the  vineyards  on  the  ground  that  wine 
ought  to  be  reserved  for  beings  superior 
to  mortals. 

In  the  countries  of  the  east  coast  the 
practices  of  the  people  in  reference  to 
intoxicants  differ  widely.  Throughout 
the  Somali  territory  (excepting  in  the 
Ogaden  country,  in  Central  Somali,  where 
a  fermented  drink  is  prepared  from 
camel's  milk)  the  use  of  alcoholic  drinks 
is  prohibited.  In  the  country  of  the 
Masai,  south-west  of  Somali  and  west  of 
Zanzibar,  where  "  the  physical  type  is  one 
of  the  finest  and  noblest  in  the  whole  of 
Africa,"'  the  natives  have  learned  by  ex- 
perience  that   intoxicating    liquors    and 

»  The  Earth  and  Its  Inhabitants,  vol.  4,  p.  3C4. 


tobacco  tend  to  debase  man  physically 
and  morally;  and  there  is  a  rigid  pro- 
hibition against  them.  The  African 
Lake  Society,  founded  in  1878  and  trad- 
ing in  the  region  of  Lake  Nyassa,  is  for- 
bidden by  the  terms  of  its  charter  to  fur- 
nish any  intoxicants  to  the  natives. 

Madagascar.  —  By  royal  decree  and 
recent  enactments,  prohibition  of  the 
trade  in  spirits  is  also  the  law  in  the 
province  of  Imerina  in  the  island  of 
Madagascar,  this  province  being  inhabited 
by  the  Hovas,  the  most  powerful  of  the 
Madagascar  natives.  Before  the  intro- 
duction  of  Christianity  into  Madagascar 
by  the  London  Missionary  Society,  there 
was  much  intoxication  among  the  people, 
who  consumed  a  fermented  drink  made 
from  the  sweet  sap  of  trees.  The  first 
sovereign  who  became  a  Christian  order- 
ed that  all  the  trees  yielding  this  sap 
should  be  cut  down,  and  this  radical 
action  put  an  end  to  drunkenness  until 
the  Governments  of  Great  Britian  and 
France,  at  the  demand  of  a  few  sugar- 
planters  in  Mauritius,  who  distilled  rum 
from  the  refuse  of  their  mills  and  sought 
a  convenient  market  for  the  stuff,  com- 
pelled Madagascar  to  consent  to  the  im- 
portation of  liquors.  Ten  per  cent,  of 
the  liquors  imported  from  abroad  belongs 
to  the  reigning  sovereign  of  the  Hovas, 
but  Queen  Ranavalona  II.  steadfastly 
refused  to  derive  a  revenue  from  the 
demoralization  of  her  people,  and  always 
had  her  share  poured  out  upon  the  ground 
at  the  landing-place  at  Tamatave.  The 
present  queen,  Ranavalona  III.,  also  ob- 
jects to  the  liquor  traffic  within  her 
dominions,  and  is  solicitous  for  a  modifi- 
cation of  the  treaty  stipulations;  but 
both  France  and  Great  Britain  have  so 
far  refused  to  grant  relief,  and  upon  these 
nations  rests  the  responsibility  for  the 
resulting  degradation.  ^ 

9  The  editor  is  indebted  to  Mrs.  Mary  Clement  Leavitt  for 
the  facts  about  Madagascar. 

We  quote  the  following  from  Archdeacon  Earrar,  based, 
in  part,  upon  information  given  in  the  report  of  a  recent 
British  and  Colonial  Temperance  Congress: 

"  In  1800  the  Malagasy  were  a  nation  of  idolaters;  now, 
thanks  in  great  measure  to  the  London  Missionary  Society, 
they  are  a  nation  of  Christians.  They  loved,  they  almost 
adored  the  English  who  had  done  so  much  for  them.  Un- 
happily, however,  Mauritius  became  a  sugar-producing 
colony,  and  rum  was  made  from  the  refuse  of  the  sugar- 
mills.  What  was  to  be  done  with  it  ?  It  was  not  good 
enough  for  European  markets,  and  Madagascar  '  was  made 
the  receptacle  for  the  damaged  spirit  of  the  colony!' 
They  received  the  curse  in  their  simplicity,  and  it  produc- 
ed frightful  havoc.  '  The  crime  of  the  island  rose  in  one 
short  year  by  leaps  and  bounds  to  a  height  too  fearful  to 
record.'  Tlio  native  Government  wu'^  seized  with  conster- 
nation, and  the  able  and  courageous  King,  Kadama  I.,  paid 


Africa.] 


14 


[Africa. 


Zanzibar,  another  prominent  island,  is 
commercially  important  as  the  base  of 
supply  and  point  of  departure  for  the 
expeditions  organized  to  penetrate  the 
equatorial  parts  of  the  continent  from 
the  east  coast.  Speaking  of  it,  Prof. 
Drummond  says : "  Oriental  in  its  appear- 
ance, Mohammedan  in  its  religion,  Arab- 
ian in  its  morals,  this  cess-pool  of  wicked- 
ness is  a  iit  capital  for  the  dark  continent. 
But  Zanzibar  is  Zanzibar  simply  because 
it  is  the  only  apology  for  a  town  on  the 
whole  coast."  1 

SOUTH   AFRICAN   COUNTRIES. 

Cape  Colony. — The  magnitude  of  the 
wine  interests  of  the  southern  extremity 
of  Africa,  or  Cape  regions,  is  well  known. 
M.  Tisserand,  in  1884,  estimated  Gape 
Colony's  annual  vintage  at  15,400,000 
imperial  gallons.  This,  however,  was 
probably  an  over-estimate.  The  "  Welt- 
wirthshaf t"  for  1884  credited  Cape  Colony 
with  only  4,490,890  gallons.  Official 
returns  for  1887  showed  that  about  5,586,- 
608  gallons  of  wine  and  1,390,052  gallons 
of  brandy  were  produced  in  1887,  the 
exports  of  wine  being  valued  at  £18,928. 
Climate  and  soil  are  eminently  adapted 
for  tlie  cultivation  of  the  grape,  and  it 
is  claimed  that  the  number  of  gallons  to 
the  acre  averages  higher  than  in  any 
other  country.  The  vine  was  one  of  the 
first  European  plants  introduced  at  the 
Cape.  The  great  success  of  the  Cape 
wines  in  the  early  part  of  this  century 
has  not  been  maintained ;  the  manufac- 
turers have  offended  fastidious  tastes  by 
a  too  free  use  of  spirits  in  "fortifying" 
their  goods.  Although  the  oidium  and 
phylloxera  have  crippled  the  vineyards, 
efforts  are  l^eing  made  to  revive  the  repu- 
tation of  the  Cape  brands,  and  it  is 
claimed  that  the  wine  interest  there  is 
only  in  its  infancy,  great  tracts  of  rich 
land  not  having  been  utilized  for  vini- 
culture as  yet. 

the  duty  and  ordered  every  cask  of  rum  to  be  staved  in  on 
the  shore,  except  those  that  went  to  the  Government 
stores.  The  merchants  of  Mauritius  complained;  the 
English  otticials  interfered;  and  from  that  day  the  '  cursed 
stuff'  has  had  free  course,  and  dehiged  the  land  with 
misery  and  crime.  Radama's  son,  Radama  II.,  a  youth  of 
great  promise,  l)ecame  a  helpless  drunkard  and  a  criminal 
maniac,  and  was  assassinated,  after  a  reign  of  nine  months, 
by  order  of  his  own  I'rivy  Council.  Drunkenness  is  con- 
sidered a  European  fashion,  and  in  spite  of  tlie  grief  of 
the  native  authorities,  'this  crying  injury  to  a  perishing 
people  remains  unredressed  and  unheeded  by  the  most  hu- 
mane aud  (ihristian  nation  in  the  world.  The  same  story 
may  be  told,  with  very  slight  variation  of  detail,  of  all  the 
native  tribes  on  the  east  African  seaboard.'  " 

'  Tropical  Africa,  l)y  Henry  Drummond,  LL.  D.,  F.  R. 
S.  E.  (.New  York,  1890),  p.  8. 


Natal. — In  Natal  the  sugar-cane  is 
widely  cultivated,  and  in  1884  the  plan- 
tations produced  18,771  tons,  of  which 
more  than  a  third  was  exported  to  the 
Boers;  from  what  remained  rum  was 
distilled,  2,200,000  gallons  being  obtain- 
ed. By  a  regulation  adopted  in  185G  it 
is  a  penal  offense  to  sell  or  give  alcoholic 
drinks  to  the  natives  in  Natal,  but  this 
law  is  frequently  violated. 

Ba-suiolaml. — There  is  a  similar  pro- 
hibition (similarly  violated)  in  force  in 
Basutoland,  situated  between  Natal  and 
the  Orange  Free  State.  At  first  it  ap- 
plied only  to  the  native  chiefs,  who,  hav- 
ing to  act  as  judges,  were  exjjected  to 
keep  perfectly  sober;  but  now  neither 
chiefs  nor  native  subjects  can  procure 
liquor  lawfully.  Prohibition  in  Basuto- 
land was  established  by  the  decree  of  the 
Chief  Moshesh,  Nov.  8, 1854  (repeated  by 
him  in  1859),  as  follows: 

"  Whereas,  the  strong  drink  of  the  whites  was 
unknown  to  the  progenitors  of  our  tribe,  Matie, 
Motlomi,  up  to  Bo  Monageng ;  and  our  father 
Mocliachane,  now  advanced  in  years,  never 
u.sed  anything  for  his  drink  save  water  and 
milk;  and  inasmuch  as  we  are  of  opinion  that 
a  good  chief  and  judge  wlio  uses  anytliing  to 
intoxicate  him  is  not  in  a  proper  state  to  act  ns 
in  duty  boimd;  and  since  strong  drink  ctiuses 
strife  and  dissension  and  is  a  cause  of  destruc- 
tion of  society  (the  strong  drink  of  the  whites  is 
nothing  el.se  but  fire): 

"  Be  it  hereby  made  known  to  all  that  the  in- 
troduction and  sale  of  the  said  drink  into  the 
country  of  the  Basutos  is  forbidden  from  this 
forward,  and  if  anyone,  white  or  colored,  shall 
act  in  opposition  to  this  interdict,  the  drink 
will  be  taken  from  him  aud  spilled  on  the 
ground,  without  apology  or  compensation. 
And  this  decree  shall  be  printed  in  the  Basuto 
and  Dutcli  languages,  and  be  posted  upon  all 
the  places  of  public  resort,  and  in  the  villages 
of  the  Basutos. 

"  Given  with  the  advice  and  con.sent  of  the 
great  of  our  tribe,  being  as  the  Chief  of  the 
Basutos,  at  Thaba,  Bosigo,  Nov.  8  1854. 

•'Moshesh,  Chief. "« 

Beclnianaland. — A  native  proclamation, 
equally  remarkable  with  that  of  Moshesh, 
and  antedating  it  by  17  years,  was  issued 
by  Moroka,  a  Chief  of  Bechuanaland,  and 
published  in  Gi'alianrs  Town  Journal 
(Cape  of  Good  Hope),  for  March  22, 
1838,  as  follows: 

"  Thaba 'nohu.   Bechuanaland. — A    Law 

Prohibitinrj  the  Trafficin  Ardent  Spirits:  Where- 
as, the  introduction  of  ardent  spirits  into  this 
country  has,  in  a  great  measure,  been  subversive 

2  Temperance  History,  by  Dawson  Burns,  D.D.  (London 
National  Temperance  Publication  Depot),  vol.  1,  pp.  377, 
435. 


Africa.] 


15 


[Africa. 


of  the  good  effects  both  of  religious  and  civil 
p:overnment  in  every  i^art  where  it  has  been 
allowed,  and  immediately  caused  disorder,  im- 
morality and  vice,  and  more  remarkably,  pov- 
erty and  distress,  demoralization  and  destruc- 
tion of  life,  by  incessant  depredations  upon  the 
property  and  rights  of  the  weaker  tribes  of 
these  parts;  Be  it  hereby  known  that  the  traffic 
in  ardent  spirits  in  every  part  of  the  country 
under  my  government  shall,  from  the  date 
hereof,  be  illegal ;  and  any  person  or  persons 
found  transgressing  this  my  law  shall  be  sub- 
ject to  the  confiscation  of  all  the  spirits  thus 
illegally  offered  for  sale,  with  all  other  property 
of  every  kind  belonging  to  the  person  or  per- 
sons thus  found  transgressing  that  may  be  on 
the  spot  at  the  time  of  the  seizure  and  in  any 
way  connected  with  the  same. 

"  Given  at  Thaba  'nohu,  this  eighteenth  day 
of  October,  in  the  year  of  our  L,ord  one  thou- 
sand eight  hundred  and  thirty-seven.  The 
mark  X  of  Moroka,  Chief  of  the  Borolongs." 

Kama,  another  Chief  of  Bechiianaland, 
said  to  a  British  official :  "  I  fear  Lo  Ben- 
gula  less  than  I  fear  brandy.  I 
fought  witli  Lo  Bengula  when  he 
had  his  father's  great  warriors  from 
Natal,  and  drove  him  back,  and  he  never 
came  again,  and  God,  who  helped  me 
then,  would  help  me  again.  Lo  Bengula 
never  gives  me  a  sleepless  night.  But  to 
fight  against  drink  is  to  fight  against 
demons,  and  not  against  men.  I  dread 
the  white  man's  drink  more  than  all  the 
assegais  of  the  Matebele,  which  kill  men's 
bodies,  and  it  is  quickly  over;  but  drink 
puts  devils  into  men,  and  destroys  both 
their  souls  and  their  bodies  forever.  Its 
wounds  never  heal." 

In  the  trade  of  Delagoa  Bay  brandy  is 
a  chief  article  of  import,  and  in  the 
soitthern  part  of  Delagoa  the  traders  rely 
upon  spirits  more  than  any  other  com- 
mercial medium  in  their  transactions 
with  the  natives,  from  whom  they  receive 
hides,  caoutchouc,  beeswax,  etc.,  in  ex- 
change for  the  vilest  rum. 

THE   COXGO    FREE    STATE. 

No  part  of  Africa  has  attracted  so 
much  attention  in  recent  years  as  the 
vast  region  called  the  Congo  Free  State. 
It  has  an  area  of  780,000  square  miles, 
contains  a  population  of  43,000,000 
people  and  embraces  about  one-half  the 
entire  basin  of  the  Congo  river.  Q'he 
most  enterprising  efforts  have  been  and 
are  being  made  to  develop  its  commercial 
resources.  The  interests  of  civilization 
within  its  limits  were  the  subject  of  care- 
ful and  prolonged  consideration  by  an 
International  Conference,  which  met  in 


Berlin.  Nov,  15,  1884,  at  the  invitation 
of  P]-ince  Bismarck.  Representatives 
from  14  nations  were  present,  and  regu- 
lations for  the  government  of  the  Congo 
Free  State  were  established.  These  in- 
cluded a  rigid  prohibition  of  the  slave 
trade,  but  the  traffic  in  intoxicating 
liquors  was  in  no  way  disturbed.  Yet  it 
was  known  to  everybody  that  this  traffic 
meant  enslavement  and  speedy  death  to 
millions  of  Africans.  The  horrors 
wrought  by  the  deadly  liquor  of  the 
whites  had  been  vividly  described.  Henr} 
M.  Stanley  had  said  in  •'  The  Congo  "  (vol. 

"With  us  on  the  Congo,  where  we  must 
work  and  bodily  movement  is  compulsory,  the 
very  atmosphere  seems  to  be  fatally  hostile  to 
the  physique  of  men  who  pin  their  faith  to 
whiskey,  gin  and  brandy.  They  invariably 
succumb,  and  are  a  constant  source  of  expense 
Even  if  they  are  not  finally  buried  out  of  sighi 
and  out  of  memory,  they  are  so  utterly  help 
les.'^,  diseases  germinate  with  such  frightful 
rapidity,  s,^  mptcms  of  insanity  are  numerous; 
and,  with  mind  vacant  and  body  .semi-paralyz- 
ed, thjy  are  hurried  homeward  to  make  room 
for  more  valuable  substitutes." 

The  failure  of  the  Berlin  Congress  to 
legislate  against  the  liquor  traffic  in  tht 
Congo  Free  State  is  the  theme  of  a  most 
interesting  and  powerful  book  by  W.  T. 
Hornaday,  entitled  "  Free  Rum  on  tho 
Congo  "  (New  York,  1887).  We  quote  as 
follows  from  Mr.  Hornaday : 

"  In  the  whole  of  this  high  and  mighty  Act 
[the  General  Act  of  the  Conference],  there  is 
not  the  slightest  mention  of  any  restriction  on 
the  trade  in  intoxicating  liquors,  or  the  promo- 
tion of  temperance,  or  of  an}' method  or  system 
whatsoever  by  which  the  condition  of  the 
people  should  be  benefited  in  any  way.  . 
So  far  as  the  improvement  of  the  African 
people  was  concerned,  or  the  interests  of  the 
Congo  Free  State  furthered,  the  Conference 
might  just  as  well  have  never  been  held. 
Judged  by  the  result,  we  may  thruthfully  say 
that  it  was  a  Conference  for  trade  only,  and  it 
is  simply  disgraceful  that  the  spirit  of  trade, 
gain,  pecuniary  advantage  and  international 
greed  should  have  so  completely  monopolized 
the  deliberations  of  the  Conference  and  the 
declarations  of  the  Act.  .  .  .  But.  it  may 
be  replied  the  Government  of  the  Congo  Free 
State  can  itself  pass  laws  for  the  protection  of 
the  people.  Let  me  tell  you  it  can  do  no  such 
thing  in  regard  to  the  traffic  in  liquor.  The 
imjjortation  and  sale  of  brandy,  rum,  gin, 
whiskey  and  alcohol  is  'trade.'  and  the  Great 
Powers  (great  in  greediness)  have  decreed  in 
the  strongest  terms  that  trade  shall  be  absolute^/ 
free  in  that  region.  Kum  has  the  right  of  wav 
by  international  edict,  and  the  International 
Association  cannot  stop  the  sale  of  a  single 
bottle  of  it  without  the  consent  of  the  Powers. 


Africa.] 


16 


[Africa. 


If  the  opium  growers  of  India  want  to  send 
opium  to  the  Congo  and  teach  all  the  natives 
to  use  it,  they  can  do  so."    (Pp.  63-65.) 

And  again,  in  the  introduction  to  his 
little  book,  Mr.  Hornaday's  arraignment 
is  even  more  severe : 

'■  It  is  amazing  that  the  representatives  of  any- 
enlightened  nation  could  insist  upon  regulations 
allowing  the  exportation  of  poisonous  brandy 
to  Africa  in  an  unlimited  quantity,  and  free 
of  all  duty.  The  result  of  the  Berlin  West 
African  Conference,  when  stripped  of  its  diplo- 
matic drapery,  was  simply  this:  the  trading 
nations  gave  themselves  a  free  entry  into  the 
country;  by  their  accursed  free  trade  enact- 
ments they  utterly  pauperized  the  Government 
of  the  Congo  Free  State  (as  a  reward  for  the 
efforts  of  the  International  African  Association 
in  opening  up  the  country  !),  and  they  fastened 
the  free  rum  traffic  upon  the  people  for  twenty 
years.'    (Pp.  5  and  6.) 

Again : 

"  Nearly  all  the  savage  tribes  accept  the  vir- 
tues of  civilization  at  retail  and  the  vices  at 
wholesale.  .  .  .  In  ninety-nine  cases  out  of 
a  hundred,  his  [the  savage's]  first  news  of  the 
Christian  world  is  brought  by  a  trader,  who 
also  brings  him  fire-water  and  gunpowder. 
.  .  .  Our  civilization,  as  it  stands  at  present, 
is  a  wholesale  extermination  of  savage  races. 
They  are  killed  off  by  intemperance  and  modern 
diseases  of  various  kinds,  which  are  introduced 
among  them  by  unprincipled  Europeans,  aided 
by  other  causes,  less  reprehensible  but  no  less 
deadly,  which  spring  from  the  same  source. 

"  Africa  is  being  opened  up  from  all  sides, 
but  to  what  ?  To  Portuguese  slave-traders  for 
one  thing,  and  also  to  New  England  rum,  Hol- 
land gin,  poisonous  brandj'  from  Hamburg, 
Portuguese  aguardiente,  and  deadly  alcohol 
from  France,  and  God  only  knows  where  else." 
(P.  37.) 

"  By  reason  of  the  total  absence  of  restrain- 
ing laws  heretofore,  and  the  special  privilege 
granted  by  the  General  Act  of  the  Berlin  Con- 
ference, the  traders  of  Holland,  Germany, 
Portugal,  the  United  States,  France  and  En- 
gland are  pouring  cheap  and  deadly  liquors  into 
Africa  by  the  shipload.  The  natives  have  de- 
veloped an  appetite  for  it  almost  beyond  the 
power  of  belief,  and  it  is  used  for  currency  in- 
stead of  money.  In  fact,  gin  is  the  lever  by 
which  Africa  is  being  '  opened  up.' "    (P.  71.) 

The  Netherlands,  Germany,  the  United 
States,  Great  Britain,  France,  Spain  and 
Portugal  are  the  principals  engaged  in 
the  production  of  liqitors  for  the  Congo 
traffic.  The  exportation  of  spirits  from 
the  Netherlands  to  the  west  coast  of 
Africa,  upon  the  authority  of  Mr.  Horn- 
aday,  who  gives  statistics  derived  from 
official  sources,  amounted  in  1883  to  8-18,- 
578  gallons,  in  1884  to  1,323,914  gallons 
and  in  1885  to  1,087,562  gallons.  Great 
Britain's  exports  of  spirituous  liquors  to 
West  Africa  for  1885  aggregated   224,- 


873  gallons.  France's  contribution  for 
1885  was  405,944  gallons.  Germany's 
liquor  exports  to  the  Congo  and  other 
parts  of  Africa  during  1885  reached  the 
enormous  quantity  of  7,823,042  gallons. 
From  the  port  of  Boston,  United  States, 
during  the  five  months  of  July  and  Oc- 
tober, 1885,  and  January,  February  and 
June,  1886,  737,650  gallons  of  rum  were 
exported  to  Africa. 

W.  P.  Tisdel,  a  special  United  States 
agent  sent  to  the  Congo  to  examine  the 
country  and  its  inhabitants,  in  his  report 
published  in  the  Consular  reports  for 
1885  (p.  334),  says  of  the  Congo  gin 
business : 

"  The  gin  comes  mainly  from  Holland  and  is 
manufactured  expressly  for  the  trade.  The 
Holland  article  comprises  aliout  90  per  cent,  of 
all  the  gin  imported.  The  remaining  10  per 
cent,  may  be  distributed  amongst  other  coun- 
tries." 

When  Mr.  Hornaday  wrote  his  booii  he 
made  this  prediction :  "  Ten  years  from 
now  it  will  be  too  late  to  offer  the  Afri- 
cans any  protection  from  the  evils  that 
are  now  being  sown  amongst  them." 
Four  years  have  passed,  but  at  the  time 
this  is  written  there  is  no  certainty  of  a 
change  of  policy.  Earnest  and  persever- 
ing efforts  have  been  made  by  philanthro- 
pists and  temperance  people  to  arouse  the 
governments  to  action,  and  the  Brussels 
Conference  of  1890  took  favorable  steps, 
prohibiting  the  traffic  in  distilled  spirits 
throughout  a  broad  zone ;  but  the  opposi- 
tion of  Holland  has  been  interposed  to 
prevent  ratification.  (See  foot-note,  p. 
498.) 

LIBERIA  AND   OTHER   COUNTRIES   OF    THE 
WEST   COAST. 

The  other  countries  of  the  west  coast 
of  Africa  are  also  deluged  with  Eurojjean 
and  American  spirits.  In  the  Republic 
of  Liberia,  which  is  regarded  with  pecul- 
iar interest  by  Americans,  the  regulation 
of  the  drink  traffic  by  license  laws  has 
been  attempted.  John  H.  Smith,  United 
States  Consul-General  to  Liberia,  in  1885, 
reported  that  "  no  spirits  have  been 
brought  into  the  Republic  during  the 
year  on  account  of  the  opposition  to  the 
license  law."  Rev.  B.  F.  Kephart,  an 
American  missionary  to  Liberia,  wrote  in 
1889: 

"I  never  saw  such  poverty  among  God's 
people  as  there  is  in  Liberia.  .  .  .  The 
Christian  nations  are  pouring  rum  and  gin  in 
upon   this   poor   people.      The  steamer   that 


African  M.  E.  Church  ] 


17 


[Alcohol. 


brought  us  from  Hamburg  bad  on  board  10.000 
CMsks  of  rum  (each  holding  .TO  to  60  gallons  , 
11  cases  of  gin,  460  tons  of  gunpowder,  and  14 
missionaries — all  on  their  way  to  Africa  to  con- 
vert the  heathen.  The  German  line  has  nine 
s  earners  that  ply  monthly  between  Germany 
ami  Africa.  They  always  have  the  same  kind 
of  a  load,  with  the  exception  of  the  mis.siou- 
aries.  I  learned  that  much  of  this  rum  came 
from  Boston."  ' 

Joseph  Thomson,  the  African  traveler, 
in  an  article  entitled  "Up  the  Niger,"' 
printed  in  Good  Tlwrc/s  for  January,  188G, 
speaks  tlms  of  the  enormous  quantities 
of  liquors  poured  into  the  coast  ports  and 
destined  for  the  natives  of  the  Niger 
Valley : 

"  At  each  port  of  call  one  becomes  bewilder- 
ed in  watching  the  discharge  of  thousands  of 
cases  of  gin,  hundreds  of  demijohns  of  rum, 
box  upon  box  of  guns,  untold  kegs  of  gun- 
powder and  myriads  of  clay  pipes,  while  it 
seems  as  if  only  by  accident  a  stray  bale  of 
cloth  went  over  the  side." 

"  The  Earth  and  Its  Inhabitants"  (vol.  3, 
p.  127)  contrasts  the  suppression  of 
slavery  in  Senegamhia  with  the  continu- 
ance of  the  liquor  traffic,  and  says : 

"If  men  are  no  longer  directly  purchased, 
the  European  dealers  continue  the  work  of 
moral  degradation.  While  reproaching  the 
Ne^ro  populations  with  cruelty,  they  incite 
them  to  war;  while  complaining  of  their  intem- 
perate, depraved,  or  indolent  habits,  they  per- 
sist in  supplying  them  with  fiery  alcoholic 
drinks." 

In  Angola,  just  south  of  the  Congo 
river,  although  there  are  some  32  distinct 
varieties  of  the  gra^^e,  not  wine-produc- 
tion but  spirit-distillation  is  a  leading  in- 
dustry. Spirits  are  made  by  the  Portu- 
guese from  the  sugar-cane.  In  Benguela, 
Mossamedes  and  nearly  the  whole  of  the 
Portuguese  territory  of  West  Africa, 
distilling  is  systematically  carried  on, 
the  atrocious  product  being  used  in  trade 
with  the  natives  of  the  interior.  The 
United  States  special  agent  to  the  Congo, 
W.  P.  Tisdel,  from  whom  we  have  already 
quoted,  declares  in  the  Consular  Reports 
for  1885  (p.  336),  that  "  in  St.  Paul  de 
Loando,  Benguela,  and  Mossamedes  there 
are  no  manufactories  in  the  country,  ex- 
cepting for  rum;  consequently  every- 
tliing  but  the  commonest  articles  of  food 
is  required  from  abroad." 

African  Methodist  Episcopal 
Church. — The  General  Conference,  rep- 
resenting 2,000  ministers  and  over  400,- 

1  The  Voice,  Dec.  5,  1889. 


000  members,  at  Indianapolis,  Ind.,  May, 
1888,  twlopted  resolutions  as  follow: 

"  Resolved  1,  That  we  discourage  the  raanr- 
facture,  sale  and  use  of  all  alcoholic  and  malt 
liquors. 

"  Resolved  2,  That  we  discourage  the  use  of 
tobacco  by  our  miiii.sters  and  people. 

"  Resolved  3,  That  we  discourage  the  use  of 
opium  and  snulf . 

'■  Resolved  4,  That  we  indorse  the  great 
Prohibition  movement  in  tiiis  country,  also  the 
work  done  by  the  Woman's  Christian  Temper 
ance  Union,  and  will  use  all  honorable  means 
to  suppress  the  evils  growing  out  of  intemper- 
ance. 

"  Resolved  5,  That  it  shall  be  a  crime  for 
any  minister  or  member  of  the  A.  M.  E.  Church 
to  fight  against  temperance,  and  if  convicted 
of  this  crime  he  shall  lose  his  place  in  the  Con- 
ference and  church." 

The  Committee  on  Temperance  recom- 
mended (1)  that  unfermented  wine  be 
used  at  the  Lord's  Supper,  and  (2)  that 
no  habitual  user  of  tobacco  or  whiskey 
be  appointed  a  traveling  preacher.  The 
Bishops  said  in  their  address : 

"  We  should  allow  no  minister  or  member 
who  votes,  writes,  lectures  or  preaches  to  up- 
hold the  rum  trade  to  retain  his  membership, 
either  in  the  Conference  or  the  church.  And 
those  who  are  addicted  to  strong  drink,  either 
ministers  or  laymen,  should  have  no  place 
among  us.  Visit  our  station-houses,  bridewells, 
jails  almshouses  and  penitentiaries,  and  you 
Vvill  th:'re  witness  the  cffe"t3  of  this  horror  of 
horrors.  Rum  has  dug  the  grave  of  the  Amer- 
ican Indian  so  deep  that  he  will  never  be  lesur- 
rected.  If  we  would  escape  the  same  fate  as  a 
church  and  a  race  we  must  be  temperate. 
.  .  .  Some  of  the  loftiest  intellects  have  been 
blasted  and  blighted  by  this  terrible  curse. 
The  use  of  wine  at  weddings  should  never  be 
encouraged  l)y  our  ministers;  it  is  often  the 
beginning  of  a  blasted  life." 

African  Methodist  Episcopal 
Zion  Church.  —  The  General  Confer- 
ence, at  its  quadrennial  session,  held  at 
New  Berne,  ]N.  C,  May,  1888,  composed 
of  ministers  and  laymen  representing  all 
the  Annual  Conferences  of  29  different 
States,  and  a  membership  of  300,000, 
declared,  in  part : 

"This  Genend  Conference  re-affirms  its  stand 
against  intemperance  and  the  use  of  intoxicat- 
ing liquors  in  any  form  as  a  beverage.  We 
favor  every  means  that  can  be  brouglit  to  bejr 
for  the  destruction  of  the  traffic  in  all  intoxi- 
cating drinks  as  a  beverage  in  State  and  nation. 
We  also  he  irlily  recommend  that  unfermented 
wine  be  used  in  the  sacramental  service  as  far 
as  possilile." 

Alabama. — See  Index. 

Alaska. — See  Index. 

Alcohol. — "The  intoxicating  ingre- 
dient in  all  spirituous  liquors,  including 


Alcohol.] 


[Alcohol. 


under  this  term  wines,  porter,  ale,  beer, 
cider  and  every  other  liquid  which  has 
undergone  the  vinous  fermentation."' 
Its  production  depends  exclusively  upon 
the  decomposition  of  vegetable  or  animal 
matter :  so  far  as  is  known  it  is  impos- 
sible to  obtain  alcohol  witliout  decompo- 
sition. The  strength  of  any  intoxicating 
beverage  is  determined  by  the  percentage 
of  alcohol  contained  in  it.  Pure  alcohol 
can  be  procured  only  by  the  processes  of 
distillation  and  rectification.  In  its 
natural  state  it  is  a  colorless,  transparent 
liquid,  closely  resembling  water  in  appear- 
ance. Chemically  it  is  composed  of 
52. G7  parts  of  carbon,  12.90  parts  of  hy- 
drogen and  32.43  parts  of  oxygen;  and 
the  chemical  formula  for  it  is  C  .  Ilg  0. 
This  is  the  ordinary  alcohol  forming  the 
basis  of  genuine  liquors,  called  ethylic 
alcohol,  which  has  a  specific  gravity  of 
0.794  at  G0°  F.  and  boils  at  173.1^  F. 
But  other  alcohols  are  obtained  by  distil- 
lation, especially  methyl  alcohol  (C  II ^  0), 
which  is  derived  from  wood,  is  less  in- 
toxicating than  the  ordinary  article  but 
disagreeable  to  the  taste,  and  is  very  ex- 
tensively used  in  the  arts  and  manufac- 
tures, because  of  its  comparative  cheap- 
ness. The  remaining  alcohols  are  the 
propiilic  (C.HaO),  butijlk  (C^H.^O), 
amijlic  (C-  H^  ,  0),  etc.  These  are  all 
heavier  than  the  ethylic,  and  a  higher 
heat  is  required  to  generate  them  from 
the  grain  or  other  substance  distilled: 
they  are  far  more  intoxicating  than  the 
ordinary  alcohol  and  of  deadly  nature, 
and  a  conscientious  distiller  Avill  use  the 
utmost  pains  to  prevent  their  presence  in 
his  liquors;  but  considerable  quantities 
of  them  are  produced  even  by  the  most 
carefully-managed  processes,  and  thor- 
ough treatment  is  required  to  eliminate 
them.  (For  further  information  con- 
cerning the  heavier  alcohols,  see  Distil- 
lation.) 

The  chemists  of  the  Middle  Ages,  who 
first  distilled  alcohol — for  to  them  its 
discovery  is  attributed  by  historical  docu- 
ments, although  there  is  ground  for  be- 
lieving that  the  Chinese  understood  the 
art  long  before — sailed  the  fluid  by  vari- 
ous names:  aqua  ardcns,  aqua  fortis, 
irinum  ardens,  fvitiuni  adustum,  spiritus 
ardens,  aqua  inta,  etc.  The  name  "  aqua 
vitm"  (water  Gi  life)  was  considered  es- 
pecially appropriate  by  those  who  believ- 

'  United  Siates  Dispensatory. 


ed  in  its  wondrous  virtues.  The  word 
''  alcohol "  is  said  by  some  students  to 
have  been  derived  from  the  Arabic  al 
("  the  ")  and  kold  ("  fine,"  or  "  exceeding- 
ly fine  and  subtle").  Others  assert  that 
because  of  its  evil  effects  upon  men  if. 
was  called  al  gliole  (Arabic  for  ''the  evil  , 
ghost  or  spirit").  According  toothers, 
alcohol  is  corrupted  from  the  Arabic  al 
gliM  ("destruction,"  ''calamity").^  At 
first  the  production  and  use  of  distilled 
spirits  were  confined  to  the  laboratory; 
but  by  degrees  the  knowledge  of  their 
highly  intoxicating  properties  and  tlie 
credulous  belief  in  their  medicinal  qual- 
ities created  the  wide-spread  demand  for 
them  that  has  prevailed  for  more  than 
three  centuries. 

Legitimate  Uses. — Alcohol  in  its  con- 
centrated form  is  not  iised  as  a  beverage, 
except  occasionally  by  the  most  desperate 
drinkers,  who  will  eagerly  swallow  any 
decoction  to  gratify  their  burning  thirst. 
Its  legitimate  uses  are  numerous  and  im- 
portant. Large  quantities,  chiefly  of 
methylated  alcohol  (i.  e.,  the  ordinary 
ethyl  alcohol  mixed  with  methyl  alcohol 
or  wood  spirits),  are  employed  by  the 
manufacturers  of  varnishes.  India  rubber, 
candles,  collodion  and  other  articles. 
Alcohol  is  also  of  great  value  as  a  solvent, 
and  is  extensively  used  to  dissolve  fatty 
substances,  essential  oils,  organic  acids, 
etc.  Ethers  are  formed  by  distilling 
mixtures  of  alcohol  and  acids;  chloral 
and  chloi'oform  are  produced  by  distilling, 
respectively,  chlorine  and  chloride  of 
lime  with  alcohol — and  thus  alcohol  is  an 
important  agent  in  the  manufacture  of 
ana3sthetic  preparations.  Vinegar  is  made 
by  exposing  fermented  fruit  Juices  to  the 
air,  the  oxygen  changing  the  alcohol  to 
acetic  acid,  which  constitutes  from  2  to  4 
per  cent,  of  ordinary  vinegar.  The  in- 
flammability of  alcohol  and  the  intense 
heat  resulting  from  its  combustion  make  it 
very  serviceable  in  mechanical  and  other 
operations  where  concentrated  heat  is 
required.  Its  resistance  to  cold  is  so 
great  that  it  has  never  been  obtained  in  a 
solid  state,  and  at  the  very  lowest  temper- 
atures it  retains  the  fluid  form  though  be- 
coming viscid;  hence  it  is  substituted  for 
mercury  in  thermometers  used  for  indi- 
cating temperatures  below  the  freezing 
point  of  mercury  ( — 39°  F.).     Alcohol  is 

2  See  "  The  Foundation  of  Death  "  (New  York,    1887), 
pp.  'S-Z-'i. 


Alcohol.] 


19 


[Alcohol. 


one  of  the  most  precious  of  antiseptics, 
and  any  animal  substance  immersed  in  it 
can  be  preserved  for  an  indefinite  period 
of  time. 

Comparative  Insignificance  of  the  Quan- 
tity of  Alcohol  Used  in  the  Arts,  Manu- 
factures, etc. — But  the  aggregate  quantity 
of  alcohol  used  for  legitimate  purposes  is 
insignificant  when  compared  with  that 
entering  into  alcoholic  liquors  and  drank 
by  the  people.  W.  F.  Switzler,  Chief  of 
the  United  States  Bureau  of  Statistics, 
in  1887,  made  some  interesting  inquiries 
to  determine  what  portion  of  the  alcoholic 
product  is  employed  in  the  arts,  manu- 
factures, etc.  These  inquiries  resulted  in 
a  statement  from  James  A.  Webb  &  Son, 
of  New  York,  a  firm  receiving  and  hand- 
ling most  of  the  spirits  used  in  the  arts 
and  manufactures  in  this  country.  Webb 
&  Son  declared  that  "  the  proportion  of 
distilled  spirits  so  used  will  not  exceed 
10  per  cent,  of  the  whole  production," 
and  that  "  90  per  cent,  of  the  whole  pro- 
duct retained  in  the  United  States  for 
consumption  during  the  year  is  used  as 
a  beverage  and  is  designated  as  rye  or 
bourbon  whiskey,  gin,  proof  spirits,  pure 
spirits,  French  spirits  and  high  proof 
spirits."  It  is  believed  by  those  who 
have  given  special  attention  to  the  sub- 
ject that  Webb  &  Son  have  overestimated 
rather  than  underestimated  the  propor- 
tion of  distilled  spirits  used  in  the  arts 
and  manufactures. '  It  will  be  understood, 
of  course,  that  whatever  estimate  is  ac- 
cepted, no  account  is  taken  of  fermented 
liquors:  the  entire  product  of  beer  and 
Avine  may  be  said  to  be  used  for  beverage 
purposes  and  therefore  to  play  no  part 
whatever  in  the  arts  and  manufactures.  ^ 
That  is,  accepting  Webb  &  Son's  estimate, 


'  The  comparative  insignificance  of  the  quantity  so  used 
is  explained  by  the  very  high  tax  (90  cents  per  gallon) 
levied  by  the  United  States  Government  on  all  spirits. 
Manufacturers  and  others  who  would  use  alcohol  extensive- 
ly in  their  business  if  it  could  be  procured  cheaply  are 
forced  to  substitute  less  expensive  articles  for  it.  See 
Consumption  of  Liquors;  also  footnote,  p.  615. 

^  It  is  true,  however,  that  wine  and  beer  are  extensively 
prescribed  for  medicinal  purposes,  so-called,  while  some 
fermented  wine  is  consumed  at  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's 
Supper.  Fermented  liquors  so  used  are  said  to  he  applied 
l''£;itimately  in  the  same  sense  that  spirits  entering  into  the 
arts  and  manufactures  arc  so  applied.  But  it  is  maintained 
by  a  constantly  increasing  number  of  physicians  that  there 
is  no  necessity  or  justification  for  administering  alcolwlic 
liqiim-sot  any  kind  to  patients;  and  that  even  admitting 
alcohol  to  have  medicinal  value,  all  purposes  may  be  better 
secyed  by  giving  doses  of  pure  (lintiUed  alcohol  to  patients 
than  l)y  providing  them  with  draughts  of  any  of  the  pop- 
ular alcoholic  beverages.  Prom  this  point  of  view  the 
quantity  of  beer  and  wine  consumed  for  so-called  medici- 
nal purposes  is  to  be  classed  with  beverage  liquors  rather 
than  with  alcohol  used  in  the  arts,  manufactures,  etc. 


the  quantity  of  alcohol  used  in  the  arts 
and  manufactures,  etc.,  in  the  United 
States  during  the  fiscal  year  ending  June 
30, 1889,  was  10  per  cent,  of  the  quantity 
of  distilled  spirits  produced  during  that 
year  (91, 13:3,550  gallons),  or  9,113,355 
gallons ;  while  83,020,195  gallons  of  spirits 
and  778,715,443  gallons  of  fermented 
liquors  were  produced  as  drink. 

Practically  all  the  distilled  liquors  in 
general  use  in  the  United  States,  save 
genuine  whiskey,  are  obtained  by  com- 
pounding raw  alcohol  with  diiferent  sub- 
stances so  as  to  give  the  particular  liquors 
desired.  Genuine  whiskey  is  not  a  pro- 
duct of  the  compounding  process,  but  is 
distilled  from  the  grain  direct.  But  by 
far  the  largest  part  of  beverage  spirits 
exists  originally  as  concentrated  alcohol, 
and  receives  commercial  recognition  as 
brandy,  rum,  whiskey,  gin,  etc.,  only 
after  the  raw  article  has  been  diluted  and 
"doctored,"  frequently  with  the  most 
poisonous  drugs.  The  alcohol  used  in 
the  compounding  of  such  drinks  is  high- 
ly condensed  to  save  freight  charges,  and 
is  commercially  known  as  "  high  proof 
spirits."  The  term  "  proof  spirits  "  sig- 
nifies, in  the  United  States,  an  alcoholic 
strength  of  50  per  cent. 

Percentages  of  Alcohol  in  Alcoholie 
Liquors.  —  The  percentages  of  alcohol 
contained  in  some  of  the  leading  ferment- 
ed and  strong  liquors  are  as  follows :  ^ 

Beer 4.0  Lisbon 18.5 

Porter 4.5  Canary 18.8 

Ale 7.4  Sherry 19  0 

Cider 8.6  Vermouth 19.0 

Perry 8.8  Cape .19.2 

Elder 9.3  Malmsey 19.7 

Moselle 9.6  Marsala 20  2 

Tokay 10.2  Madeira 21.0 

Rhine 11  0  Port 23.2 

Orange 11.2  Curacoa 27.0 

Bordeaux 11.5  Aniseed 33.0 

Hock 11.6  Chartreuse 43.0 

Gooseberry 11.8  Gin 51.6 

Champagne  12.2  Brandy 53.4 

Claret  13.3  Rum 53  7 

Burgundy 13.6  Irish  Whiskey. . . .  53.9 

Malaga 17  3  Scotch      "        ...54.3 

[The  processes  for  obtaining  the  different  al- 
coholic liquors  are  treated  under  the  heads, 
Brewing,  Distillation  and  Fermentation. 
Descriptions  of  particular  liquors  will  be  found 
under  Malt  Liquors,  Spirituous  Liquors 
and  Vinous  Liquors.  The  various  controvert- 
ed questions  involved  in  the  alcohol  discussion 
are  considered  in  the  proper  places;  for  in- 
stance, see  Alcohol,  Effects  op  ;  Food  and 
Medicine.] 

3  Mulhall  (1886). 


Alcohol,  Effects  of.] 


20 


[Alcohol,  Effects  of. 


Alcohol,  Effects  of. — When  we  use 
the  word  alcohol  we  require  to  be  clear 
as  to  the  meaning  of  the  word  and  the 
thing.  We  know  now  that  the  term  is 
employed  by  the  chemists  to  indicate  a 
long  series  of  chemical  bodies,  having 
certain  properties  in  common  and  ex- 
hibiting the  same  chemical  constitution 
in  respect  to  the  elements  which  enter 
into  the  composition  of  them.  These  ele- 
ments, three  in  number — carbon,  hydro- 
gen and  oxygen  —  never  vary  except  in 
quantity  or  amount,  and  one  of  them, 
the  oxygen,  remains  always  the  same, 
even  in  amount,  in  every  member  of  the 
family.  The  other  tAvo  elements,  the 
hydrogen  and  the  carbon,  invariably  pre- 
sent, exist  in  different  quantities  in  differ- 
ent members  of  the  family,  and  it  is  on 
this  difference  that  the  family  differences 
depend.  In  the  first  or  primary  member 
of  the  family,  the  elements  stand  in  the 
following  form :  there  is  one  proportion 
or  part  of  carbon,  four  of  hydrogen  and 
one  of  oxygen.  This  alcohol,  called 
metliylic  alcohol  or  wood  spirits,  is  a  light 
fluid  which  boils  at  140*^  Fahrenheit,  and 
is  so  far  volatile  that  I  have  succeeded  in 
putting  warm-blooded  animals  to  sleep 
by  making  them  inhale  its  vapor.  We 
have  in  this  methylic  alcohol  the  lightest 
of  the  family  group.  If  we  pass  to  the 
thirtieth  of  the  group  we  find  a  solid  al- 
cohol, called  melytic,  or  by  some,  melissir, 
really  a  wax-like  substance.  The  propor- 
tion of  oxygen  is  just  the  same  in  this 
variety  as  in  the  last-named,  but  the  pro- 
portions of  carbon  and  of  hydrogen  have 
so  greatly  changed  that  the  change  in  the 
quality  of  the  substance  need  not  be 
wondered  at.  The  heavy  element,  car- 
bon, has  increased  from  one  part  in  the 
mdliijUc  alcohol  to  30  in  the  melytic,  and 
the  hydrogen  has  risen  to  61.  If  we  go 
back  in  the  series  we  shall  find  another 
alcohol,  the  fifth  from  the  methylic,  call- 
ed usually  amylic  alcohol,  fusel  oil,  or, 
sometimes,  potato  spirits.  This  is  a 
heavy  oily  fluid  of  disagreeable  odor  and 
of  high  boiling  point,  270°  Fahrenheit. 
It  differs  from  the  wood  spirits  in  ^ts 
weight,  being  very  much  heavier.  It  is  com- 
posed of  five  parts  of  carbon  and  12  of 
hydrogen,  with  the  usual  unit  of  oxy- 
gen. 

The  variations  here  noticed  extend  all 
through  the  series,  and  all  through  in 
regular  sequence,  the  carbon  increasing 


one  part  and  the  hydrogen  two  parts  each 
step.  If  we  could  add  one  more  of  car- 
bon and  two  more  of  hydrogen  to  me- 
thylic alcohol  we  should  get  another  alco- 
hol composed  of  two  parts  of  carbon,  six 
parts  of  hydrogen  and  one  part  oxygen, 
and  this  would  be  the  common  alcohol  of 
commerce,  ethylic  alcohol,  the  spirit  which 
forms  the  staple  of  all  the  wines,  spirits, 
ales  and  other  so-called  spirituous  drinks 
supplied  in  such  large  quantities  to  our 
communities  for  drinking  purposes.  All 
the  alcohols  are  products  or  results  of 
fermentation  of  one  or  other  fermentable 
substance.  The  common  or  ethylic  alco- 
hol is  the  product  of  the  fermentation  of 
grain  and  of  fruit,  and  is  by  far  the 
largest  product  of  any,  because,  by  what 
has  become  the  almost  universal  consent 
of  the  civilized  world,  it  has  been  and  is 
demanded  as  a  beverage  and  stimulant. 
We  may  say  of  it,  jiractically,  that  it 
alone  is  the  alcoholic  drink  of  those  who 
indulge  in  the  use  of  a  stimulant;  for 
although  it  is  true  that  amylic  alcohol 
and  some  other  alcohols  get  mixed  by 
accident,  or  carelessness,  or  it  may  be 
sometimes  by  design,  with  common  alco- 
hol, they  are  not  supposed  to  be  present 
in  it,  and  the  general  effects  of  alcoholic 
drinking  are  attributable  to  it  alone. 

DIFFUSION     OF     ALCOHOL    THROUGH     THE 
BODY. 

With  the  few  facts  above  stated  clearly 
before  us  on  the  position  of  common  al- 
cohol, from  a  chemical  point  of  view,  we 
may  turn  to  the  study  of  the  effects  of  it 
on  man  and  other  living  things  subjected 
to  its  influence.  For  all  living  things  it 
has  a  certain  physical  affinity,  for  the 
simple  reason  that  all  living  things  con- 
tain, and  as  a  rule  are  largely  made  up  of 
luater,  for  which  the  alcohol  has  a  strong 
affinity.  Itself  a  mobile  fluid,  it  mixes 
with  water  in  all  proportions  and  with 
the  utmost  readiness:  in  fact,  it  is  by 
virtue  of  this  readiness  that  it  is  received 
into  the  body.  No  one  would  ever  learn 
to  drink  alcohol,  under  any  circumstances, 
unless  it  were  first  largely  diluted  with 
water,  as  it  is  in  wine,  beer,  brandy,  rum, 
gin,  whiskey  and  other  spirits.  When 
in  any  of  these  it  is  present  in  great 
strength,  it  is  again  diluted  by  the  addi- 
tion of  more  water,  because  if  it  were 
not  so  diluted  it  would  create  a  burning 


Alcohol,  Effects  of.]                           21  [Alcohol,  Effects  of. 

sensation  in  the  mouth  and  throat  and  pkimary  or  acute  effects  of  alcohol 

would  inflict  serious  injury  on  the  stom-  ^^  ^jj^  body 
ach.     Dihited   wioh   water  it  enters   the 

body  of  man  or  animal  with  the  water.  So  soon  as  the  diffusion  of  alcohol  has 
and  soon  diffuses  through  the  body  where-  been  made  through  the  system  of  a  hu- 
ever  there  is  water  in  the  tissues.  Thus,  man  being,  effects  are  manifested.  The  ef- 
for  a  short  time  after  a  portion  of  alcohol  fects  are  modified  by  the  amount  taken, 
has  entered  the  body,  and  before  it  has  and  by  some  other  circumstances,  such  as 
had  the  opportunity  of  being  removed,  temperature  of  the  air,  the  dilution  of 
it  can  be  detected  in  all  the  fluid  secre-  the  spirit  with  water,  and  above  all  the 
tions.  The  late  Dr.  Percy  discovered  it  habits  of  the  person  who  has  partaken  of 
present  in  the  fluid  of  the  ventricles  of  it,  whether  he  be  an  abstainer  from  it 
the  brain.  I  have  found  it  in  the  same  habitually  or  one  accustomed  to  it.  But 
fluid,  in  the  blood,  in  the  urine,  in  the  as  a  rule  we  may  state  that  the  action, 
fluids  which  lave  the  serous  membranes,  varying  in  degrees  under  different  circum- 
and,  in  short,  in  all  the  fluids  derived  stances,  is  exceedingly  uniform  and  regu- 
from  the  blood.  With  some  of  the  tis-  lar.  The  effects  which  ensue  may  em- 
sues  it  maintains  a  very  close  affinity,  es-  phatically  be  called  nervous  in  character, 
pecially  with  the  tissues  of  the  liver  and  that  is  to  say,  they  are  phenomena  due 
the  brain.  So  close  is  its  affinity  for  the  to  a  disturbance  emanating  from  the  ner- 
brain-substance  that  it  becomes  a  most  vous  centers,  the  centers  of  the  sympa- 
difficult,  nay  even  an  impossible  task,  to  thetic  or  organic  nervous  system,  and 
distill  from  brain-matter  all  the  ethylic  afterwards  from  the  centers  of  the  volun- 
alcohol  with  wliich  it  can  be  saturated,  tary  nervous  organism.  The  impression 
Hence  in  confirmed  alcoholic  inebriates  made  through  the  stomach  upon  the  or- 
it  becomes,  veritably,  part  and  parcel,  so  ganic  nerves  is  exceedingly  rapid,  being 
to  say,  of  the  cerebral  organization.  manifested  often  within  a  few  minutes 
The  usual  mode  of  taking  alcohol  into  after  the  alcohol  has  been  imbibed,  and 
the  living  body  is  to  imbibe  it  by  the  becoming  well  developed  in  20  minutes  to 
mouth,  as  a  drink;  but  it  can  effect-  half  an  hour.  These  first  effects, extend- 
ively  be  introduced  in  other  ways.  If  ing  through  the  nervous  distribution  to 
it  be  diluted  and  injected  into  the  eel-  the  whole  of  the  vascular  system,  institute 
lular  tissue,  under  the  skin,  it  will  be  wliat  I  have  called  the  first  stage  or  de- 
absorbed  from  there.  I  found  by  experi-  gree  of  alcoholic  disturbance,  the  stage  of 
ment  that  it  is  rapidly  absorbed  from  the  paresis  of  the  arterial  vessels  to  their  ex- 
peritoneal  surface  of  a  lower  animal  when  tremities.  These  vessels,  held  naturally 
it  is  freely  diluted  with  water.  I  also  in  a  state  of  proper  tension  and  of  re- 
found  that  at  a  sufficiently  high  temper-  sistance  to  the  stroke  of  the  heart,  be- 
ature  the  vapor  of  it  could  be  made  to  come  relaxed  under  the  action  of  the  al- 
enter  the  lungs  in  sufficient  quantity  to  cohol,  as  a  result  of  its  interference  with 
be  absorbed  from  the  lungs  and  to  pro-  the  function  of  the  organic  nerves  which 
duce  by  its  diffusion  through  the  blood  follow  these  vessels  to  their  extremities 
its  specific  effects.  Lastly,  I  have  known  and  attune  their  muscular  contraction  so 
it  to  be  absorbed  by  the  skin  in  so  distinc-  as  to  permit  the  necessary  quantity  of 
tive  a  manner  as  again  to  prove  its  trans-  blood  to  make  its  course  through  them, 
mission  through  the  blood  to  all  parts.  The  quantity  of  blood  thrown  out  by  the 
The  easy  and  rapid  diffusibility  of  alcohol  stroke  of  the  heart  is  treated  with  less 
through  the  body  is  the  reason  why  its  resistance  than  is  natural  in  every  part 
effects  are  so  speedily  realized  after  it  has  where  blood  circulates,  beginning  with 
been  received  by  the  body,  and  it  is  on  the  circulation  of  the  blood  through  the 
this  account  that  it  has  gained  so  wide  a  heart  itself  and  extending  to  the  circula- 
popularity  as  a  quick  restorer.  It  seems  tions  through  the  brain,  through  the  vis- 
to  those  who  are  wearied  to  restore  the  ceral  organs — like  the  stomach,,  intestines 
lost  power  so  speedily  that  they  are  led  and  liver — as  well  as  through  the  active 
to  consider  it  a  panacea  in  all  cases  of  organs  of  locomotion,  the  groups  of  mus- 
need  or  of  emergency,  llow  far  this  cles  that  move  the  body.  Tlie  result  is 
view  is  true  we  shall  see  better  as  we  pro-  that  action  through  every  part  and  organ 
ceed.  of  the  body   that  is  capable  of    action 


Alcohol,  Effects  of.] 


[Alcohol,  Effects  of. 


wliicli  can  be  felt,  as  well  as  of  parts  in 
which  action  is  not  sensibly  felt  — such  as 
the  involuntary  muscles — is  for  the  mo- 
ment intensified,  and  phenomena  are  in- 
duced which  are  strictly  indicative  of  the 
over-action.  The  heart  is  quickened  in 
its  beat,  and  owing  to  the  checked  flow 
of  blood  through  itself  the  force  of  its 
beat  is  also  increased.  The  vessels  of  the 
surfaces  of  the  body,  like  those  of  the 
skin  and  mucous  membranes,  are  injected 
with  blood  —  a  fact  evidenced  in  the 
increased  redness  of  the  skin  which  is 
always  seen  during  this  stage.  The  mind 
becomes  a  little  exalted,  and  ideas  seem 
to  flow  more  freely.  The  larger  quantity 
of  warm  blood  sent  into  the  skin  com- 
municates a  sensible  glow,  which  feels  to 
the  person  affected  like  an  increased 
warmth  of  body  generally.  The  secre- 
tions of  the  different  visceral  glands  are 
increased.  The  muscles  appear  to  be  en- 
dowed with  renewed  power,  and,  taking 
all  the  phenomena  experiened  into  ac- 
count, it  really  seems,  on  a  superficial 
view,  as  if  during  this  stage  all  the  vital 
powers  were  being  carried  on  with  an  ad- 
vanced vitality.  The  feeling  is  as  pleas- 
ant as  it  is  delusive,  as  cheering  as  it  is 
deceptive. 

It  is  not  until  we  come  to  measure  up 
the  effects  of  this  first  stage  with  the 
precision  of  an  observer  who  is  looking 
at  the  phenomena  without  feeling  them, 
that  the  truth  is  made  manifest.  Then  it 
comes  out  clearly  that  the  over-action 
felt,  subjectively,  is  waste  without  com- 
pensation—lost energy,  and  so  lost  that 
in  no  sense  whatever  is  it  regained.  If 
at  the  moment  when  the  over-action  is  at 
its  height  the  muscular  power  be  tested, 
it  will  be  found  wanting.  By  a  beautiful 
series  of  experiments.  Dr.  Ridge  has 
demonstrated  that  if  at  this  particular 
time  of  over-action  the  refined  involun- 
tary muscular  movements  be  tested,  they 
are  in  the  most  uncertain  condition  for 
action.  The  sense  of  delicate  touch  for 
balancing  weights  is  made  absolutely 
worthless;  sensibility  of  touch  is  ren- 
dered imperfect;  the  adjustment  of  the 
muscles  of  vision  is  made  uncertain  and 
feeble,  so  that  the  act  of  aiming  at  a 
mark  is  extremely  faulty;  and  the  sense 
of  hearing  faint  sounds  is  decisively  im- 
paired. These  facts  relate  to  the  action  of 
the  involiinfnnj  muscles,  but  they  apply 
with  equal  correctness  to  the  voluntary. 


I  myself  studied,  with  the  greatest  care, 
the  effects  of  alcohol  during  the  first 
stage  of  its  action  on  the  voluntary 
muscles,  not  only  of  man  but  of  inferior 
animals ;  and  I  detected  invariably  that, 
other  things  being  equal,  the  actual 
strength  of  the  voluntary  muscles  is  re- 
duced under  alcoholic  excitement,  except 
for  the  briefest  moments,  in  which  no 
sustained  work  is  being  carried  out. 

Precisely  the  same  state  of  tilings  is 
observable  in  respect  to  mental  phenom- 
ena. The  mind  seems  more  active,  and 
may  be  so,  but  it  is  less  precise  and  less 
strong  in  its  efforts.  Words,  whicli  come 
forth  at  one  moment  in  haste,  are  forgot- 
ten the  next,  or  refuse  to  come  into  re- 
membrance, and  in  the  art  of  spelling 
words  the  greatest  confusion  is  often  apt 
to  prevail.  To  these  failures  of  mind, 
excitement  of  mind  is  often  an  accom- 
paniment followed  by  depression  and 
irritability.  To  sum  up,  the  first  degree 
of  effect  from  alcohol  is  towards  helpless- 
ness of  mind  and  body  when  the  full  in- 
fluence is  calculated.  What  seems  good 
about  it  is  delusive;  what  seems  bad  is 
definitely  bad,  and  admits  of  scarcely 
any  qualification. 

The  first  stage  or  degree  passing  away 
may  leave  nothing  more  than  a  depres- 
sion, but  if  it  has  been  induced  by  a 
quantity  of  alcohol  which  leads  to  an 
extension  of  symptoms,  then  a  second 
stage  or  degree  is  evidenced,  in  which  all 
the  signs  of  failure  are  more  strikingly 
portrayed.  In  this  second  degree  the 
worst  indications  of  the  first  are  exag- 
gerated, and  the  failures  of  muscular 
I3recision  and  power  and  of  mental 
equilibrium  are  much  advanced.  In  this 
degree  the  voluntary  muscles  begin  to 
show  the  same  aberration  that  was  in- 
stanced in  the  involuntary  at  an  earlier 
period.  The  smaller  voluntary  muscles, 
like  tliose  of  the  lip,  are,  as  a  rule,  the 
first  to  become  enfeebled  and  uncertain. 
Afterwards  the  muscles  of  the  limbs  fol- 
low the  imperfection  of  function,  and  the 
brain  also  becoming  reduced  in  power  the 
mu,jcular  and  mental  acts  begin  to  be 
aberrant  simultaneously.  Meantime,  in 
this  degree,  the  temperature  of  the  body 
begins  to  fall.  The  great  surface  of  blood 
that  has  been  exposed  to  the  air  in  tlie 
first  stage  is  now  flowing  more  tardily 
and,  receiving  no  sufficient  supply  of 
warmth  from  within  the  body,  is  cooling 


Alcohol,  EfiTects  of.] 


23 


[Alcohol,  Effects  of. 


down,  leaving  all  parts  reduced  in 
warmth  like  itself. 

The  second  degree  of  alcoholic  effect 
always  leaves  behind  it  considerable  de- 
pression of  body  and  of  mind,  even  if  not 
succeeded,  as  it  may  be,  by  a  third  de- 
gree from  a  still  deeper  dose  of  alcohol. 
This  third  degree,  if  it  does  ensue,  is 
marked  by  a  more  complete  prostration, 
by  an  entire  want  of  proper  control  of 
tiie  voluntary  as  well  as  of  the  involuntary 
muscles,  by  delirium  and  mental  imbecil- 
ity, and  at  last  by  complete  collapse 
both  of  body  and  mind. 

To  this  third  stage  of  alcoholic  depres- 
sion there  may  succeed  a  fourth,  in  which 
there  is  absolute  paralysis  of  the  will,  and 
of  all  voluntary  muscular  power.  In  this 
stage  the  mind,  quite  unconscious,  is 
buried  in  the  deej^est  coma  or  sleep.  The 
body  is  now  entirely  anaesthetized,  so  that 
a  surgical  operation  of  the  severest  char- 
acter might  be  performed  on  it  without 
the  slightest  pain.  In  this  stage  also  the 
temperature  of  the  body,  which  has  been 
falling  through  the  whole  of  the  third 
degree,  sinks  to  the  low(5st  point  prac- 
tically compatible  with  the  continuance 
of  life,  namely  to  92*^  or  over  6*^  below 
what  is  natural.  To  such  a  low  ebb,  in 
short,  has  life  been  brought,  that  only 
two  nervous  centers  remain  true  to  their 
function,  the  center  which  presides  over 
respiration  and  the  center  which  stimu- 
lates the  heart  into  motion.  Upon  the 
fidelity  of  these  two  centers,  so  acting 
,  until  the  body  begins  to  be  set  free  from 
the  alcohol  by  its  slow  elimination  re- 
covery entirely  depends,  recovery  always 
attended,  under  the  most  favorable  con- 
ditions, by  many  hours  and  even  days  of 
depression  and  degradation  of  nutrition. 

IS   ANY    GOOD    DONE  ? 

In  the  above  description  of  the  effects 
of  alcohol  on  the  body  the  acute  effects 
alone  have  been  considered.  Before  pass- 
ing to  a  new  point  it  may  be  well  to 
make  a  note  on  one  or  two  questions 
which  the  narrative  suggests.  The  first 
question  we  are  led  to  ask  is.  Whether  in 
the  course  of  the  variation  from  the  nat- 
ural standard  of  vital  actions  which  fol- 
low the  action  of  alcohol  to  and  through 
any  degree,  any  good,  useful  or  neces- 
sary thing  has  been  done?  The  admit- 
ted answer  to  this  question  must  on  all 
sides  be,  that  after  the  effects  of  the  first 


degree  have  been  obtained  no  good  thing 
can  have  been  done,  while  some  amount 
of  evil  may  have  been  effected.  It  is  in- 
deed accepted  now  by  all  authorities  that 
the  phenomena  of  alcoholism  manifested 
in  the  primary  and  stimulating  periods 
of  its  action  are  the  only  phenomena  that 
can  be  productive  of  service.  These  are 
the  phenomena  of  stimulation;  and  as 
they  are  well  defined  we  can  study  them, 
one  by  one,  and  ask  their  value. 

1.  There  is  the  phenomenon  of  quick- 
ened circuhifi())i  of  the  blood  and  ([uickened 
motion  of  the  heart.  Is  that  good  ?  It 
may  be  good  to  call  a  languidly  acting 
heart  into  more  vigorous  motion,  but  to 
do  this  with  the  rest  of  the  body  in  re- 
pose, by  means  of  an  internal  stimulant, 
is  certainly  very  bad  practice.  The  heart 
that  wants  to  be  called  into  more  action 
requires  invigoration  by  reasonable  exer- 
cise in  which  the  other  muscles  of  the 
body  can  share,  not  by  exercise  in  which 
it  alone  is  engaged.  The  heart  stimu- 
lated alone  soon  begins  to  feel  the  habit- 
ual necessity  of  the  special  stimulant, 
and  learning  in  time  to  depend  upon  its 
artificial  supj^ort  lives  as  it  were  upon 
that  support;  and  becoming  over-active 
and  out  of  harmony  with  the  rest  of  the 
organs  of  the  body  so  long  as  it  is  sup- 
plied with  its  stimulant,  it  fails  in  the 
most  lamentable  manner  if  by  any  acci- 
dent its  stimulant  be  withdrawn.  Here 
is  the  reason  why  even  so-called  temperate 
consumers  of  alcohol  feel  so  acutely,  at 
first,  the  withdrawal  of  alcohol.  They 
feel  as  if  they  had  lost  blood,  and  num- 
bers who  try  to  abstain  are  driven  back 
from  the  trial  of  abstinence  because  they 
have  not  the  resolution  to  persevere  until 
the  heart  learns  to  work  without  the  arti- 
ficial spur  to  its  action.  The  spur  all 
through  is  deceptive  and  bad.  It  takes 
the  place  of  exercise  without  performing 
the  proper  duty.  It  produces  derange- 
ment just  bordering  on  disease  of  the 
heart.  It  often  lays  the  foundation  of 
actual  disease  of  that  organ,  and  it  leads 
to  inactivity  of  other  functions  of  the 
body  and  to  general  inaptitude  for  the 
active  duties  of  life  until  a  stimulant  has 
been  taken.  We  cannot,  therefore,  count 
this  part  of  the  action  of  alcohol  as  a 
good  action. 

2.  There  is  the  phenomenon  of  vxirmth 
induced  by  the  primary  action  of  alcohol. 
Is  that  good  ?     This  warmth  is  always 


Alcohol,  Effects  of.] 


24 


[Alcohol,  Effects  of. 


ephemeral  and  is  always  followed  by  a 
corresponding  fall  of  temperature.  It  is 
like  the  temporary  increased  heat  of  a 
fire  nnder  the  action  of  the  bellows :  it 
quickens  the  glow  but  it  does  not  sustain 
the  steady  burning  of  the  fire.  On  the 
contrary,  it  really  causes  the  fire  to  burn 
out  more  quickly  without  adding  a  grain 
to  the  fuel.  It  is  impossible,  conse- 
quently, to  attach  any  value  to  alcohol  as 
a  warmer.  It  is  positively  a  cooler  of  the 
blood  and  tissues,  and  combined  with 
cold  it  expedites,  in  the  most  determi- 
nate manner,  as  my  researches  on  the 
action-  of  alcohol  on  pigeons  showed,  the 
fatal  effects  of  extreme  cold.  The  ex- 
periences of  Arctic  voyagers  have  proved 
the  same  in  man. 

3.  There  is  experienced  in  those  who 
are  accustomed  to  alcohol  a  sense  of 
strength  after  taking  it,  and  of  firmness, 
which  seems  to  be  a  good  preparation  for 
acts  requiring  precision,  strength  or  en- 
durance. Is  that  good  ?  To  those  who 
rely  on  the  assurance  given  in  this  way 
by  alcohol,  this  is  considered  not  only  as 
good  but  as  a  necessity.  The  best  that 
can  be  truly  said  of  it,  however,  is  that  it 
is  an  acquired  good,  an  acquired  neces- 
sity. In  itself  it  is  bad,  because  the 
greatest  benefits  which  it  confers  are  poor 
indeed  when  compared  with  tlie  pre- 
cision, the  strength  and  the  endurance 
experienced  by  those  who.  being  un- 
touched by  the  habit  of  relying  on  wine, 
are  accustomed  to  depend  purely  on  nat- 
ural agencies  for  their  maintenance  of 
vital  labors.  In  a  word,  it  may  be  ac- 
cepted with  absolute  certainty  that  when- 
ever a  person  habituated  to  alcohol  feels 
that  he  is  unable  to  perform  any  work 
which  he  wishes  to  perform  unless  he  re- 
sorts to  alcohol  for  assistance,  he  is  so  far 
under  its  influence  for  evil  as  to  be  in 
positive  danger  from  it  and  from  its  inter- 
ference with  his  natural  vitality. 

Summing  up  all  the  effects  produced 
by  alcohol  during  the  primary  and  least 
hurtful  stage  of  its  action,  there  is  no 
effect  from  it  that  can  be  pronounced 
either  good  or  necessary  for  the  healthy 
body,  no  effect  that  cannot  be  supplied 
by  more  natural  and  better  means — that 
is  to  say,  by  the  aid  of  natural  food  and 
drink,  neither  of  which  alcohol  can  claim 
to  be. 

It  is  one  of  the  most  distinctive  effects 
of  alcohol  that  when  the  taste  for  it  has 


once  been  acquired  it  makes  for  itself  a 
special  constitution  which  may  most  faith- 
fully be  designated  the  alcoholic  constitu- 
tion. When  this  constitution  has  once 
been  formed  it  renders  everything  else 
subordinate  to  itself,  according  to  tho  de- 
gree of  alcoholic  influence  that  has  been 
established.  Thus  the  joerson  really 
temperate  in  the  use  of  alcohol  holds  by 
his  temperate  habit  as  firmly  as  he  wlio 
has  establislied  in  himself  the  more  dan- 
gerous habit  of  inebriety.  These  erfeets 
are  purely  physical,  and  they  can  be  in- 
duced in  animals  inferior  to  man,  by 
training,  just  as  easily  as  in  man  himself. 
They  are  dependent  on  the  affinity  which 
alcohol  has  for  the  matter  of  the  brain 
and  the  other  nervous  centers,  in  which 
centers  it  forms  a  habitat  for  itself,  from 
which  it  can  be  removed  only  by  Ljng- 
continued  total  abstinence. 

Many  persons  go  on  for  years  under  the 
simple  action  of  the  moderate  effect  of 
alcohol;  they  are  never  affected  beyond 
the  first  stage  of  its  action,  and  always 
assume  that  they  feel  the  benefit  of  it. 
Others  who  have  got  so  far  are  tempted 
to  go  a  little  farther  under  some  excite- 
ment, recreation,  work,  worry,  or  one  of 
tlie  many  incentives  for  stimulation,  and 
so  work  themselves  into  the  habit  of  the 
second  stage,  which  islesseaey  to  restrain 
than  the  first.  Others  slip  habitually 
into  the  habit  of  the  third  degree,  be- 
come regularly  intemperate  and  so  fixed 
in  intemperance  that  tliey  are  all  but 
irreclaimable.  From  this  last  group 
spring  those  lowest  in  the  series  of  the 
habitual  alcoholics,  who  suffer  from  gene- 
ral paralysis  and  who  fitly  and  literally 
represent  the  individual  in  the  fourth 
degree  of  acute  alcoholic  intoxication, 
dead  to  the  world  under  the  extreme 
paralyzing  influence  of  the  spirit  they 
have  imbibed. 

These  four  classes  of  mankind  form 
the  four  great  populations  of  constitu- 
tionally-alcoholized humanity  that  exists 
out  of  the  bonds  and  bounds  of  child- 
hood. It  is  fortunate  that  as  yet  the 
first  years  of  human  life  have  been  so 
far  exempted  from  the  alcoholic  spell, 
for  by  this  circumstance  a  full  sixth  of 
the  term  of  each  life  is  largely  saved  from 
the  injury  and  danger  of  alcohol.  Yet 
even  this  more  fortunate  section  is  not 
altogether  free ;  for,  unhappily,  an  agent 
which,  like  alcohol,  is  capable  of  inflict- 


Alcohol,  Effects  of.] 


25 


[Alcohol,  Effects  of. 


ing  so  marked  an  impression  on  the  ner- 
vous centers,  is  also  capable  of  inflicting 
impressions  which  pass  from  parent  to 
offspring  and  which  implant  by  inherit- 
ance the  constitutional  habit.  The  in- 
heritance of  disease  thus  acquired  from 
alcohol  is  not  so  strong  as  that  of  some 
other  diseased  conditions  from  other 
causes,  and  it  is  not,  according  to  my 
observation,  transmitted  farther  than  the 
third  generation;  but  it  must  be  ad- 
mitted as  a  factor  tending  to  the  produc- 
tion of  alcoholic  degeneracy  and  to  the 
increase  of  the  great  populations  sharing 
in  one  or  other  of  the  constitutional 
stages  of  alcoholic  existence,  and  in  the 
induced  series  of  aberrations  from  the  nat- 
ural standard  of  health  which  furnish 
the  large  class  of  disorders,  bodily  and 
mental,  now  designated  as  the  alcoholic 
diseases  of  mankind. 

INJURIES,   PHYSICAL   AND   MENTAL. 

It  will  be  clear  to  every  reasoning  and 
unprejudiced  mind  that  a  chemical  sub- 
stance which  possesses  the  power  of  pro- 
ducing in  the  living  so  many  varied  and 
important  changes  as  those  which  alcohol 
produces,  cannot  fail  to  induce,  in  the  or- 
gans of  the  body,  physical  modifications 
which  are  either  good  or  bad.  That 
alcohol  is  incapable  of  imparting  any 
good  is  now  pretty  generally  acknowl- 
edged. Its  elementary  construction  pre- 
cludes the  possibility  of  considering  it  as 
a  substance  or  food  which  can  build  up 
or  sustain  any  vital  structure  or  organ, 
such  as  muscle  or  brain ;  and  when  it  is 
freed  from  saccharine  foods  there  is  no 
evidence  whatever  for  assigning  to  it  the 
doubtful  virtue  of  giving  fat  to  the  body. 
In  small  quantities  it  quickens,  in  large 
quantities  it  deadens  nervous  action.  This 
is  its  summnm  bonum  and  its  summiim 
malum.  The  good  is  infinitesimal — 
the  evil  infinite.  The  physical  injuries 
from  alcohol  are  incomparably  large  be- 
cause of  their  extent.  They  graduate 
from  the  simple  exaltation  of  action, 
peculiar  to  the  excitement  of  the  first  de- 
gree of  its  action,  to  the  complete  paraly- 
sis pertaining  to  the  last  degree.  Where- 
ever  organic  matter  of  the  body  is  en- 
folded in  membrane,  there  will  alcohol 
penetrate  and  there  will  functional  dis- 
turbances followed  by  organic  degenera- 
tion be  set  up.    "VVe  know  now  of  a  de- 


finite and  connected  family  of  alcoholic 
degenerative  diseases.  We  are  acquainted 
with  alcoholic  ])Iifhisis,  or  the  consump- 
tion of  drunkards;  with  hepatic  cirrliosis, 
or  induration  of  the  drunkard's  liver; 
with  the  dropxy  arising  from  the  hepatic 
cirrhosis;  with  alcoholic  diispeiJsia  ;  with 
alcoholic  epilepsy ;  with  alcoholic  hyper- 
tropliy,  or  enlargement  of  the  heart;  with 
alcoholic  asthetda,  or  feebleness  of  the 
heart ;  with  degeneration  of  tlie  kidney  and 
the  accompanying  train  of  kidney  dis- 
eases classed  vaguely  under  the  term 
Bright's  Disease.  But  the  most  wide- 
spread devastations  from  alcohol  are 
those  seated  in  the  nervous  system  and 
displayed  in  mental  aberration.  The 
commoner  known  of  these  are  the  acute 
affections,  delirium  tremens,  mania  from 
drink,  inebriety  or  repeated  intoxication, 
to  which  must  be  added  the  less  under- 
stood yet  serious  conditions,  alcoJiolic 
epilepsy  and  alcoholic  paralysis.  This 
last-named  disease,  only  recently  clearly 
defined,  is  one  of  the  most  wide-spread 
of  the  chronic  diseases  resulting  from 
alcohol,  one  of  the  most  obscure  and  one 
of  the  most  fatal. 

MORTALITY  FROM  ALCOHOL. 

An  agent  like  alcohol,  extensively  and 
recklessly  used  by  mankind  in  all  parts 
of  the  world,  and  capable  of  inducing 
so  many  and  serious  diseases,  must  of  ne- 
cessity be  the  cause  of  a  tremendous 
mortality,  with  the  usual  precedence  of 
many  days  of  utter  disablement  and  dis- 
ease. That  is  the  fact.  It  is  difficult  to 
calculate  the  precise  mortality  from  alco- 
hol, because  we  have  never  yet  fully 
diagnosed  all  the  evils  leading  to  disease 
and  death  wdiich  spring  from  it.  For 
example,  up  to  this  time  we  have  not 
added  the  mortality  due  to  alcoholic 
paralysis  in  the  large  computations  from 
which  our  results  have  been  drawn.  Some 
years  ago,  from  the  best  data  I  could  ob- 
tain, I  estimated  that  in  England  and 
Wales  the  annual  mortality  from  alcohol 
was  50,000  per  annum,  an  estimate  fairly 
confirmed  by  other  observers  who  have 
made  inquiries  of  an  important  and  in- 
dependent character.  Admitting  its  cor- 
rectness, this  estimate  makes  the  mortality 
from  alcohol  to  be  about  one-tenth  of  the 
whole  mortality — a  view  which  had  pre- 
viously been  expressed  by  the  late  Dr. 


Alcohol,  Effects  of.] 


26 


[Anti-FroMbition. 


Edwin  Lankester,  the  Coroner  for  Central 
Middlesex — and  places  alcohol,  as  one  of 
the  causes  of  mortality,  at  the  head  of 
those  causes.  This  estimate,  however, 
must  have  been  under  the  mark,  since  it 
excluded  altogether  that  fatality  which 
we  now  know  to  arise  from  alcoholic 
paralysis,  and  excluded  also,  too  rigidly, 
instances  of  direct  poisoning  from  alcohol 
and  all  accidents  of  a  fatal  kind  indirectly 
due  to  alcohol.  I  would  not,  however, 
run  any  risk  of  being  charged  with  over- 
statement, and  would  be  content  still  to 
place  the  mortality  from  alcohol  at  one- 
tenth  of  the  whole  mortality,  in  places 
where  the  article  is  consumed  in  the  same 
proportion  as  in  England  and  Wales  at 
the  present  time,  a  proportion  fairly  rep- 
resentative of  alcoholic  populations  gene- 
rally. 

Connected  with  the  two  subjects  of  the 
diseases  from  alcohol  and  the  mortality 
from  it,  the  question  has  often  been  dis- 
cussed as  to  the  relative  amount  of  sick- 
ness presented  by  abstaining  as  compared 
with  non-abstaining  communities,  and  as 
to  the  relative  value  of  life  in  the  two 
communities.  It  has  been  difficult  to  get 
at  precise  conclusions  on  these  subjects 
from  the  two  circumstances  that  in 
making  comparisions  the  social  relation- 
ships of  the  different  classes  are  largely 
different,  and  the  returns  from  the  regis- 
ters of  death  from  alcohol  have  been 
hitherto  imperfect  in  themselves  and  im- 
perfect in  the  interpretations  that  have 
been  put  upon  them.  But  judging  from 
the  reports  of  those  life  assurance  com- 
panies in  which  there  are  two  classes  of 
insured — one  an  abstaining  and  the  other 
a  non-abstaining  class — and  judging  like- 
wise from  the  returns  of  sickness  and 
mortality  of  two  clubs,  one  abstaining 
and  the  other  non-abstaining,  existing  in 
the  same  locality,  holding  the  same  social 
status,  and  made  up  of  the  same  num- 
bers, it  is  absolutely  certain  that  the  rate 
of  mortality  and  the  number  of  days  of 
sickness  present  data  largely  in  favor  of 
abstaining  communities. 

In  summary,  as  to  the  effects  of  alcohol 
on  the  health  and  life  of  the  human 
species,  on  which  fortunately  those  effects 
have  alone  been  tried  on  a  large  scale,  it 
must  be  stated  on  physical  grounds,  apart 
altogether  from  moral  considerations, 
that  the  effects  of  alcohol  are  injurious, 
both  to  mind  and  body,  that  until  it  has 


produced  an  artificial  constitution,  alco- 
hol does  nothing  that  anyone  can  con- 
strue into  useful  action,  and  that  the  es- 
tablishment of  the  alcoholic  constitution 
is  a  false  and  unnatural  policy  of  human 
life — a  source  of  weariness,  of  disease,  of 
premature  old  age,  and  of  excessive  and 
unnecessary  mortality. 

BENJAMiiy'  Wakd  Eichakdson. 

Ale. — See  Malt  Liquors. 

AniendmentSj    Constitutional. — 

See  Coj^STiTUTioNAL  Prohibition. 


recog- 


Anti-Prohibition.  —  While 
nizing  the  praiseworthy  motives  and  com 
mendable  zeal  of  Prohibitionists,  the  anti 
Prohibitionists  oppose  their  aim  and 
measures  for  the  following  reasons : 

1.  They  consider  Prohibition  laws,  in- 
cluding the  prohibition  of  the  sale  and 
thus  of  the  use  of  wine  as  a  beverage,  to 
be  so  opposed  to  public  ojjinion  that  they 
could  not  be  passed;  or,  if  passed  by 
some  legislative  accident,  would  never  be 
enforced.  In  connection  with  this  argu- 
ment they  consider  the  experiment  in 
Kansas  and  Iowa  too  recent  for  deduc- 
tions, and  that  in  Maine  to  be  a  failure. 

2.  They  consider  the  Prohibition  of 
the  sale  and  therefore  the  use  of  wine  as 
a  beverage,  to  be  contrary  to  the  teach- 
ings of  Scri|)ture.  Of  course  they  hold 
the  two-wine  theory  to  be  a  Avild  chimera 
of  the  brain. 

3.  They  consider  the  denunciation  of 
wine  implied  in  such  laws  as  a  reflection 
on  the  Saviour,  who  made  it  the  emblem 
of  his  salvation  and  who  used  it  in  his 
earthly  life. 

4.  They  consider  that  any  such  laws, 
which  are  counter  to  the  public  opinion 
and  the  public  conscience,  lead  to  the  dis- 
organization of  the  community  by  creat- 
ing a  contempt  for  law. 

5.  They  believe  that  Prohibition  laAvs 
would  inevitably  lead  to  the  increase  of 
law-breaking  and  drunkenness,  and  thus 
ruin  the  reform  proposed.  Any  one  would 
then  sell,  while  now  only  a  certain  num- 
ber are  allowed  to  sell. 

6.  They  believe  that  the  sale  should  be 
restricted,  and  that  Prohibition  will  not 
restrict. 

7.  They  believe  that  wise  and  strong 
restrictive  laws  will  receive  the  cordial 
approbation  of  the  vast  majority  of  llio 
community,   and    that    the   Prohibition 


Anti-Saloon  Republicans.]                 27  [Anti-Saloon  Republicans. 

movement  is  the  greatest  enemy  to  this  to  the  unsatisfactory  attitude  of  the  Re- 

ueeded  reform.  publicans  on    the    tem])erance   question. 

8.  They  believe   that  the   Prohibition  When  the   bitter   feelings  occasioned  by 

movement,  for  the  above  reasons,  is  dis-  the  result  had  been  somewhat  soothed, 

gusting  many,  so  tliat  they  take  no  inter-  numerous  temperance   advocates,    firmly 

est  in  any  temperance  action.     Prohibi-  attached  to  the  Republican  organization, 

tion  is  thus  hindering  moral  effort.  began  to  hope  that  the  party  in  seeking 

y.  They   believe   that  all   evils  which  ways   and   means   for    regaining    power 

are    not    in   themselves    crimes   or   sins  Avould  show  favor  for  tiieir  views, 

should  be  remedied  gradually,  if  the  rem-  Albert  Griffin,  then  editor  of  the  Man- 

edy  is  to  be  a  permanent  one.  hattan  (Kan.)   Nationalist,  issued  a  call, 

10.  They  believe  that  the  selling  of  dated  Dec.  1,  1885,  for  a  National  Con- 
liquor  is  not  a  crime  or  a  sin,  and  that  to  vention  of  Republican  foes  of  the  liquor 
class  it  with  theft  or  murder  is  a  gross  traffic,  to  meet  at  Toledo,  0.,  May  19, 
fallacy.  1886,     The   call  was  entitled  "Destruc- 

11.  They  believe  that  the  evils  of  tion  to  Dramshops,"'  was  addressed  to 
liquor-selling  are  wholly  in  the  excesses  "  Enemies  of  the  Dramshop,"  and  was 
that  have  been  connected  with  it,  and  signed  by  146  persons,  residents  of  63 
that  law  should  have  regard  only  to  those  towns  of  Kansas.  It  declared  that  the 
excesses.  The  crime  or  sin  is  in  the  ex-  time  had  come  "  when  this  issue  must  be 
cess  and  not  in  the  selling.  squarely  made  and  fought  out,"  and  that 

12.  They  believe  that  certain  forms  "the  Republican  party  must  and  will 
and  ways  of  liquor-selling,  as  especially  mount  a  temperance  platform."  It  in- 
dangerous,  should  for  that  reason  come  vited  the  co-operation  of  all  earnest  tem- 
under  the  cognizance  of  the  laws.  perance  men,  "  provided  they  are  working 

13.  They  believe  that  the  justice  of  for  the  annihilation  of  the  liquor  traf- 
these  sentiments  is  far  more  available  to  fie  at  the  earliest  possible  moment," 
turn  the  public  to  a  true  temperance  and  closed  by  appealing  to  Rej^ublicans 
than  the  injustice  of  the  Prohibitionist  to  "  save  the  grand  old  party  from  disin- 
sentiments,  which  only  exasperate  men  of  tegration."  Half-way  measures  or  corn- 
good  rejjute  and  enkindle  opposition  to  promising  schemes  were  not  contemplated 
all  reform.  by  this  call. 

14.  They  believe  that  Prohibition,  if  •  Mr.  Griffin  made  a  tour  of  the  Eastern 
temporarily  successful  in  any  locality.  States,  presenting  his  idea  to  prominent 
will  produce  a  fearful  re-action  in  which  Republican  leaders,  and  soliciting  practi- 
the  moderate  men,  as  they  were  ignored  cal  encouragement.  He  found,  however, 
by  the  extremists  for  Prohibition,  will  be  that  tlie  radical  Kansas  basis  would  not 
in  like  manner  ignored  by  the  extremists  be  acceptable  to  the  responsible  managers 
on  the  other  side.  of  the  party.     It  was  impossible,  under 

Howard  Crosby.  these  circumstances,  to  make  the  proposed 

National  Convention  a  success.  The  Re- 
Anti-Saloon  Republican  Move-  publican  organ  at  Toledo,  the  Blade,  al- 
ment. — A  movement  inaugurated  in  though  an  outspoken  opponent  of  the 
1885  by  Republican  Prohibitionists  of  saloon  (under  the  editorial  management 
Kansas,  for  the  purpose  of  inducing  the  of  D.  R.  Locke),  regarded  the  movement 
Republican  party  everywhere  to  adopt  "a  with  coldness  and  suspicion,  and  no  State 
platform  of  uncompromising  hostility  to  Convention  was  held  to  prepare  for  the 
the  saloon;"  pressed  with  considerable  proposed  national  meeting  at  Toledo, 
earnestness  in  different  parts  of  the  The  original  call  was  finally  withdrawn, 
country  by  individual  sympathizers ;  re-  and  a  new  call  was  issued,  providing  for 
garded,  however,  with  but  scant  favor  by  a  National  Conference  at  Chicago  on 
the  leaders  and  masses  of  the  party,  and  Sept.  16,  1886.  This  new  call  made  ma- 
practically  abandoned  after  the  Presiden-  terial  concessions  to  the  timidity  of  party 
tial  campaign  of  1888.  leaders,  and  defined  the  purposes  of  the 
The  defeat  of  Blaine,  Republican  can-  movement  in  the  following  cautious  lan- 
didate  for  President  in  1884,  was  attrib-  guage: 

uted  by  many  to  the  large  vote   of  the  "  in  the  opinion  of  those  who  called  this  Na- 

Prohibition  party,  and  this  was  attributed  tional   Conference,    tlie    party   should    not  be 


Anti-Saloon  Republicans.] 


28 


[Anti-Saloon  Bepublicans. 


asked  to  commit  itself  nationally  to  or  against 
any  specific  law.  but  should  announce  as  its 
settled  policy  that  it  will  everywhere  strive  to 
reduce  the  business  of  dramselling  and  the 
evils  resulting  from  it  as  much  as  possible,  each 
btate  to  deide  for  itself  from  time  to  time  what 
laws  are  best  adapted  to  secure  the  end  in 
view;  and  that  whenever  the  people  express  a 
desii-e  to  vote  on  Prohibitory  Amendments  they 
should  be  given  an  opportunity.  But  whatever 
is  done  should  be  done  honestly  and  with  such 
emphasis  that  the  men  engaged  in  the  liquor 
business  will  recognize  the  party  as  their  enemy, 
and  leave  its  ranks.  Nothing  short  of  that  will 
satisfy  the  temperance  forces,  and  that  line  of 
policy  need  not,  and,  if  properly  managed  will 
not,  alienate  the  mass  of  drinking  men  almost 
all  of  whom  admit  that  the  saloon  is  a  deadly 
enemy  to  good  order  and  every  human  interest. 
Some  will,  of  course,  leave  us,  but  their  ranks 
will  in  the  near  future  be  more  than  made  up 
by  temperance  men  of  other  parties  who  will 
Join  us  until  that  issue  shall  be  settled." 

Desjiite  the  expressed  dissatisfaction  of 
many  of  the  original  signers,  the  elastic 
policy  thus  outlined  was  adhered  to  ;  and 
the  Anti-Saloon  Republicans  manifested  a 
very  reasonable  disposition  in  all  the  snb- 
sequent  efforts  that  they  made  to  control 
the  party.  Their  failure  was  consequently 
all  the  more  disappointing  and  signifi- 
cant. 

The  first  State  meeting  held  in  sup- 
port of  their  programme  was  for  New 
Jersey,  at  Trenton,  May  26,  1886.  In  a 
number  of  other  States  conferences  met 
during  the  summer.  The  National  Con- 
ference assembled  at  Chicago  on  the  ap- 
pointed day,  Sept.  16,  with  about  200 
delegates  present.  The  tone  of  the  Re- 
publican press  was  unfriendly.  There 
was  no  suitable  representation  from  the 
States  except  in  two  or  three  instances, 
and  no  very  influential  managers  of  party 
affairs  were  present.  Vital  demands 
made  by  the  Pronibition  element  were 
rejected,  particularly  the  demand  that 
the  party  should  favor  the  adoption  of 
Prohibition.  An  objectionable  declara- 
tion, recognizing  taxation  of  the  liquor 
traflfic  as  a  legitimate  policy,  was  inserted 
in  the  platform.  But  there  were  many 
earnest  and  aggressive  words  spoken,  es- 
pecially by  the  Permanent  Chairman, 
William  Windom  (Secretary  of  the  Trea- 
sury under  Garfield  and  afterwards  under 
Harrison).  Senator  Henry  W.  Blair  was 
Temporary  Chairman  of  the  Conference. 
The  following  is  the  platform  adopted : 

"  First. — That  the  liquor  traffic  as  it  exists  to- 
day in  the  United  States  is  the  enemy  of  society, 
a  fruitful  source  of  corruption  in  politics,  the 


ally  of  anarchy,  a  school  of  crime,  and  with  its 
avowed  purpose  of  seeking  to  corruptly  control 
elections  and  legislation  is  a  menace  to  the  pub- 
lic welfare  and  deserves  the  condemnation  of 
all  good  men. 

"Second. — That  we  declare  war  against  the 
saloon,  and  hold  it  to  be  the  supreme  duty  of 
the  Government  to  adopt  such  measures  as 
shall  restrict  it  and  control  its  influence,  and  at 
the  earliest  possible  moment  extinguish  it  al- 
together. 

"  Third. — We  believe  the  National  Govern- 
ment should  absolutely  prohibit  the  manufac- 
ture and  sale  of  intoxicatiug  liquors  in  the  Dis- 
trict of  Columbia  and  in  all  the  Territories  of 
the  United  States. 

"Fourth. — We  believe  the  best  practical 
method  of  dealing  v.'ith  the  liquor  traffic  in  the 
several  States  is  to  let  the  people  decide  whether 
it  shall  be  prohibited  by  the  submission  of  Con- 
stitutional Amendments,  and  until  such  Amend- 
ments are  adopted,  by  the  passage  of  Local  Op- 
tion laws. 

"  Hfth. — That  inasmuch  as  the  saloon  busi- 
ness creates  a  special  burden  of  taxation  upon 
the  people  to  support  courts,  jails  and  alms- 
houses, therefore  a  large  annual  tax  should  be 
levied  upon  the  saloons  as  long  as  they  continue 
to  exist,  and  that  they  should  be  made  respon- 
sible for  all  public  and  private  injury  resulting 
from  the  trattic. 

"  Sixth. — That  the  Republican  party,  wherever 
and  whenever  in  power,  will  faithfully  enforce 
whatsoever  ordinances,  statutes  or  Constitutional 
Amendments  may  be  enacted  for  the  restriction 
or  suppression  of  the  liquor  traffic. 

"  Seventh. — That  we  approve  the  action  of 
Congress,  and  of  those  States  that  have  done 
so,  in  providing  for  teaching  the  physiological 
effects  of  intoxicants  in  our  public  schools,  and 
that  we  earnestly  recommend  to  every  State 
Legislature  the  enactment  of  such  laws  as  shall 
provide  for  the  thorough  teaching  of  such  effects 
to  our  children. 

"Eighth. — We  demand  that  the  Republican 
party  to  which  we  belong,  and  whose  welfare 
we  cherish,  shall  lake  a  firm  and  decided  stand, 
as  the  friend  of  the  home  and  the  enemy  of  the 
saloon,  in  favor  of  this  policy  and  these  meas- 
ures. We  pledge  ourselves  to  do  our  utmost 
to  cause  the  party  to  take  such  a  stand,  and  we 
call  upon  all  temperance  men  and  all  friends  of 
humanity  of  whatever  party  or  name  to  join 
with  us  in  securing  these  objects  and  in  .support 
of  the  Republican  party  so  far  as  it  shall  adopt 
them  " 

No  important  results  were  brought 
about  by  the  Chicago  Conference.  A 
National  Committee  was  selected,  with 
Albert  Griffin  as  Chairman.  It  opened 
headquarters  in  l\e\N  York,  and  some  work 
was  carried  on.  A  few  State  meetings 
were  held  between  September,  1886,  and 
May,  1888,  but  the  attendance  was  mea- 
gre in  each  instance,  and  the  real  leaders 
of  the  party  could  not  be  persuaded  to 
exhibit  active  interest.  The  New  York 
Weekly  Mail  and  Express  finally  consented 


Anti-Saloon  Republicans.] 


on 


[Anti-Saloon  Republicans. 


to  become  the  formal  organ  of  tlie  move- 
ment, but  very  little  sympathy  or  atten- 
tion was  bestowed  by  the  press  in  gen- 
eral. 

As  the  Presidential  campaign  of  1888 
approached  the  Anti-Saloon  Republicans 
prepared  to  test  their  strength  in  the 
national  councils  of  the  party.  A  second 
National  Conference  was  called,  to  meet 
in  New  York,  May  3  and  3,  1888.  "The 
Anti-Saloon  Republican  movement,"  said 
the  call  for  this  body,  "  has  now  reached 
a  magnitude  and  a  momentum  which 
nothing  can  withstand.  It  no  longer 
pleads  for  a  hearing.  It  commands  com- 
pliance. It  j^roposes  to  place  the  Repub- 
lican party  where  it  belongs,  positively 
and  finally  on  the  side  of  the  home  and 
the  public  safety,  as  against  the  saloon 
system  and  its  destructive  work.  .  .  . 
Speaking  for  an  overwhelming  majority 
of  Republican  voters  and  good  citizens, 
we  respectfully  but  most  urgently  ask 
our  brethren  of  the  Republican  National 
Convention,  which  is  to  meet  in  Chicago 
in  June,  to  incorporate  in  their  platform 
of  principles  a  declaration  of  hostility  to 
the  saloon  as  clear  and  as  emphatic  as  the 
English  language  can  make  it.  We  ask 
this  because  it  is  right.  Right  is  might." 
But  this  Conference  was  not  well  attended. 
There  were  no  very  important  represent- 
atives of  the  party  present,  and  the  fi- 
nance report  showed  that  Mr.  Griffin's 
Committee  was  hopelessly  in  debt.  Never- 
theless it  was  decided  to  make  as  good  a 
fight  as  could  be  made  at  the  coming  Na- 
tional Convention  of  the  Republican 
party  in  Chicago.  Despite  the  complete 
defeat  of  the  Anti-Saloon  Republicans  in 
that  body,*  the  services  of  their  organi- 
zation were  given  to  the  National  Repul)- 
lican  managers  in  the  Presidential  con- 
test. 

Mr.  Griffin  conducted  a  campaign  bu- 
reau, publishing  and  circulating  docu- 
ments Avhich  appealed  to  temperance 
people  to  support  Harrison  and  Morton. 
This  bureau  was,  however,  in  no  way 
publicly  connected  with  the  Republican 
National  Committee,  Chairman  Quay 
disclaiming  responsibility  for  it;  and  Mr. 
Griffin  was  not  permitted  to  can-y  on  his 
work  at  the  regular  headquarters  of  the 
party,  although  a  German  and  Anti-Pro- 
hibition bureau  managed  by  a  prominent 

'  See  Republican  Paktt. 


"  personal  liberty  "  advocate  was  harbored 
there. 

After  the  election  the  efforts  to  main- 
tain an  agitation  were  brought  to  an  end. 
The  New  York  Wmkhj  Mail  and  Bxpress 
continued  for  some  months  as  the  organ 
of  the  movement,  and  Mr.  Griffin  became 
its  editor.  But  the  proprietors  of  this 
newspaper,  in  July,  188!),  perceiving  the 
inconsistency  of  championing  Prohibition 
while  loyally  supporting  the  actual  policy 
of  the  Republican  party,  presented  to  Mr. 
Griffin  the  alternative  of  advocating  High 
License  and  similar  compromises  or  sever- 
ing his  connection  with  the  paper.  He 
stood  by  his  principles,  and  with  his  re- 
tirement from  the  Mail  and  .Express  the 
national  movement  was  practically  ter- 
minated. 

The  Anti-Saloon  Republicans,  though 
never  a  strong  factor  in  the  Prohibition 
work,  made  important  contributions  to 
tlie  discussion  of  political  issues.  There 
was  a  natural  antagonism  between  them 
and  the  party  Prohibitionists,  and  warm 
arguments  were  exchanged.  A  bitter 
spirit  was  manifested  at  times,  especially 
in  the  editorials  of  the  Weekly  Mail  and 
Express  before  Mr.  Griffin  assumed  charge 
of  that  journal.  Even  the  National  Com- 
mittee of  the  Anti-Saloon  Republicans 
exhibited  extreme  rancor,  and  in  one  mem- 
orable address  emanating  from  it  the 
party  Prohibitionists  were  derided  as  "  a 
combination  of  misguided  enthusiasts, 
moral  peacocks,  disgruntled  politicians, 
mercenaries  and  cranks  operating  in  the 
sacred  name  of  temperance." 

But  the  conscientiousness  and  earnest- 
ness of  most  of  the  representative  Anti- 
Saloon  Republicans  were  never  questioned. 
Their  arguments  and  efforts  put  many 
individuals  to  severe  but  wholesome 
tests.  They  were  criticized  for  their  con- 
cessions and  tame  acquiescence;  but  if, 
[IS  Republicans  seeking  to  convert  their 
party  organization,  they  had  been  more 
radical  and  less  patient,  their  ultimate 
failure  would  not  have  been  so  instruc- 
tive. The  most  important  reason  for 
their  lack  of  success  was  expressed  by 
Governor  Foraker  of  Ohio,  in  a  letter  to 
Mr.  Griffin.  "We  are  straightout  Repub- 
licans in  Ohio,"  said  he,  "with  entire 
confidence  that  the  duly  accredited  rep- 
resentatives of  the  party  in  convention 
assembled  Avill  always  best  determine 
what  the  party  should  do."     That  is,  the 


Anti- Slavery  Parallel.] 


30 


[Anti-Slavery  Parallel. 


Anti-Saloon  Republican  movement  was 
irresponsible  and  irregular,  viewed  from 
;i  strict  party  standpoint,  and  the  practi- 
cal politicians  were  not  disposed  to  en- 
courage a  factional,  loosely-connected, 
sentimental  and  unauthoritative  organi- 
zation. 

Besides  Mr.  Griffin,  some  of  the  men 
most  conspicuously  identified  with  the 
cause  were  Henry  B.  Metcalf  of  Rhode 
Island,  Major  Z.  K.  Pangborn,  editor  of 
the  Jersey  City  Evening  Journal',  H.  K. 
Carroll,  LL.  D.,  of  the  Independent;  Gen. 
A.  B.  Nettleton  of  Minnesota,  Noah 
Davis  of  New  York,  Frank  Moss  of  New 
York,  Rufus  S.  Frost  of  Massachusetts, 
Liston  McMillen  of  Iowa  and  Alexander 
S.  Bacon  of  New  Y'ork. 

Anti-Slavery  Parallel,  The.  — A 

marked  similarity  is  observable  in  the 
movements  against  slavery  and  against 
the  liquor  evil  in  the  United  States. 
Slavery  and  the  liquor  traffic  were  inti- 
mately associated  almost  from  the  begin- 
ning. The  traders  who  brought  ship- 
loads of  slaves  to  America  carried  cargoes 
of  rum  to  Africa.  During  the  Revolu- 
tionary period  the  slave-trade  and  the 
liquor  traffic  alike  provided  themes  for 
discussion  and  agitation.  The  early  ef- 
forts for  both  reforms  were  very  conserva- 
tive. The  first  Anti-Slavery  society  did 
not  propose  Abolition,  but  was,  as  its 
name  implies,  a  "  Society  for  the  relief 
of  free  negroes  unlawfully  held  in  bond- 
age." Similarly  the  first  temperance  so- 
cieties consisted  of  individuals  pledged 
"to  discountenance  the  too  free  use  of 
ardent  spirits,"  or  "  co  restrain  and  pre- 
vent the  intemperate  use  of  intoxicating 
liquors." 

In  1775  the  first  Abolition  society  was 
formed  at  Philadelphia,  with  Dr.  Benja- 
min Franklin  as  President,  and  Dr. 
lienjamin  Rush  as  Secretary. 

Two  years  later  the  question  of  pro- 
hibiting whiskey-making  came  to  the  sur- 
face, the  following  resolution  being  passed 
by  the  Continental  Congress  at  Philadel- 
phia: 

"  Resolved,  That  it  be  recommended  to  the 
several  Legislatures  in  the  United  States  im- 
mediately to  pass  laws  the  most  eflfectualfor 
putting  an  immediate  stop  to  the  pernicious 
practice  of  distilling  grain,  by  which  the  most 


1  The  editor  is  indebted  to  Rev.  D.  W.  C.  Huntington, 
D.  O.,  of  Bradford,  I'a. 


extensive  evils  are  likely  to  be  derived  if  not 
quickly  prevented." 

In  1785  the  Manumission  Society  of 
New  York  City  was  formed,  with  John 
Jay  as  its  President,  to  secure  the  free- 
dom of  slaves.  That  same  year  Dr.  Ben- 
jamin Rush  put  forth  his  famous  tract, 
"  An  Inquiry  into  the  Effects  of  Ardent 
Spirits  upon  the  Human  Mind  and  Body," 
whicli  created  a  profound  sensation  and 
led  to  tlie  ''Memorial  of  the  College  of 
Physicians  to  the  Senate  of  the  United 
States  Congress,"  deprecating  the  use  of 
ardent  spirits  and  recommending  the  im- 
position of  high  duties  upon  their  impor- 
tation. This  memorial  was  presented 
Dec.  29, 1790.  Four  years  later,  in  1794, 
the  Quakers  presented  to  Congress  the 
first  Anti-Slavery  petition.  Soon  after 
this  Abolition  societies  sprang  into  exist- 
ence in  various  parts  of  the  country  as 
did  also  anti-liquor  societies.  As  early  as 
1789  a  number  of  farmers  of  Litchfield 
County,  Conn.,  combined  to  do  their  agri- 
cultural work  without  recourse  to  spirit- 
uous liquors. 

In  1805,  at  Allentown,  N.  J.,  the 
"  Sober  Society  "  was  founded,  and  in 
1808,  at  Moreau,  N.  Y.,  an  organization 
believed  to  have  been  the  first  so-called 
"Temperance  Society  "  was  established. 
In  1816  a  newspaper  called  the  Appeal 
was  started  at  St.  Clairsville,  0.,to  cham- 
pion the  Anti-Slavery  cause.  The  move- 
ment against  slavery  languished  for  some 
years,  but  in  1831  new  life  was  given  to 
the  agitation  by  William  Lloyd  Garrison's 
Liberator,  and  from  that  time  forward  tlie 
issue  became  of  paramount  importance. 
In  1834  President  Jackson  recommended 
to  Congress  the  passage  of  an  act  sup- 
pressing Anti-Slavery  literature.  The 
Whig  party  opposed  this  radical  measure, 
and  many  Abolitionists  looked  to  that 
party  to  advocate  their  principles,  much 
as  Proliibitionists  of  a  later  day  looked 
to  the  Republican  party.  In  November, 
1839,  a  number  of  Abolitionists  met  at 
Warsaw,  N.  Y.,  and  organized  a  political 
Anti-Slavery  party  with  a  platform  con- 
sisting of  a  single  plank  as  follows : 

"  Eesolved,  That  in  our  judgment  every 
consideration  of  duty  and  expediency  which 
ought  to  control  the  action  of  Christian  free- 
men requires  of  the  Abolitionists  of  the  United 
States  to  organize  a  distinct  and  independent 
political  party,  embracing  all  the  necessary 
means  for  nominating  candidates  for  office  and 
sustaining  them  by  public  suffraije." 


Anti-Slavery  Parallel.] 


[Anti-Slavery  Parallel. 


Tliis  was  about  G4  years  after  the  or- 
ganization of  the  first  Abolition  society ; 
and  G-i  years  after  the  Moreau  "  Temper- 
ance Society  "  was  formed  the  Prohibition 
political  party  held  its  first  National 
Nominating  Convention  (at  Columbus,  0., 
Feb.  22,  1872). 

Nothing  is  more  remarkable  in  the  his- 
tory of  these  two  political  movements  than 
the  striking  similarity  between  the  argu- 
ments against  separate  party  action 
brought  to  bear  upon  the  adherents  of 
the  "  Third  Party  "  of  a  generation  ago, 
and  those  used  to  show  the  inexpediency 
and  immorality  of  radical  Prohibitionists 
to-day.  As  "  Prohibition  doesn't  prohibit '' 
is  a  favorite  claim  of  the  anti-Prohibi- 
tionists, so  the  prediction  that  emancipa- 
tion would  not  emancipate  was  indus- 
triously urged  by  the  anti- Abolitionists. 
"  It  is  a  singular  fact,"  said  the  People's 
Friend  of  Skowhegan,  Me.  (a  pro-slavery 
paper),  "that  while  it  is  well  known  that 
the  emancipation  of  African  slaves  in  the 
West  Indies,  especially  in  the  island  of 
Jamaica,  has  not  only  rendered  the  island 
a  desert,  but  tiie  Africans  themselves  the 
most  miserable  savages  and  idolaters,  yet 
clergymen,  men  professing  the  Christian 
religion,  should  from  their  pulpits  recom- 
mend a  similar  course  in  this  country.  It 
is  not  emancipation  itself  that  is  com- 
plained of,  but  the  injudicious  manner  in 
which  it  was  done — emancipation  without 
regard  to  consequences  or  the  future  wel- 
fare of  the  slaves.  It  is  said  that  the 
Jamaica  negroes  are  the  most  miserable 
beings  on  the  face  of  the  earth,  and  are 
fast  returning  to  the  worship  of  idols, 
beasts,  trees  and  serpents."  > 

The  following  appeal  in  the  Portland 
l)iqnirei\  just  before  the  Presidential 
election  of  1852  (Oct.  28),  corresponds 
in  letter  and  spirit  with  the  closing  words 
addressed  at  the  end  of  each  political 
campaign  to  the  rank  and  file  of  the 
Prohibitionists  by  their  leaders : 

•■  Vote  for  principle:  vote  right,  and  you  need 
not  fear  the  consequences.  A  vote  given  in  ac- 
cordance  with  the  dictates  of  conscience  is  not 
lost;  its  salutary  influence,  a  noble  testimony 
for  truth  and  freedom,  will  be  felt,  whether  the 
(■andidate  for  whom  it  is  given  is  elected  or  not. 
Those  votes  only  are  lost  which  are  given  for 
unfit  men,  in  violation  of  principle." 

The  Abolitionists,  like  the  Prohibition- 
ists, were  bitterly  taunted  with  the  com- 

'  Quoted  in  Austin  Willey's  Enquirer  (published  at 
Portland,  Me.),  Aug.  23,  1853. 


parative  insignificance  of  their  party 
strength  and  besought  to  abandon  a 
political  organization  that  seemed  to  be 
without  prospect  of  success.  Replying  to 
this  method  of  reasoning,  the  Portland 
Inquirer  said,  Sept.  8,  1853 : 

"  Many  people  have  been  unable  to  see  how 
voting  for  the  Free  Democracy  [Abolition 
party]  could  effect  anything  in  favor  of  free 
principles.  They  have  figured  it  and  cannot 
make  out  that  we  shall  ever  secure  decisive  ma- 
jorities, and  without  that,  votes  are  all  thrown 
away.     .  .     The  fact  is,  we  shall  have  ma- 

jorities fast  enough  by  and  by,  but  at  present  we 
hardly  need  them.  A  powerful,  firm  minority 
for  just  principles  is  in  the  end  precisely  equiva- 
lent to  a  majority.  ...  In  Ohio  there  is  a 
good  illustration  of  the  power  of  our  votes, 
though  a  decided  minority  of  a  little  over  30.000. 
While  the  slave  Democracy  all  over  the  country 
elsewhere  are  prostrating  themselves  upon  the 
Baltimore  platform  [of  1852],  and  before  the 
inaugural,  like  the  worshippers  of  Baal  around 
his  altar,  the  party  in  that  8tate  dare  do  no  such 
thing  How  plain  from  these  facts  the  value  of 
a  free  vote,  although  it  may  not  elect.  .  .  . 
Such  results  aie  within  our  reach  while  a  small 
minority,  and  when  these  are  gained  the  step 
will  be  short  to  majorities.  Roll  up,  then,  the 
votes  of  free  men.    We  can  succeed." 

The  speeches  of  noted  Abolition  advo- 
cates are  replete  with  arguments  that,  with 
slight  adaptation,  might  be  repeated  by 
those  desiring  to  most  effectively  answer 
the  popular  objections  to  the  Prohibition 
party.  Charles  Sumner,  in  an  address 
delivered  in  the  Metropolitan  Theatre  of 
New  York,  May  9,  1855,  said: 

"  In  such  a  cause  I  am  willing  to  be  called 
'fanatic'  or  what  you  will;  I  care  not  for 
aspersions,  nor  shall  I  shrink  before  hard  words, 
either  here  or  elsewhere.  Hard  words  have 
been  followed  by  personal  disparagement,  and 
the  sneer  is  often  launched  that  our  enterprise 
lacks  the  authority  of  names  eminent  in  church 
and  State.  If  this  be  so  the  more  is  the  pity  on 
their  account ;  for  our  cause  is  needed  to  them 
more  than  they  are  needed  to  our  cause.  But 
alas!  It  is  only  according  to  the  example  of  his- 
tory that  it  should  be  so.  It  is  not  the  eminent 
in  church  and  State,  the  rich  and  powerful,  the 
favorites  of  fortune  and  of  place,  who  most 
promptly  welcome  Truth  when  she  heralds 
change  in  the  existing  order  of  things  It  is 
others  in  poorer  condition  who  throw  open  their 
hospitable  hearts  to  the  unattended  stranger. 
Nay,  more  :  it  is  not  the  dwellers  amid  the  ^lare 
of  the  world,  but  the  humble  and  lowly,  who 
most  clearly  discern  new  duties,  as  the  watchers 
placed  in  the  depths  of  a  well  may  observe  the 
stars  which  are  obscured  to  those  who  live  in 
the  effulgence  of  noon.  Placed  below  the  ego- 
tism and  prejudice  of  self  interest  or  of  a  class — 
below  the  cares  and  temptations  of  wealth  or 
power, — in  the  obscurity  of  common  life,  they 
discern  the  new  signal  and  surrender  them.se]ves 
unreservedly    to  its    guidance.     The    Saviour 


Anti- Slavery  Parallel.] 


32 


[Anti-Slavery  Parallel. 


knew  this.  He  did  not  call  the  Priest  or  Levite 
or  Pliarisee  to  follow  him,  but  upon  the  humble 
fishermen  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee." 

And  in  another  speech  (Sept.  16,  1852) 
Mr.  Sumner  made  the  following  reply  to 
the  frequent  declaration  that  a  "  third 
party  "  effort  was  inexpedient  and  hope- 
less: 

"  But  there  is  one  apology  which  is  in  com- 
mon to  the  supporters  of  both  the  old  parties 
and  which  is  often  in  their  mouths  when  pressed 
for  their  inconsistent  persistence  in  adhering  to 
these  parties  It  is  dogmatically  asserted  that 
there  can  be  but  two  parties,  that  a  third  party 
is  impossible,  particularly  in  our  country,  and 
that,  therefore,  all  persons,  however  opposed  to 
slavery  must  be  content  in  one  of  the  old  par 
ties.  This  assumption,  which  is  witiiout  any 
foundation  in  reason,  has  been  so  often  put 
forth  that  it  has  acquired  a  certain  currency ; 
and  many  who  reason  hastily  or  who  implicitly 
follow  others,  have  adopted  it  as  their  all  suf- 
ficient excuse  for  their  conduct.  Confessing 
their  own  opposition  to  .slavery,  they  yet  yield 
to  the  domination  of  party  and  become  dumb. 
All  this  is  wrong  morally,  and,  therefore,  must 
be  wrong  politically." 

Joshua  R.  Giddings,  explaining  the 
rationale  of  the  separate  party  movement 
for  Abolition,  used  these  striking  words 
in  a  speech  in  the  National  House  of 
Representatives,  June  23, 1852; 

"  I  am  aware  that  a  strong  effort  is  making  to 
induce  our  Free  Democracy  [Abo!itionists|  to 
sustain  the    Whig  candidate    [Gen.    Wintield 
Scott]  at  the  coming  election.    With  the  gentle- 
man nominated  I  have  long  been  acquainted. 
To  him  nor  to  the  Democratic  nominee  have  I 
any  personal  objection.     But  if  elected  he  is 
pledged  to  maintain  the  outrages,  the  revolting 
crimes  pertaining  to  the  compromise  measures 
and  Fugitive  Slave  law.  to  render  them  per 
petual  so  far  as  he  may  be  ab'e,  to  prevent  all 
discussion  relating  to  them.    To  vote  for  him  is 
to  vote  for  his  policy,  to  identify  ourselves  in 
favor  of  the    avowed  doctrines  which  he   is 
pledged  to  support,  to  give  proof  by  our  votes 
that  we  approve  the  platform   on   which   he 
stands.     But,  sir.  why  vote  for  Scott  in  prefer- 
ence to  Pierce  ?    Of  the  men  I  say   nothing. 
They  merely  represent    the    doctrines    of  the 
parties  that  nominated  them.     .     .     .  The  doc- 
trines of  the  Whig  party  pledge  them  and  their 
candidate  to  maintain  slavery.     .     .     .    This  is 
as  far,  I  think,  as  human  depravity  can  go.     If 
the  Democratic  party  has  dived  deeper  into 
moral  political  putridity,  some  archangel  fallen 
must  have  penned  their  confession  of  faith.     If 
there  be  such  a  distinction,  it  can  only  be  dis- 
covered by  a  refinement  of  casuistry  too  intricate 
for  honest  men  to  exert.    Sir,  suppose  there  was 
a  shade  of  distinction  in  the  depths  of  depravity 
to  which  tiiose  parties  have  descended,  does  it 
become  men — free  men — men  of  moral  princi- 
ple, of  political  integrity — to  be  straining  their 
visions  and  using  intellectual  microscopes  to  dis- 
cover that  shade  of  moral  darlaiess  ?     No,  sir: 
lei  e-s  cry  man  who  feels  he  has  a  country  to 


save,  a  character  to  sustain— that  he  owes  a  duty 
to  mankind  and  to  God — come  forward  at  once 
and  wage  a  bolJ  and  exterminating  war  agaii.st 
these  doctrines,  so  abhorrent  to  freedom  and 
humanity." 

The  bitter  opposition  of  many  good 
men  to  the  radical  Prohibition  movement 
was  paralleled  in  the  Anti-Slavery  crusade. 
Biblical  arguments  were  used  by  the  an- 
tagonists of  Abolition.  Although  most  of 
the  active  Abolitionists  were  devout 
Christians,  and  the  cause  derived  earnest 
and  able  support  from  the  churches,  vig- 
orous resistance  was  offered  by  influential 
clergymen.  Rev.  Nehemiah  Adams  of 
Boston,  Rev.  Dr.  Lord  (President  of  Dart- 
mouth College),  and  Bishop  Hopkins  of 
Vermont  wrote  books  to  counteract  the 
teachings  of  the  Abolitionists.  So  dis- 
tinguished and  noble-spirited  a  Methodist 
leader  as  Wilbur  Fisk  discouraged  their 
efforts.^  It  is  said  that  only  three  of  the 
23  ministers  in  Springfield,  111.  (Lincoln's 
home),  voted  for  Abraham  Lincoln  in 
18  GO. 

The   Whig  party  treated   the   slavery 
question  in  essentially  the  same  way  that 
its   successor,  the  Republican  party,  has 
treated  the  Prohibition  issue.     In  locali- 
ties where  the  Abolition  sentiment   was 
strong  the  Whigs  professed  Anti-Slavery 
sympathy  and  tendencies,  and  made  much 
of  the  pro-slavery  attitude  of  the  Demo- 
crats,    Elsewhere  they  took  all  necessary 
pains  to  assure  the  slave  power  that  the 
party  would  protect  its  interests.     E.  V. 
Smalley's  valuable  "■  History  of  the  Re- 
publican Party"  (New  York,  1884),  dis- 
cusses in  a  very  caridid  way  the  unsatis- 
factory  and    cowardly   behavior    of    the 
Whigs.     '■'  The  Whigs  dodged  the  slavery 
question   altogether,"  sa}-s   Mr.    Smalley 
(p.  17);  and  "as  a  national  organization 
it  [the  Whig  party]  was  obliged  to  cater 
to  the   South,     .     .     .     and  no  positive 
declaration  against  the  extension  of  sla- 
very could  be  got  from  its  conventions  " 
(p.    15).     The     Abolitionists    were    fre- 
quently charged  with  responsibility   for 
defeating  the   AVhig   party.  Just   as   the 
Prohibitionists  are  blamed  for  beating  the 
Republicans.     In  18-14  it  was  the  Aboli- 
tion vote  in  the  State  of  New  York  that 
caused  the  defeat  of  Henry  Clay  for  the 
Presidency;  and  just  40  years  later  the 
defeat   of'^  Blaine  was  attributed  to  the 
larse  Prohibition  vote  in  the  same  State. 


1  Sec  "  Lifo  of  Williiir  Fisk,"  by  George  Prentice,  D.D., 
(Boston,  1890),  jip.  104--,>21. 


Anti-Slavery  Parallel.] 


33 


[Appleton,  James. 


All  sorts  of  compromises  were  resorted 
to  during  the  Anti-Slavery  agitation. 
Slavery  was  permitted  in  some  States  and 
forbidden  in  others.  Even  the  tax  plea 
was  advocated :  several  times  it  was  pro- 
posed in  Congress  to  put  a  tax  upon  im- 
ported slaves,  and  thus  secure  a  Govern- 
ment revenue  from  a  traffic  that  "  could 
not  be  suppressed."  Indeed,  there  were 
plausible  reasons  for  the  claim  that  the 
slave  trade  could  not  be  stopped ;  for  ac- 
cording to  the  admission  of  Southern  men 
the  smuggling  of  African  negroes  into 
Southern  ports  was  regularly  carried  on 
for  years  after  the  traffic  was  prohibited, 
and  although  it  was  declared  by  act  of 
Congress  that  all  Africans  landed  in  the 
United  States  should  be  forfeited  to  the 
(iovernment  and  entitled  to  freedom,  not 
one  African  of  all  the  100,000  or  more  so 
landed  was  ever  forfeited. 

A  still  more  curious  coincidence  is 
found  in  the  fact  that  statesmen  of  the 
highest  character  and  talent  strenuously 
insisted  that  legalization  of  the  slave  sys- 
tem had  made  it  thoroughly  legitimate 
and  established  a  right  of  property  in 
slaves  not  to  be  gainsayed  or  rudely  dis- 
turbed. Thus  Henry  Clay  said  in  a 
speech  that  "Two  hundred  years  of 
legislation  have  sanctioned  and  sanctified 
negro  slaves  as  property."  ^ 

The  Abolitionists,  like  the  Prohibi- 
tionists, were  unmercifully  abused  and 
ridiculed.  Daniel  Webster  called  their 
movement    "a    rub-a-dub     a2:itation 


'•'  2 


Henry  Clay  sneeringly  said  they  were 
"under  the  influence  of  negrophobia."  ^ 
Chancellor  Walworth  called  them  "vis- 
ionary enthusiasts"  and  "reckless  dema- 
gogues."* Mr.  Preston  of  South  Carolina, 
in  a  speech  in  Congress  on  a  motion 
made  by  James  Buchanan,  said  that  they 
were  "  hot-headed  and  cold-hearted,  igno- 
rant and  blood-thirsty  fanatics."  Their 
petitions  were  denounced  as  "the  rant 
and  rhapsody  of  meddling  fanatics,  inter- 
larded with  texts  of  Scripture."  A  lead- 
ing Whig  journal  of  Albany,  N.  Y.,  said 
of  the  Pree-Soilers  :  "  They  now  consti- 
tute a  sectional,  political,  Abolition  party, 
with  that  iDoor  despised  member  of  the 
United  States  Senate,  William  H.  Seward, 


1  Quoted  in  "  Complete    Works   of  W.  E.  Channing, 
D.D."  (London,  George  Routledge  &  Sons),  p.  (560. 

2  Speeches  and   Lectures  of  Wendell   Phillips   (Lee  & 
Shepard,  1884),  pp.  3S,  39,  50. 

'  Rise  and  Fall  of  the  Slave  Power  in   America,   by 
Henry  Wilson,  vol.  1,  p.  139. 
« Ibid,  vol.  1,  p.  235. 


for  their  leader.  They  can  never  succeed 
in  this  State,  and  if  they  could  they  must 
be  a  miserable  minority  and  powerless  in 
the  nation." 

Nearly  all  the  most  earnest  Anti- 
Slavery  leaders  were  devoted  to  temper- 
ance principles,  frequently  advocating  ad- 
vanced legislation.  Gerrit  Smith,  Charles 
Sumner,  Henry  Wilson,  Abraham  Lin- 
coln, Wendell  Phillips,  Horace  Greeley 
and  many  others  were  thoroughly  in 
sympathy  with  the  anti-liquor  cause. 

The  vote  of  the  Anti-Slavery  men  in 
national  contests  was  at  first  discourag- 
ingly  small,  and  even  after  four  Presi- 
dential compaigns  had  been  fought  their 
strength  was  unimportant  when  compared 
with  that  of  either  of  the  other  parties. 
Below  are  given  tlie  votes  cast  for  the 
Presidential  candidates  of  the  Anti- 
Slavery  men  and  also  of  the  Prohibition- 
ists: 

ANTI-SLAVEEY  VOTE. 

1840,  JamesG.Birney (Liberty  party),  7,059 
1844,  James  G.  Birney  (Liberty  party),  62,800 
1848,  Martin  Vau    Buren    (Free-Soil 

party) 291,263 

1853,  John  P.  Hale  (Free-Soil  party),  156,140 
1856,  John  C.  Fremont   (Republican 

party) 1,341,264 

1860,  Abraham  Lincoln  (Republican 

party) 1,866,353 

PROHIBITION  VOTE. 

1872,  James  Black 5,607 

1876,  Green  Clay  Smith 9,737 

18S0,  Neal  Dow 9,678 

1884,  John  P.  St.  .John 150,626 

1888,  Clinton  B.  Fisk 249,945 

The  heavy  decrease  in  the  Anti-Slavery 
vote  in  1852  Avas  due  to  the  desertion  of 
many  Democrats  who  had  voted  for  ex- 
President  Van  Buren  in  1848  from  per- 
sonal reasons  rather  than  because  of 
deep-seated  convictions  against  slavery. 
With  the  Presidential  contest  of  1852  the 
Whig  party  made  its  last  national  cam- 
paign of  importance  ;  its  disintegration 
followed,  and  in  the  struggles  of  1856 
and  1860  its  successor,  the  Eepublican 
party,  took  an  attitude  satisfactory  to 
most  of  the  foes  of  slavery.  These  ex- 
planations are  important  in  comparing 
the  Abolition  and  Prohibition  votes. 

Appleton,  James. — Born  in  Ipswich, 
Mass.,  in  1786,  and  died  at  the  same 
place  in  1863.  He  was  prominent  as  an 
Abolitionist,  and  early  in  life  became  in- 
terested in  the  temperance  reform.     In 


Arthur,  Timothy  Shay.] 


34 


[Austin,  Henry  "W. 


1S31  he  listened  to  a  debate  on  the  license 
question  in  the  Massaclni setts  Legisla- 
ture, and  from  that  time  forward  was  firm 
in  tlie  conviction  that  the  liquor  traffic,  if 
injurious,  should  be  prohibited  and  not 
licensed  or  countenanced  in  any  way. 
He  thus  early  became  a  champion  of  ab- 
solute Prohibition,  and  in  1833  clearly 
stated  his  views  in  a  series  of  letters  in 
the  Salem  Gazette.  "  The  license  sj^stem 
has  been  tried,"  he  wrote,  "  and  we  have 
a  right  to  pronounce  it  a  total  failure. 
The"  best  test  of  the  utility  of  any  law  is 
experience.  There  is  no  ground  for  be- 
lieving that  a  greater  quantity  of  ardent 
spirits  would  have  been  consumed  had 
there  been  no  regulations  of  its  sale  what- 
ever. A  law  should  be  passed  pro- 
hibiting the  sale  of  ardent  spirits. 
Why  should  it  not  be  prohibited  ?  It 
has  been  proved  again  and  again,  by  com- 
petent witnesses,  that  so  far  from  being 
valuable  to  any  one  purpose,  it  is  the  dir- 
est calamity  that  ever  visited  our  world." 
In  1833  Gen.  Appleton  removed  to  Port- 
land, Me.,  where  he  resided  for  20  years. 
In  1836  he  was  elected  to  theMaine  Leg- 
islature. In  presenting  his  report  as 
Chairman  of  a  certain  committee  he  took 
occasion  to  make  an  able  plea  for  entire 
Prohibition.  "  If  we  have  any  law  on 
the  subject,"  said  he,  "  it  should  be  abso- 
lutely Prohibitory."  This  report  was  laid 
on  tlie  table,  but  its  unanswerable  logic 
opened  the  way  for  the  expression  of 
public  sentiment  resulting  in  the  enact- 
ment of  the  famous  Maine  law  of  1846, 
and  the  passage  of  the  improved  measure 
(with  search  and  seizure  clauses)  of  185  L 
Perhaps  to  Gen.  James  Appleton,  rather 
than  to  auy  other  man,  belongs  the  title 
of  "  Father  of  Prohibition." 

Ardent  Spirits.—  A  term  applied  to 
distilled  liquors  containing  a  large  pro- 
portion of  alcohol,  as  distinguished  from 
malt  and  vinous  liquors  containing  a 
small  proportion. 

Arizona. — See  Index. 

Arkansas. — See  Index. 

Arthur,  Timothy  Shay.  —  Born 
near  Newburgh,  N.  Y.,  in  180!),  and  died 
in  Philadelphia,  March  6, 1885.  In  1817 
he  removed  with  his  parents  to  Baltimore, 
Md.  His  school  advantages  were  few, 
and   ho   was  considered  stupid  and  un- 


promising as  a  pupil.  His  progress  was 
so  slow  that  his  father  concluded  that  the 
attempt  to  educate  him  was  a  waste  of 
time,  and  he  was  apprenticed  to  learn  a 
trade.  During  his  years  of  apprentice- 
ship he  adopted  a  system  of  self-educa- 
tion through  reading.  When  18  years  of 
age  he  became  a  member  of  the  first 
temperance  society  organized  in  Mary- 
land, and  ever  after  he  was  an  earnest 
champion  of  the  movement.  Defective 
eye-sight  forced  him  to  abandon  his 
trade  after  he  had  followed  it  seven  years, 
and  during  the  next  three  years  he  was  in 
a  counting-room.  His  new  position  gave 
him  more  time  for  reading  and  writing, 
and  he  began  to  contribute  to  the  press, 
but  without  compensation  and  with  no 
idea  of  making  literature  his  profession. 
Obtaining  the  editorial  charge  of  a  news- 
paper in  1833,  he  soon  achieved  some 
local  reputation.  In  1836  he  was  mar- 
ried to  Eliza  Alden  of  Portland,  Me., 
who  became  a  devoted  wife  and  bora  him 
seven  children.  In  1841  he  removed  to 
Philalelphia,  and  began  to  produce 
sketches,  magazine  articles  and  books  at 
a  rapid  rate.  He  established  a  periodical, 
which,  having  undergone  many  changes, 
is  still  published  as  Arthw's  lllustntted 
Home  Magazine.  He  also  projected  the 
Children's  Hour  and  the  WorkiiKjinnn. 
Though  the  earliest  of  Mr.  Arthur's  writ- 
ings were  more  or  less  sensational,  most 
of  his  distinctive  work  belongs  to  the 
order  of  mild,  inoral  fiction.  His  remi- 
niscences of  the  Washingtonian  movement 
inspired  his  book, "'  Six  Nights  with  the 
AVashingtonians,"  which  had  a  large  sale. 
His  best-known  temperance  tale  is  "  Ten 
Nights  in  a  Barroom."  It  became  im- 
mediately popular,  and  very  large  editions 
were  sold.  In  1873  he  published  "  Three 
Years  in  a  Man-Trap,"  another  tempe- 
rance story  which  shared  the  popularity 
of  its  predecessors. 

Atlanta. — See  Local  Option. 

Austin,  Henry  W. — Born  in  Skane- 
ateles.  New  York,  Aua:.  1,  1838,  and  died 
in  Oak  Park,  111.,  Dec.  34, 1889.  He  lelt 
home  at  the  age  of  31  and  engaged  in 
business,  first  in  New  Haven,  Conn.,  then 
in  Kingston,  Can.,  and  Syracuse,  N.  Y., 
and  finally  in  Chicago,  where  he  opened 
a  hardware  store.  By  patient  industry 
and  judicious  investments  Avhen  Chi- 
cago was  young,  he  acquired  considerable 


Australasia.] 


35 


[Australasia. 


property,  lie  was  the  founder  of  a 
thriving  suburb  of  Chicago  bearing  liis 
n:ime.  One  of  its  residents  says  of  this 
town  that  "  among  its  5,000  people  no 
saloon  has  ever  intruded,  nor  any  dis- 
orderly house,  nor  have  so  many  as  a 
score  of  arrests  ever  been  made  there  from 
crimes  resulting  from  intoxicating  drinks 
or  broils,  except  of  persons  from  the 
neighboring  city."  For  25  years  he  re- 
sided in  Oak  Park,  another  Chicago  sub- 
urb. Cursed  at  first  with  saloons  and  a 
foreign  population  that  it  was  impossible 
to  out-vote.  Oak  Park  is  now  one  of  the 
model  temperance  towns  of  Illinois.  Mr. 
Austin  was  mainly  responsible  for  the 
reform.  The  last  saloon  in  the  place  was 
banished  through  his  action  in  leasing  for 
$5,000,  for  a  term  of  ten  years,  the 
premises  occupied  by  it.  He  was  elected 
to  the  State  Legislature  to  advocate  the 
idea,  originating  with  him,  of  setting 
aside  land  in  Chicago  for  a  system  of 
parks  to  surround  the  city.  The  miles  of 
beautiful  park-lands  on  the  west  side  of 
the  city  are  the  result  of  his  labor.  Al- 
ways a  temperance  man,  Mr.  Austin, 
while  a  member  of  the  Legislature,  se- 
cured the  passage  of  a  bill  making  land- 
lords as  well  as  saloon-keepers  responsible 
for  the  damages  resulting  from  the  sale  of 
intoxicants.  This  was  generally  regarded 
at  tlie  time  as  a  radical  measure.  During 
the  Presidential  campaign  of  1884  he  left 
the  Republicans  to  ally  himself  with  the 
Prohibition  party.  From  this  time  until 
his  death  he  was  actively  identified  with 
the  cause  of  Prohibition,  and  contributed 
liberally  toward  its  advancement  both  by 
financial  support  and  personal  labor. 
For  some  time  he  was  Chairman  of  the 
Illinois  State  Prohibition  Committee,  and 
afterwards  was  manager  of  the  Lever. 

Australasia. — Australia  is  divided 
into  five  parts,  with  areas  and  populations 
as  follows  :  (1)  Western  Australia,  975,920 
square  miles;  population,  45,000.  (2) 
South  Australia,  903,425  square  miles; 
population,  313,000.  (3)  Queensland, 
008,224  square  miles;  population,  304,- 
000.  (4)  New  South  Wales,  309,175 
square  miles;  population,  1,045,000.  (5) 
Victoria,  87,884  square  miles;  popula- 
tion, 1,035,000.  Two  important  islands 
are  to  be  added:  (0)  Tasmania,  26,375 
square  miles,  with  a  population  of  141,- 
000.     (7)  New   Zealand,   104,235  square 


miles,  with  a  population  of  607,000. 
Australia,  Tasmania  and  New  Zealand 
are  British  colonies,  and,  taken  together, 
constitute  what  is  known  as  Australasia. 
Of  the  1.044  people  with  whom  Capt. 
Phillips  founded  the  first  settlement  in 
Australia  (Sydney,  1788),  seven-tenths 
were  convicted  criminals,  and  the  remain- 
der their  guard,  In  celebration  of  the 
event  a  pint  of  rum  was  given  to  every 
man,  half  a  pint  to  every  woman,  and  a 
pint  of  porter  to  every  soldier.  For  years 
afterward  convicts  were  cast  by  the  hun- 
dreds on  these  shores,  and  how  the  drink 
was  honored  might  be  seen  from  the  fact 
that  the  very  rum  barrels  Lore  the  stamp 
of  the  Royal  Mint.  As  the  State,  so  the 
church  w^as  founded  in  liquor.  It  is 
recorded  that  part  of  the  cost  for  build- 
ing the  first  Church  of  England  was  paid 
in  Jamaica  rum.  The  evil  results  were 
soon  apparent,  and  varicus  Governors 
raised  their  voices  against  the  traffic.  In 
1797  Governor  Hunter  wrote :  "  The  in- 
troduction of  this  destructive  trade  has 
done  immense  mischief.  Spirituous 
liquors  have  completed  the  ruin  of  many 
who  might  have  been  perfectly  independ- 
ent." And  when  the  farmers  asked  for 
Government  relief  he  said,  "Shut  up 
your  drink-shops."  Governor  Blyth  writes 
that  in  1807  "the  farmers  were  in  debt 
chiefly  because  of  their  parting  with  their 
crops  for  drink."  But  these  warning 
voices  did  not  avail.  Though  several  of 
the  American  and  English  emigrants 
during  1835-7  were  total  abstainers,  it 
was  not  until  1838  that  the  real  total 
abstinence  movement  commenced.  In 
that  year  (September)  Mr.  William  Rowe, 
an  English  pledged  abstainer,  succeeded 
in  Sydney,  with  the  support  of  the  Gov- 
ernor, in  forming  the  first  Australian 
total  abstinence  society.  Governor  Gipps 
himself  became  President  of  the  men's, 
and  Lady  Gipps  of  the  woman's  branch  of 
the  society.  Its  motto  Avas,  "Temper- 
ance is  moderation  in  things  innocent 
and  abstinence  from  things  hurtful." 
Similar  societies  were  started  at  Hobart 
(Tas.)  1839,  Adelaide  (S.  A.)  1840,  and 
Melbourne  (Vict.)  1842.  Since  then 
nearly  all  American  and  English  total 
abstinence  societies  have  been  nominally 
reproduced  in  Australia.  But  many, 
especially  the  larger  ones — and  notably 
the  Melbourne  Total  Abstinence  Society 
— are  mere   money-making  institutions. 


Australasia  J 


3G 


[Australasia. 


la  the  beginning,  however,  the  total 
abstinence  societies  were  doing  good 
work  ;  but  the  gold  discoveries  (1851) 
brought  sudden  wealth  and  spendthrift 
riotous  living.  What  enormous  riches 
tlie  drink  traffic  amassed  duiing  the 
decade  1852-62  is  seen  from  the  following 
official  figures,  unparalleled,  I  believe,  in 
drink  annals:  In  Victoria,  in  1852,  the 
drink-bill  per  head  reached  £21  14  5;  in 
1853  £27  19  7. 

Meanwhile  immigrants  from  America 
and  England  had  brought  news  of  the 
political  temperance  movements  in  those 
countries,  and  in  February,  1857,  Mr.  G. 
J.  Crouch  of  Sydney  inaugurated  the  po- 
litical temperance  work  by  starting  the 
New  Soutli  Wales  Alliance.  It  followed 
faithfully  the  footsteps  of  the  United 
Kingdom  Alliance,  but  found  slight  sup- 
port. In  1883  it  was  reorganized  and 
baptized  the  New  South  Wales  Local 
Option  League.  In  the  other  colonies 
political  temperance  movements  were 
begun,  but  with  small  results.  Of  these, 
specially  worthy  of  remembrance  is  the 
one  formed  more  than  thirty  years  ago  on 
pure  Maine  Law  lines  by  the  noble  vet- 
eran philanthropist,  Dr.  Singleton  of 
Melbourne.  It  died  from  want  of  funds. 
Meanwhile  the  traffic  grew  richer  and 
steadily  intrenched  itself  in  legislatures 
and  society.  In  Melbourne  (1880)  an 
International  Temj^erance  Convention 
passed  a  resolution  urging  each  colony  to 
form  an  Alliance  for  securing  Local  Op- 
tion. This  was  soon  accomplished,  and 
from  then  till  now  the  political  policy  of 
the  temperance  forces  in  Australia  has 
been  to  secure  Avhat  is  called  "complete 
Local  Option  "  in  the  matter  of  public- 
house  licenses.  Laws  on  these  lines  were 
passed  in  New  Zealand  (1881),  in  Queens- 
land (1885),  partial  ones  in  New  South 
Wales  (1883)  and  Victoria  (1885),  some 
granting  Local  Option  as  regards  new 
licenses,  and  some  Local  Option  as 
regards  excess  over  what  is  termed  stat- 
utory number  of  licenses  (on  the  lines  of 
the  Ontario,  Can.,  Crooks  act),  subject 
to  compensation.  Those  colonies  not  yet 
under  Local  Option  are  clamoring  for  it, 
and  those  that  have  it  are  dissatisfied — 
Victoria  and  New  South  Wales  with  the 
('haracter  of  the  Local  Option,  New 
Zealand  and  Queensland  with  its 
results.  It  is  no  wonder;  for  although 
the    Queensland    Local   Option    is    tlie 


acknowledged  goal  to  wliich  all  the 
rest  are  tending,  still,  according  to 
the  uncontradicted  statement  of  the 
Victorian  Alliance  Secretary  in  the  Inter- 
national Temperance  Convention  at 
Melbourne  in  1888,  "  only  three 
public  houses  had  thus  far  been  closed  up 
by  means  of  that  act."  On  the  same 
occasion  Sir  William  Fox,  ex-Premier  and 
President  of  the  New  Zealand  Alliance, 
said  of  that  country  :  "It  may  be  imag- 
ined the  people  can  now  do  what  they 
like.  In  theory  they  can,  but  not  in 
practice.  The  act  has  been  in  existence 
for  seven  years  and  there  have  been  a 
number  of  committees  with  a  majority  of 
teetotallers  on  the  Bench,  but  during  that 
period  out  of  1,500  public  houses  in  the 
colony  only  25  have  been  suppressed  on 
the  ground  that  they  were  not  Avanted." 
Still  the  cry  is  Local  Option,  and,  if  pos- 
sible, louder  than  ever.  Rev.  Mr.  Nich- 
olson's paper  to  the  International  Tem- 
perance Convention  (1888)  about  South 
Australia,  says :  "(1)  Our  first  demand 
is  for  Local  Option  in  the  threefold  de- 
grees provided  by  the  Queensland  act,  viz. : 
First,  as  applied  against  an  increase  of 
licenses;  second,  for  a  definite  numerical 
decrease;  third,  for  the  cessation  of  all 
licenses  where  temperance  sentiment  is 
strong  and  permanent.  (2)  We  seek  a 
repeal  of  the  clause  that  grants  a  renewal 
of  license  as  a  matter  of  course." 

Thus  the  Australasian  pseudo-Local 
Option  movement  resolves  itself  into  a 
licensing  reform  movement  such  as  the 
United  States  liquor  traffic  would  proba- 
bly gladly  embrace ;  but  here  tlie  traffic 
is  strong  enough  to  dictate  better  terms. 
For  example,  according  to  the  Good 
Templar,  the  leading  temperance  paper 
of  the  colonies,  in  the  general  elections 
of  March,  1889,  in  New  South  AVales,  ina 
House  of  137  members  101  were  in  favor 
of  Local  Option,  19  doubtful,  17  opposed; 
yet  when,  on  the  2d  of  August  following, 
after  a  two  months'  notice,  it  was  pro- 
posed to  introduce  the  Liquor  Traffic 
Veto  bill,  the  House  was  counted  out. 
In  Victoria  it  is  even  worse.  The  leader 
in  the  Licensed  Victualers'  Advocate,  liquor 
organ  of  Victoria,  for  Feb.  G,  1889,  said: 
"  It  is  an  open  secret  that  in  the  raiiks 
of  the  trade  there  is  a  good  deal  of  sym- 
pathy with  the  policy  of  Local  Option." 
So  general  was  this  '*  sympathy  "  that  the 
Victorian  Alliance  issued  a  special  mani- 


Australasia.] 


37 


[Australasia. 


festo  on  the  eve  of  the  elections  warning 
electors  to  "  beware  of  the  wolf  in  sheep's 
clothing  as  personified  in  the  publicans' 
candidate  who  advocates  Local  Option.'^ 

In  the  teeth  of  the  most  unsparing 
opposition  it  has  ever  been  my  fate  to 
observe,  I  have  succeeded  in  forming  a 
Prohibition  nucleus— the  Victorian  Home 
Protection  party — on  the  same  basis  as  I 
adopted  in  England  and  Sweden.  We 
are  determined  to  divide  the  country,  if 
possible,  on  the  issue  of  home-protection 
or  hpme-destruction— our  platform  in- 
cluding, besides  the  destruction  of  the 
drink,  the  securing  of  Woman  Suffrage, 
compulsory  State  education  in  citizen- 
ship and  ballot  reform. 

Axel  Gustafson. 

Supplemental  Facts,  from  J.  W.  Mea- 
den.  Editor  of  tlie  Melbotirne  Alliance 
Record. — Among  the  temperance  organ- 
izations first  formed  in  the  Australasian 
colonies  was  the  Independent  Order  of 
Rechabites,  which  now  has  a  total  mem- 
bership of  about  25,000,  one-half  being  in 
Victoria.  The  Order  of  the  Sons  and 
Daughters  of  Temperance  is  divided  into 
two  National  Divisions — the  "Austral- 
asian "  and  the  "  Victorian  and  South 
Australian  "—with  a  combined  member- 
ship of  between  9,000  and  10,000. 

The  Independent  Order  of  Good  Tem- 
plars has,  with  varying  success,  aided 
during  the  past  years  in  the  work  of  "  re- 
claiming the  fallen  and  keeping  others 
from  falling."  It  has  established  Grand 
Lodges  in  all  the  colonies,  and  has  a 
membership  in  New  South  Wales  of 
1G,GG8  adults,  in  Victoria  of  about  4,000, 
in  Queensland  of  3,000  and  in  New  Zea- 
land of  5,498. 

The  newest  organization  for  the  promo- 
tion of  temperance  principles  is  the  Wo- 
man's Christian  Temperance  L^nion,  trans- 
planted from  America  by  Mary  Clement 
Leavitt,  and  apparently  destined  to  take 
deep  root  in  Australia.  It  is  still  in  the 
initial  stage  of  its  history,  but  Unions  are 
being  rapidly  formed  throughout  Austral- 
asia. The  work  of  organization  has  been 
undertaken  by  ladies  who  are  not  only  of 
devoted  spirit  but  who  possess  special 
qualifications  for  their  important  duties. 
Gospel  temperance  effort  is  carried  on  by 
numerous  workers,  there  are  many 
Bands  of  Hope,  and  considerable  atten- 
tion is  paid  to  the  temperance  movement 
by  the  most  advanced  of  the  churches. 


The  following  table  shows  the  annual 
consumption  of  liquors  and  their  values 
in  the  various  Australasian  colonies  for 
the  year  1887:  ^ 


ti 

^ 

«J    -o 

^ 

•^ 

< 

3 

:3 

2      P 
^     1 

ro 

o 
CO 

-J 

O 

2 

^     5- 

a 

o 

=■ 

? 

> 

»■ 

cn 

3 

»' 

a- 

o 

Zh 

3 

ai 

w 

i:^ 

^ 

^ 

"-J 

£- 

p 

SB 

CO 

5' 

': 

CD 

^ 

~o 

►^ 

»-i 

:ji 

i£* 

"t-^ 

IS 

c« 

w 

30 

•o.     u> 

01 

CO 

30 

p 

CO 

*.         CO 
J3        -! 

o 

ii 

ro  7 

2 

GP 

OI 

CO 

Jt 

OI 

o 

Cj 

to 

00 

to 

-> 

•u 

3 

V; 

CO 

DO 

O        OD 

o 

JO 

x> 

fO 

O 

JI 

o 

Ti 

,_i 

^^ 

»-* 

-> 

^ 

1-L 

iiB. 

O    t-H 

cO 

ZJl        Oi 

CO       p       ^ 

t— ^ 

30  —* 

J4.  D 

O        OS 

Vi      OS      o 

o    '-2 

0  v' 

55 

cl 

is        00 

(33 

CO 

4^  7^ 

&I 

> 

>U         *£.. 

CO       o 

X 

CO 

^ 

CO 

^ 

C75 

00  £^ 

?g^ 

^^ 

s. 

O 

>u  ^ 

1— I 

*. 

CO      oo 

25' 

H 

io 

■*. 

». 

00 

•—I 

5 

s  § 

-? 

•^s- 

W 

Oi 

{O 

-O 

rd 

fO 

JO        CD 

to 

•u    -^p 

0     H-l 

2.C 

O        OT 

OI 

-1        00 

^o 

to  — 

oo      to 

CO        OI 

zn 

p 

-!0 

0  T* 

_» 

to     "o 
*.     o 

o 

CO 

^  ^ 
-.'/> 

Cu 

W 

-> 

fe 

C2          ~>          CO 

*- 

= 

i-L 

ts      lO 

*> 

p 

S^o 

P- 

- 

to 

oB. 

Op 

05 

J3 

JI 

J"  ■zr 

o'x' 

o 

M 

43 

~-  2 

3  0 

to 

o     *. 

JI 

00 

-)  S 

J3 

SO 

CO     o;^' 

•     3 

o 

o    ji    o 

OI 

-i 

^^ 

fO 

to 

T3 

rn 

,__4 

h-i 

CO 

_1 

XI 

o 

o. 

0  l-H 

o 

c:5 

fO 

xto 

§? 

3 

-} 

yr 

-t 

rs 

43 

4* 

J_; 

"rf*. 

OO 

o 

JI 

"bi 

01 

Oi 

H 

*> 

>^ 

4^ 

-i 

Oi 

o 

-> 

CO 

o 

4.^ 

o 

01 

^_^ 

to 

v-t 

to 

IS 

it^ 

»o 

CO 

;o 

OO 

■0 

Oi 

Ci 

4.. 

~a 

CO 

p 

0't(3 

0     V 

lo 

C3 

o 

i» 

■o 

"4i- 

CO 

•-1 
•z 
w 

CO 

CO 

00 

f-^ 

CO 

OO 

o 

ts 

-t 

OT 

-J 

C5 

OI 

OI 

* 

^ 

CO 

JO 

J?" 
0  » 

rf^ 

to 

*^ 

o 

o 

w 

o 

p 

"'it, 

00 

gg- 

"to 

«■ 

lo 

< 
> 

to 

C3 

4.>. 

-} 

'^  tZ' 

4^ 

4^ 

CO 

OO 

-! 



f 

M 

Ci 

CO 

2tH 

s 

OD 

(-* 

-■> 

x> 

00 

OI 

-1 

00 

->     ^o     ot 

"cO        OI        00 

p 

0  ^ 

O 

OI 

00 

to 

CD 

-J 

4^ 

Qj 

W 

t?3 

C.5 

rf^ 

CO 

30 

CO_ 

DO 

t~* 

W 

2.P 

BI 

v-» 

CO 

CO 

00 

"rfx 

|te 

CO 

-> 

C-1 

•£ 

o 

0  ii- 

to 

M 

OI 

o 

-> 

3  0 

g 

O 

o 

CO 

CO 

Or 

•^l  E' 

CO 

o 

:0 

o 

CO 

O 

O 

CT 

o 

4- 

OI 

c:^ 

H 

te 

0 

jjl 

t-^ 

JO 

>(>. 

Zjf 

p 

Ot 

fe 

«3 

Ci 

^^ 

00 

^^ 

^ 

0 

K> 

j"^ 

4:^ 

t^s 

0 

"rf^ 

C3 

4^ 

*i. 

OI 

OI 

4^ 

w 

oo 

OO 

CO 

4^ 

4^ 

00 

rt 

O" 

C5 

J- 

CJI 

^-^ 

Xi 

OI 

^^ 

Us 

'^ 

(X 

05 

o 

CO 

o 

ts 

CO 

OI 
CO 

CO 

c;i 

4^ 
O 

OI? 

0 
'-I 

C5 

o 

-1 

o 

>u 

o 

CO 

oP 

3=^ 

P 
& 

Local  Option  is  the  accepted  policy. 
The  present  conditions  may  be  summar- 
ized as  follows : 

1  The  calculations  for  New  South  Wales  are  by  the  Rev. 
F.  B.  Boyce  of  Sydney,  and  those  tor  New  Zealand  by  Mr. 
C.  M.  (iray  of  Christchurch.  Mr.  J.  D.  Merson,  who  is  a 
recognized  authority  on  the  subject  of  Australasian  tem- 
perance statistics,  based  his  estimates  of  the  other  Col- 
onies upon  returns  supplied  by  the  respective  Govem- 
meuts. 


Australasia.] 


38 


[Austria. 


1.  Neio  South  Wales. — Every  three 
years  the  people  vote  on  the  follow- 
ing questions :  (1)  "Shall  any  new  publi- 
cans' licenses  be  granted  in  respect  of 
premises  situate  within  the  ward  or  mu- 
nicipality for  the  period  of  three  years 
from  this  date  ?  "  (2)  "  Shall  any  renewals 
of  publicans'  licenses  be  granted  in  re- 
spect of  premises  situate  within  the  ward 
or  municipality  for  the  period  of  three 
years  from  this  date  ?  "  The  publican's 
license  fee  is  £30.  Entire  Sunday-clos- 
ing is  required,  under  a  maximum  pen- 
alty of  £20.  Persons  apparently  under 
16  not  to  be  furnished  with  liquor  for 
their  own  consumption  on  the  premises. 

2.  Neto  Zealand. — (1)  A  Licensing 
Committee  is  vested  with  power  to 
grant  or  refuse  licenses.  Those  who  wish 
to  shut  up  the  saloons  must  elect  men  in 
favor  of  doing  so.  (2)  A  vote  is  taken 
every  three  years  to  determine  whether 
or  not  new  licenses  shall  be  issued.  Pub- 
lican's license  fee,  £25  to  £40.  Entire 
Sunday-closing  required,  under  maxi- 
mum penalty  for  first  offense  of  £10. 
Children  under  16  not  allowed  to  drink 
on  the  premises. 

3.  Queensland. — This  colony  possesses 
the  only  provision  for  complete  local  Pro- 
hibition by  direct  vote.  A  poll  may  be 
taken  in  any  division  or  subdivision,  upon 
the  petition  of  one-sixth  of  the  ratepay- 
ers. Wine-seller's  license  fee,  £10;  vict- 
ualler's license  fee,  £30.  Entire  Sunday- 
closing  required,  under  maximum  penalty 
of  £5.  Children  under  14  not  to  be  sup- 
plied under  any  circumstances. 

4.  Victoria. — Electors  may  reduce  the 
number  of  hotels  to  a  statutory  limit— one 
hotel  for  each  250  inhabitants  up  to  the 
first  1,000,  and  after  that  one  for  each 
500.  Spirit-merchant's  license,  £25.  En- 
tire Sunday-closing  required,  under  max- 
imum penalty  of  £10.  Children  under 
16  not  allowed  to  drink  on  the  premises. 

5.  South  Australia. — Limited  Sunday 
selling  allowed  between  the  hours  1  and 
3  p.  M.  The  Sunday  selling  may  be 
.egulatedby  vote  of  the  rate-payers.  Pub- 
lican's license  fee,  £30.  Children  under 
15  not  allowed  to  drink  on  the  premises. 

6.  Tasmania. — Entire  Sunday-closing 
required  under  maximum  penalty  of  £5. 
Publican's  license  fee,  £25. 

All  the  colonies  prohibit  the  sale  of 
liquor  to  aborigines. 


Austria. — The  intemperance  statis- 
tics of  the  Austrian  EmjDire  have  strik- 
ingly refuted  the  arguments  of  the  soph- 
ists who  propose  to  counteract  the  in- 
crease of  intemperance  by  the  introduc- 
tion of  the  "  milder  alcoholics  " — beer  and 
wine.  Austria  comprises  eleven  different 
nationalities,  some  of  them  addicted  to 
the  use  of  alcohol  in  its  most  concentrated 
forms,  as  kirschiuasser  (cherry  brandy) 
in  the  Tyrol,  and  slibovitz  (a  vile  spirit 
prepared  by  the  distillation  of  plums  and 
prunes)  in  Carinthia  and  Slavonic  Illyria; 
but  the  best  wine  and  beer  districts — 
German  Austria  and  Western  Hungary — 
enjoy  the  questionable  prestige  of  pro- 
ducing the  most  habitual  drunkards,  and 
in  them  there  is  the  largest  per  capita 
consumption  of  alcohol.  In  these  regions 
drunken  brawls,  incident  to  the  revels  of 
the  public  tavern,  are  a  more  fruitful 
cause  of  crime  than  the  frequency  of  in- 
ternational border  feuds.  Temperance 
has  made  but  little  theoretical  progress 
in  any  part  of  the  Austrian  Empire,  and 
the  manufacture  of  distilled  liquors  is  not 
only  tolerated  but  sedulously  encouraged. 
Still  an  era  of  practical  reform  has  been 
inaugurated  by  a  decided  change  of  hab- 
its among  the  upper  classes,  with  the  occa- 
sional exception  of  the  Hungarian  nobles, 
who  consider  it  a  duty  of  hospitality  to 
maintain  the  convivial  custom  of  their 
feudal  ancestors.  Drunkenness,  once  a 
boast  of  cavaliers  and  prelates,  has  come 
to  be  considered  a  disgraceful  and  un- 
pardonable misdemeanor  in  the  upper 
social  circles  of  Vienna,  Trieste  and 
Prague;  and  one  of  our  American  tem- 
perance journals  recently  mentioned,  as 
a  noteworthy  sign  of  the  times,  the  fact 
that  several  of  the  officers' messes  of  the 
Austrian  army  have  dropped  wine  from 
their  regular  bill  of  fare,  and  even  from 
the  list  of  provisions  to  be  kept  on  hand 
for  use  during  active  service  in  the  field. 
Felix  L.  Oswald. 

Supplemental  Facts. — Fiscal  reasons 
decide  alcoholic  legislation  in  Austria, 
and  the  financial  condition  of  the  coun- 
try has  driven  the  Government  to  impose 
as  high  a  tax  as  possible  without  endan- 
gering the  supposed  interests  of  industry, 
commerce  and  agriculture.  Hence  many 
legislative  acts  and  many  changes  in  the 
legislation.  In  1835  the  ancient  duty  on 
consumption  was  changed  to  a  tax  on  the 
vessels  for  I'ermentation,    according   to 


Bacchus.] 


39 


[Bacchus. 


their  size.  This  law  continued  in  force 
till  1803,  when  it  was  replaced  with  a  law 
taxing  liquors  according  to  their  strength. 
This  again  was  abolished  in  186G,  and  the 
previous  one  was  re-enacted.  The  license 
fee  in  Austria  is  graduated  according  to 
the  population.  In  localities  of  500  people 
the  fee  is  5  florins ;  in  those  of  500  to  3,000 
people,  10  florins ;  2,000  to  10,000  people, 
30  florins;  10,000  to  20,000  people,  30 
florins;  30,000  to  100,000  people,  45  flo- 
rins ;  and  above  100,000  people,  50  florins. 
(A  florin  is  about  50  cents  in  American 
money.)  Persons  committing  crime  un- 
der the  influence  of  liquor  are  punished 
with  comparative  leniency. 

Mulhall  (1886)  estimated  the  aver- 
age annual  wine-yield  of  the  Austrian 
Empire  at  310,000,000  gallons,  valued  at 
$73,000,000,  1,580,000  acres  being  de- 
voted to  the  cultivation  of  the  grape. 
This  agrees  approximately  with  the  esti- 
mate of  the  United  States  Consul  at  Mar- 
seilles, who  in  a  report  dated  Feb.  37, 
1889,  placed  the  Austrian  vintage  for 
1888  at  93,459,500  gallons,  and  the  Hun- 
garian vintage  for  the  same  year  at  184,- 
919,000  gallons.  Austria-Hungary  ranks 
after  France,  Italy  and  Spain  among  the 
wine-producing  countries  of  the  earth. 
She  is  also  one  of  the  chief  producers  of 
beer;  Mulhall  estimates  that  the  average 
annual  beer  product  is  245,000,000  gal- 
lons. The  quantities  of  beer,  wine  and 
spirits  consumed,  respectively,  in  the 
Empire  are  stated  by  the  same  authority 
to  be  300,000.000,  245,000,000  and  30,- 
000,000  gallons  per  year. 


Bacchus. — The  Latin  name  for  Dio- 
nysus, in  Greek  mythology  the  god  of 
wine  and  the  vineyard.  The  legends  relate 
that  he  was  the  son  of  Zeus  (Jupiter) 
and  Semele,  daughter  of  Cadmus,  King 
of  Thebes.  When  he  attained  to  man- 
hood Bacchus  learned  the  secret  of  pro- 
ducing wine  from  the  grape,  and  imme- 
diately set  out  on  a  long  journey  through 
Greece,  Asia  Minor,  Arabia,  Persia  and 
India  to  teach  this  wonderful  art.  In 
Phrygiahe  met  Rhea,  who  instructed  him 
concerning  her  religious  rites,  and  he 
resolved  to  become  a  teacher  of  these 
also.  Euripides  represents  him  as  con- 
quering Asia  by  means  of  a  good  deal  of 
noise  and  ceremony  but  no  bloodshed, 
marching  at  the  head  of  an  army  of  wo- 
men and  men,  who,  "  inspired  with  divine 


fury,"  mingled  their  cries  with  the  clash- 
ing of  cymbals  and  the  din  of  other  mu- 
sical instruments.  AVherever  he  went 
this  god  of  confusion  taught  the  people 
the  culture  of  the  vine  and  the  art  of 
wine-making,  and  also  instructed  them 
in  honey-making  and  the  cultivation  of 
the  soil.  Everywhere  also  he  introduced 
the  dances  and  religious  rites  he  had 
learned  from  Rhea.  The  Greeks  held 
Thebes  to  be  the  birth-place  of  Bacchus, 
but  it  seems  probable  that  the  worship  of 
this  deity  originated  in  India,  and  was 
brought  into  Greece  by  migrating  people. 
Bagfis,  one  of  the  names  of  the  Hindu 
god  Schiva,  gives  a  clew  to  the  origin  of 
the  name  of  the  wine-god.  Among  an 
agricultural  people  like  the  Greeks  a 
pastoral  deity  Avould  very  naturally  hold 
a  high  place  in  popular  worship,  and  thus 
Bacchus  was  honored  by  four  annual 
feasts,  called  Dionysia  or  Bacchanalia. 
These  were  the  "  country  Dionysia,"  in 
rural  towns  and  villages,  the  "  festival  of 
the  wine-press,"  at  Athens,  the  "an- 
thestria,"  minor  feasts,  and  the  "Great 
Dionysia,"  celebrated  at  Athens.  Orig- 
inally only  women  took  part  in  the  feasts, 
giving  themselves  over  to  wild  dances,  and 
in  their  frenzy  often  rending  animals  and 
cutting  themselves  with  sharp  instru- 
ments. Later  the  festivals  were  popu- 
larized and  characterized  by  song  and 
dance  and  processions,  headed  by  an  im- 
age of  the  god.  Finally  license  was 
given  to  every  sort  of  immorality  at 
these  orgies,  and  they  were  occasions  for 
general  debauchery.  The  institution  of 
the  Greek  tlieatre  grew  out  of  the  worship 
of  Bacchus.  The  Greek  colonists  in 
Southern  Italy  introduced  the  worship 
of  the  wine-god  among  the  Romans,  and 
in  the  year  495  B.  C.  a  temple  was  erected 
to  him.  At  first  the  feasts  were  observed 
with  decency  and  decorum,  the  women 
not  being  permitted  so  much  as  to  taste 
wine,  and  the  men  held  under  the  same 
restraint  until  they  had  attained  the  age 
of  30;  but  very  soon  all  restraint  Avas 
swept  away  and  men  and  Avomen  alike 
plunged  into  every  excess  and  the  gross- 
est immoralities.  Wives  followed  their 
husbands  in  drunken  orgies,  and  the  cor- 
ruption spread  among  the  young  men 
and  women.  Things  finally  reached  such 
a  pass  that  the  Roman  Senate,  in  the  year 
186  B.  C,  was  compelled  to  prohibit  the 
rites  and  forms  of  Bacchanalian  worship 
and  revels. 


Baird,  Robert.] 


40 


[Bands  of  Hope. 


Baird,  Robert. — Born  in  Fayette 
County,  Pa.,  Oct.  G,  17D8,  and  died  in  Yon- 
kers,  N.  Y.,  Nov.  15, 1863.  He  graduated 
from  Jefferson  College,  Pa.,  and  from 
Princeton  Theological  Seminary.  In 
1822  he  became  principal  of  an  academy 
at  Princeton.  In  1828  he  was  appointed 
agent  of  the  New  Jersey  Missionary  So- 
ciety, and  he  did  much  toward  found- 
ing the  present  system  of  public  schools 
in  that  State.  In  1829,  as  agent  of  the 
American  Sunday-School  Union,  he  suc- 
ceeded in  increasing  the  annual  income 
of  that  organization  from  $5,000  to  ^28,- 
000.  In  1836  he  published  his  "  History 
of  the  Temperance  Societies  of  the  United 
States,"  and  having  gone  abroad,  he  ar- 
ranged for  the  translation  of  the  work 
into  French.  He  remained  in  Europe 
nearly  eight  years,  but  in  that  time  made 
two  brief  visits  to  America.  His  efforts 
abroad  were  divided  between  an  attempt 
in  the  countries  of  southern  Europe  to 
revive  the  Protestant  faith,  and  an  effort 
in  the  northern  countries  to  promote 
temperance  reform.  The  French  edition 
of  his  history  was  widely  read  both  in 
France  and  by  the  French  Swiss,  the  lat- 
ter being  induced  by  its  teachings  to  in- 
stitute temperance  societies  at  Geneva 
and  Fribourg.  In  Holland  about  1,100 
copies  of  the  book  were  circulated.  The 
Empress  of  Eussia  received  a  copy,  and 
manifested  an  interest  in  the  temperance 
movement.  King  Charles  XIV  of  Swe- 
den accorded  a  gracious  reception  to  Mr. 
Baird,  and  at  his  own  expense  had  the 
book  ti-anslated  and  a  copy  sent  to  each 
parish  in  his  kingdom.  Quotations  from 
the  work  were  made  by  the  newspapers, 
and  Crown  Prince  Oscar  consented  to  be- 
come Patron  to  the  Swedish  Temperance 
Society,  formed  at  Stockholm,  May  5, 
1837.  This  society  issued  a  second  edi- 
tion of  Mr.  Baird's  history  in  1839,  by 
Avhicli  time  the  number  of  temperance 
societies  in  the  country  had  increased  to 
150,  with  30,000  members.  In  1833  King 
Frederick  William  III  of  Prussia  sought 
information  about  the  temperance  socie- 
ties of  America,  through  his  ambassador 
at  Washington.  Mr.  Baird  was  therefore 
cordially  welcomed  by  him  when  lie  visit- 
ed Germany  in  1836,  and  the  king  or- 
dered a  German  translation  of  the  work, 
and  presented  copies  of  it  to  the  Emperor 
of  Austria  and  the  other  German  princes. 
The  first  German  edition  of  6,000  copies 


was  exhausted,  and  a  second  was  issued 
within  a  year,  while  by  the  king's  orders 
the  temperance  movement  was  encouraged 
and  strengthened  by  the  authorities  of 
both  church  and  state.  On  his  second 
visit  to  Europe  in  1810  Mr.  Baird  visited 
Denmark,  Sweden,  Norway  and  Russia. 
Having  arranged  in  Denmark  for  a 
translation  of  his  book  into  Danish,  and 
the  publication  of  an  edition  of  2,000 
copies,  he  organized  a  temperance  com- 
mittee in  Christiana,  Norway,  which  dis- 
tributed 800  copies  of  the  Danish  edition 
among  Norwegians  of  influence.  In  Octo- 
ber,1840,  he  had  an  interview  with  Em- 
peror Nicholas  at  St.  Petersburg,  who  re- 
ceived him  favorably,  and  issued  an  edi- 
tion of  10,000  copies  of  the  book  in  the 
Eussian  language,  and  an  edition  of  5,000 
copies  in  Finnish.  Mr.  Baird's  personal  in- 
terviews with  men  of  rank  and  prominence 
were  hardly  less  potential  than  the  in- 
fluence of  his  book.  His  other  published 
works  are  "Religion  in  America,"  first 
issued  in  Scotland,  and  translated  into 
several  languages ;  "A  Visit  to  Northern 
Europe;"  "Protestantism  in  Italy,"  and 
"  History  of  the  Albigenses,  Waldenses 
and  Vaudois." 


Bands  of  Hope.— Temperance  organ- 
izations for  juveniles, established  in  great 
numbers  throughout  all  the  English- 
speaking  countries,  frequently  as  depart- 
ments of  church  and  Sunday-school  work. 
In  the  United  States  the  name  "Band of 
Hope"  has  been  generally  changed  to 
"  Loyal  Temperance  Legion,"  altliough 
some  local  organizations  are  continued 
under  the  old  name.  The  Band  of  Hope 
pledge  in  this  country  is  as  follows : 

*'  I  hereby  solemnly  pledge  myself  to  abstain 
from  the  use  of  all  intoxicating  drinks,  includ- 
ing wine,  beer  and  cider,  as  a  beverage;  from 
the  use  of  tobacco  in  every  form,  and  from  all 
pi'ofanity." 

Concerning  the  Bands  of  Hope  of  the 
United  Kingdom,  Mr.  Frederick  Smith 
(Editorial  Secretary)  provides  the  follow- 
ing information  for  this  work: 

The  first  society  called  a  Band  of 
Hope  was  formed  in  England  in  Octo- 
ber, 18-17,  Temperance  societies  for 
children  and  young  people,  on  a  distinctly 
total  abstinence  basis,  had  existed,  how- 
ever, many  years  earlier,  both  in  the  Brit- 
ish  Isles  and  the  United  States.     The 


Bands  of  Hope.] 


41 


[Baptist  Church. 


origin  of  the  first  Band  of  Hope  must  be 
jointly  attributed  to  the  efforts  of  Mrs. 
Carlile  of  Dublin,  and  the  Rev.  Jabez 
Tuuniclili,  a  Baptist  minister  of  Leeds. 
In  August,  1847,  Mrs.  Carlile  visited 
Leeds,  to  address  children  in  Sunday  and 
day  schools  on  the  subject  of  temperance. 
Mr.  Tunnicliff,  who  had  occasionally 
accompanied  Mrs.  Carlile  in  her  visits  to 
the  schools,  felt  convinced  that  unless 
something  was  done  to  follow  ujd  her  labor 
it  would  be  largely  lost.  Accordingly, 
before  Mrs.  Carlile  left  Leeds,  a  meeting 
was  called,  an  organization  was  formed, 
a  name  was  adopted  and  a  committee 
was  appointed  to  perfect  the  plan.  The 
first  Band  of  Hope  meeting  was  held  late 
in  October,  when  about  300  children  sat 
down  to  tea,  more  than  200  of  them  tak- 
ing the  following  pledge: 

"  I  promise  to  abstain  from  all  intoxicating 
drinks  as  beverages." 

The  movement  spread  nowhere  with 
greater  success  than  in  the  county  of  its 
birtli,  where  at  the  present  time  (18S9) 
there  are  probably  2,000  juvenile  temj^er- 
ance  societies  of  one  kind  or  other.  In 
1851  the  first  Band  of  Hope  Union  was 
formed.  A  Union  for  London  was  estab- 
lished in  1855,  which  in  1864  became  the 
"  United  Kingdom  Band  of  Hope  Union." 
Couutv  Unions  rapidly  followed,  and  now 
cover  the  greater  part  of  England.  The 
United  Kingdom  Band  of  Hope  Union, 
Avith  which  the  various  organizations  are 
associated,  aims  at  furthering  the  inter- 
ests of  the  whole  movement  throughout 
the  country.  It  assists  local  Unions  and 
societies  by  means  of  its  lecturers  and 
deputations,  by  public  meetings,  confer- 
ences, missionary  efforts,  literature,  cor- 
respondence and  advice.  Its  sphere  of 
work  is  in  Bands  of  Hope,  Sunday- 
schools,  day  schools,  colleges,  orphan 
asylums,  industrial  and  district  schools, 
training  ships,  reformatories  and  the 
homes  of  the  children.  Its  latest  and 
most  important  effort  is  the  "  School 
Scheme."  by  which,  through  the  kindness 
of  munificent  friends,  the  committee  is 
enabled  to  devote  £2,000  per  annum  for 
the  next  five  years  to  the  delivery  of  sci- 
entific lectures  and  addresses  in  day 
schools  and  to  other  important  educa- 
tional work.  The  President  of  the  Union 
is  George  Williams,  Esq.,  of  London,  and 
its  Secretaries  are  Mr.  Charles  Wakely 
and  Mr.  Frederick  Smith. 


The  latest  estimate  of  the  strength  of 
the  movement,  compiled  from  the  best 
available  data,  shows  that  there  are  nearly 
15,000  Bands  of  Hope  and  juvenile  tem- 
perance organizations  in  England,  Scot- 
land, Wales  and  Ireland,  with  upwards  of 
1,800,000  members. 

Baptist  Churc h.— The  Baptist 
Church  is  not  represented  as  a  national 
denomination  by  any  conference  or  as- 
sembly of  a  thoroughly  comprehensive 
nature.  But  different  representative  or- 
ganizations within  the  church  are  fully 
qualified  to  declare  its  position  upon  a 
question  so  intimately  related  to  religious 
interests  as  is  that  of  temperance. 

The  American  Baptist  Home  Mission 
Society,  in  session  at  Chicago,  May  27, 
1890,  adopted  the  following  resolutions, 
reported  by  Rev.  H.  A.  Delano,  D.D,,  of 
Evanston,  111.,  on  behalf  of  the  Special 
Committee  on  Temperance ; 

"  Whcreasy^e  recognize  in  the  liquor  traffic  an 
enemy  of  saoanic  and  appalling  force,  menacing 
the  purity  of  the  Christian  Church,  the  virtue  of 
society  and  the  safety  of  government ;  and 

"  WhereaSyVfe  believe  it  true  policy,  principle 
and  duty  to  antagonize  with  uncompromising 
zeal  its  presence  and  ravages  ;  therefore 

"Resolved,  That  we  declare  ourselves  among 
its  most  pronounced  and  relentless  foes,  believ- 
ing that  it  has  no  defensible  right  to  exist,  and 
that  it  can  never  be  reformed,  and  that  it  .stands 
condemned  by  its  unrighteous  fruits  as  a  thing 
unchristian,  un-American  and  perilous  utterly 
to  every  interest  of  life. 

"Resolved,  That  we  profoundly  deplore  the 
results  of  the  recent  Supreme  Court  decision 
[relating  to  the  inter-  State  liquor  traffic],  where- 
by Prohibitory  laws  in  Maine,  Kansas,  Iowa, 
South  Dakota  and  other  States  are  rendered 
less  efficient  and  extremely  imperiled,  and  wc 
sincerely  hope  the  Congress  of  the  United 
States  may  speedily  rise  to  so  meet  the  exigency 
of  the  case,  that  the  last  estate  of  the  liquor 
traffic  may  be  worse  than  the  first. 

"Resolved,  That  we  stand  pledged  by  every 
legitimate  means  to  work  and  pray  and  (as  God 
shall  give  us  wisdom  and  light)  to  vote  for  the 
ab.iolute  abolition  and  overthrow  of  the  iniqui- 
tous traffic  in  State  and  nation." 

The  Baptists  of  the  Southern  States 
hold  annual  conventions.  In  May,  1889, 
they  met  at  Memphis,  Tenn.,  white 
representatives  being  present  from  Mary- 
land, Virginia,  North  Carolina,  South 
Carolina,  Georgia,  Florida,  Alabama, 
Louisiana,  Mississippi,  Texas,  Arkansas, 
Kentucky  and  the  Indian  Territory.  The 
following  resolution,  offered  by  J.  B. 
Cranfill,  was  adopted : 


Barbour,  John  Nathaniel.] 


42 


[Barnes,  Albert. 


"  Whereas,  The  liquor  traffic  is  a  most  power- 
ful hindrance  to  the  gospel  of  Christ,  and  an 
aggressive  enemy  to  social  order ;  and 

"  Whereas,  This  traffic  is  steadily  encroaching 
upon  all  that  Christian  men  revere  and  the  hu- 
man heart  holds  dear;  and 

"  W/ienas.  It  seeks  to  destroy  the  Christian 
Sabbath  and  annihilate  public  morals  and  the 
public  conscience:  and 

•'  W'lereas  All  Christian  bodies  should  speak 
out  in  no  uncertain  tones  on  this  question ; 
therefore,  be  it 

"  Resolved,  by  the  Southern  Baptists  in  Con- 
vention assembled,  That  we  favor  the  speedy 
and  entire  Prohibition  of  the  liquor  traffic ;  that 
we  oppose  license  for  this  traffic  in  any  and  all 
its  forms,  through  which  men  buy  the  right  to 
destroy  human  hope  and  happiness  and  blight 
human  souls,  as  an  offence  against  public  morals 
and  a  sin  against  God." 

Barbour,  John  Nathaniel — Born 
in  Boston,  Mass.,  Oct.  4,  1805,  and  died  in 
Cambridge,  Mass.,  Jan.  29,  1890.  He 
graduated  from  Eliot  School,  Boston,  tak- 
ing the  highest  honor,  the  Franklin  medal. 
Entering  a  large  mercantile  establishment 
at  a  small  salary,  he  performed  his  duties 
with  such  fidelity  as  soon  to  win  the  firm's 
confidence  and  a  place  for  himself  as  a 
partner.  With  his  uncle  he  established  a 
business  house  which  acquired  many  ves- 
sels and  built  up  an  extensive  carrying 
trade.  From  youth  Mr.  Barbour  was  a 
total  abstainer  from  both  tobacco  and  in- 
toxicating drink  despite  the  jeers  of  his 
young  associates.  He  carried  his  convic- 
tions and  temperance  principles  into  his 
business,  and  it  was  the  rule  of  his  house 
neither  to  buy  nor  sell  alcoholic  liquors, 
nor  allow  them  on  its  vessels  either  for  use 
there  or  as  freight.  This  stand  brought 
the  firm  into  conflict  with  all  the  wholesale 
grocers  dealing  in  liquors  ;  and  although 
he  was  ridiculed  and  sometimes  boycotted, 
Mr.  Barbour  could  boast  that  he  never 
compromised  his  temperance  principles 
for  financial  advantage.  He  enjoyed  the 
acquaintance  and  friendship  of  many  of 
the  distinguished  men  and  reformers  of 
two  generations.  He  was  as  staunch  an 
advocate  of  the  Abolition  of  slavery  as  of 
the  temperance  cause,  and  William  Lloyd 
Garrison  and  John  G.  Whittier  were  his 
personal  friends.  He  freely  employed  his 
means  to  further  the  causes  he  espoused, 
and  thus  did  not  permit  himself  to  be- 
come very  wealthy. 

Barley. — The  grain  from  which 
nearly  all  of  the  malt  used  in  brewing  is 
derived.     It   is  the   hardiest  of  cereals. 


growing  at  higher  latitudes  than  any 
other  and  also  capable  of  cultivation  in 
warm  climates.  Its  superiority  for  brew- 
ing purposes  has  always  been  recognized. 
It  is  also  largely  used  in  the  production 
of  distilled  spirits,  especially  Scotch  and 
Irish  whiskies.  Mulhall  (London,  18SG) 
estimates  the  number  of  acres  devoted  to 
barley  culture  and  the  quantities  pro- 
duced in  leading  countries  as  follows : 

Acres.        doj)  (hush.). 

United  Kingdom 2  590.000  90.00i»,000 

France 3,500  OOJ  80  000,000 

Germany 3  900  000  90,000,000 

Russia 1 5.500.000  130  000,000 

Austria 5.100  000  81.000,000 

Italy  and  Spain 4,700.000  95,000.000 

Belgium  and  Holland.  230  0,  0  8  000,000 

Scandinavia 1,300  000  89,000.000 

Roumania,  etc 2  000  000  40,000,000 

Europe 88.820,000    653  000,000 

United  States' 1,700  000  40  000,000 

Japan 2,000,000  50  000.000 

Egypt   l.OJOOOJ  15,000  000 

Algeria  2,000  01)0  45  000,000 

British  Colonies 940.000  34,000.000 

Totals 46,460,000    837,000,000 

1  The  Census  for  1880  states  that  in  that  year  there  were 
1,997,727  acres  devoted  to  barley-culture,  producing 
43,997,495  bushels. 


Barnes,  Albert. — Born  in  Rome, 
N.  Y.,  Dec.  1,  1798;  died  Dec.  24,  1870. 
He  graduated  at  Hamilton  College,  in 
1820,  and  from  the  Princeton  Theological 
Seminary  in  1824,  In  1825  he  was  in- 
stalled pastor  of  the  Presbyterian  Church 
at  Morristown,  N.  J.,  and  in  1830  he  took 
charge  of  the  1st  Presbyterian  Church 
in  Philadelphia,  where  he  officiated  for 
more  than  thirty  years.  Although  emi- 
nent both  as  a  preacher  and  scholar  he 
refused  all  proffered  degrees  and  titles. 
He  achieved  a  great  reputation  as  a  com- 
mentator, and  his  "  Notes  on  the  New 
Testament^'  enjoyed  an  extensive  circula- 
tion and  became  a  standard  work  on  both 
sides  of  the  water.  In  1857  he  published 
a  work  on  "  The  Church  and  Slavery,"'  in 
which  he  took  radical  ground  for  free- 
dom. He  was  equally  pronounced  on 
the  liquor  question:  his  sermon  on  the 
"  Throne  of  Iniquity  "  and  his  tract  on 
"  The  Traffic  in  Ardent  Spirits  "  are  mas- 
terly arguments  and  were  A\ddely  read. 
He  took  the  ground  that  this  evil  could 
be  suppressed  only  by  law  and  by  Pro- 
hibitive enactments ;  and  he  believed  that 


Barrooms.] 


43 


[Beecher,  Lyman. 


upon  the  churches  and  ministers  of  the 
gospel  rested  the  great  responsibility  of 
leading  the  attack  against  the  traffic. 
"  The  pulpit,"  said  he,  "'  should  speak  in 
tones  deep  and  solemn  and  constant,  re- 
verberating through  the  land.  The  watch- 
men should  see  eye  to  eye.  Of  every  of- 
ficer and  member  of  a  church  it  should 
be  known  where  he  Hiay  be  found.  We 
want  no  vacillating  counsels,  no  time- 
serving apologies,  no  coldness,  no  reluc- 
tance, no  shrinking  back  in  this  cause. 
Every  church  of  Christ  the  world  over 
should  be,  in  very  deed,  an  organization 
of  pure  temperance  under  the  headship 
and  patronage  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  friend 
and  model  of  purity.  The  pulpit  must 
speak  out.  And  the  press  must  speak. 
And  you,  fellow-Christians,  are  sum- 
moned by  the  God  of  purity  to  take  your 
stand  and  cause  your  influence  to  be  felt." 
Concerning  the  necessity  for  a  more  vig- 
orous method  than  moral  suasion,  he  said : 

"There  is  a  class  of  men,  ajid  those  most 
deeply  interested  in  the  matter,  that  you  can 
never  influence  by  moral  suasion.  They  are 
men  who  enter  no  sanctuary,  who  place  them- 
selves aloof  from  argument,  whose  hearts  are 
hard,  whose  consciences  are  seared,  whose 
sole  motive  is  gain,  and  who,  if  the  moral  part 
of  the  community  abandon  a  business,  will  only 
drive  it  on  themselves  the  faster.  What  are  you 
to  do  with  such  men  ?  You  may  go  far 
in  the  temperance  reformation  by  moral  suasion, 
but  it  has  failed  in  removing  the  evil,  and,  from 
the  nature  of  the  case,  must  always  fail,  while 
the  State  throws  its  protecting  shield  over  the 
traffic." 

For  45  years  he  was  an  aggressive  and 
a  radical  enemy  of  the  saloon  and  cham- 
pion of  temperance  principles.  In  the 
beginning  the  cause  was  very  unpopular 
and  he  suffered  persecution,  but  he  lived 
long  enough  to  see  it  respected  and  tri- 
umphing. 

Barrooms. — See  Saloon. 

Barrows,  Lorenzo  Dow.— Born 
in  Windham,  Vt.,  July  1,  1817 ;  died  in 
Plymouth,  N.  H.,  Feb.  18,  1878.  He 
received  a  thorough  academic  training, 
and  throughout  life  remained  a  student. 
He  entered  the  ministry  in  183G  and 
served  Methodist  Episcopal  churches  in 
Vermont,  New  Hampshire,  Massachu- 
setts and  Ohio.  He  was  for  four  years  a 
Presiding  Elder.  From  185G  to  1859  he 
was  President  of  the  Pittsburg  (Pa.) 
Female  College,  and  from  186G  to  1871, 
and  again  in  1877,   held  the   same  posi- 


tion in  the  New  Hampshire  Conference 
Seminary  and  Female  College.  Although 
feeble  in  body  he  was  a  clear,  forcible 
speaker,  effective  in  debate  and  aggres- 
sive for  reform,  and  especially  for  the 
temperance  reform,  in  which  he  became 
interested  early  in  life.  He  was  one  of 
the  organizers  of  the  Prohibition  party 
in  New  Hampshire,  and  was  nominated 
as  its  first  candidate  for  Governor  in  1870, 
receiving  1,1G7  votes.  March  4,  1870,  he 
issued  the  first  number  of  the  Proliibition 
Herald,  a  weekly  newspaper  which  he 
edited  and  controlled  until  September, 
1871.  He  was  not  only  a  gifted  speaker 
but  a  forcible  writer.  Many  temperance 
workers  owe  to  Dr.  Barrows's  words  and 
example  their  enlistment  in  the  move- 
ment. D.  C.  Babcock. 

Beecher,  Lyman. — Born  in  New  Ha- 
ven, Conn.,  Oct.  12,  1775;  died  in  Brook- 
lyn, N.  Y.,  Jan.  10,  18G3.  This  renowned 
preacher  graduated  from  the  Theological 
School  of  Yale  College  in  1797,  and  the 
next  year  was  ordained  pastor  of  the  Con- 
gregational Church  of  East  Hampton, 
Long  Island,  with  a  salary  of  $300  a  year. 
While  pastor  here  he  married  Kosana 
Foote,  who  contributed  to  their  support 
by  teaching  school.  He  was  installed 
pastor  of  the  Congregational  Church  at 
Litchfield,  Conn.,  in  1810,  and  remained 
there  16  years.  In  182G  he  became  pastor 
of  the  Hanover  Street  Church  of  Boston, 
and  in  1833  was  chosen  President  of  Lane 
Seminary,  near  Cincinnati,  0.  He  held 
this  position  for  twenty  years,  and  during 
one-half  that  time  added  to  his  other  du- 
ties the  pastorate  of  the  2d  Presbyterian 
Church  of  Cincinnati.  Resigning  the 
Presidency  of  the  Seminary  in  1852  he 
ceased  his  active  labors,  though  doing 
occasional  preaching.  Three  times  mar- 
ried. Dr.  Beecher  was  the  father  of  13 
children,  six  of  whom  became  clergymen. 
Two  of  the  family,  Henry  W^ard  Beecher 
and  Harriet  Beecher  Stowe,  attained 
world-wide  reputation. 

Perhaps  no  man  in  America  has  done 
more  to  mould  public  opinion  on  the  tem- 
perance question  than  Lyman  Beecher. 
He  was  first  aroused  to  a  realization  of 
the  magnitude  of  the  drink  evil  in  1808, 
while  pastor  at  East  Hampton,  by  observ- 
ing how  a  conscienceless  grogseller  cor- 
rupted the  Montauk  Indians.  "  There 
was  a  grogseller  in  our  neighborhood,"  he 
writes,  "  who  drank  himself  and  corrupt- 


Beecher,  Lyman.]                                 44  [Beecher,  Lyman. 

ed  others.  He  always  kept  his  jug  under  puhlished  in  book  form  iii  1827,  mark  a 
the  bed,  to  drink  in  the  night,  till  he  was  most  important  epoch  in  the  temperance 
choked  off  by  death.  He  would  go  down  movement.  Reprinted  abroad  and  eagerly 
Avith  his  barrel  of  whiskey  in  a  wagon  to  read  by  many  thousands,  they  did  more 
the  Indians  and  get  them  tipsy  and  bring  than  any  other  agency  to  create  a  distinct 
them  in  debt;  he  would  get  all  their  and  practical  temperance  sentiment,  and 
corn,  and  bring  it  back  in  his  wagon — in  were  recognized  as  the  standard  authority 
fact,  he  stripped  them.  Then,  in  winter,  on  the  temjaerance  question  for  many 
they  must  come  up  twenty  miles,  buy  years.  In  them  he  indicated  the  neces- 
their  own  corn,  and  pack  it  home  on  their  sity  for  the  absolute  Prohibition  of  the 
shoulders  or  starve.  Oh !  it  was  horrible,  liquor  traffic.  "  There  is  no  remedy  for 
horrible.  It  bui'ned  and  burned  in  my  intemperance  but  the  cessation  of  it,''  he 
mind,  and  I  swore  a  deep  oath  in  my  declared.  "  The  time  is  not  distant,  we 
mind  that  it  shouldn't  be  so."  A  little  trust,"  said  he,  "  when  the  use  of  ardent 
later  he  was  greatly  moved  upon  reading  spirits  will  be  proscribed  by  a  vote  of  all 
Dr.  Benjamin  Eush's  famous  essay  on  the  churches  in  our  land,  and  when  the 
*■*  The  Effects  of  Ardent  Spirits  on  the  commerce  in  that  article  shall,  equally 
Human  Body  and  Mind."  In  1812,  soon  with  the  slave  trade,  be  reg;'.rded  as  in- 
after  his  removal  to  Litchfield,  he  lis-  consistent  with  a  creditable  profession  of 
tened  to  the  report  of  the  committee  ap-  Christianity."  The  following  sentences 
pointed  by  the  Connecticut  General  As-  show  tbe  radicalism  of  his  views  as  to  the 
sociation  of  Congregational  Churches  to  ways  and  means  necessary  for  accomplish- 
consider    the    temperance   problem  and  ing  reform  : 

answer  the  question,  '*  How  can  drunken-  "  It  is  in  vain  to  rely  alone  upon  self- 

ness  be  prevented  ?"     The  conclusion's  of  government  and    voluntary    abstinence, 

the  committee  were  feeble  and   evasive;  This,  by  all  means,  should  be  encouraged 

the  growing  evils   of   intemperance  were  and  enforced,  and  may  limit  the  evil  but 

deplored,  but   the  committee  seemed  to  can  never  expel   it.     Alike  hopeless  are 

be  of  the  opinion  that  nothing  could   be  all  the  efforts  of  the  pulpit  and  the  press, 

done.      Beecher's  soul  was  stirred.     He  without  something  more  radical,  efficient 

immediately  arose  and  moved  to  discharge  and  permanent.     If   knowledge  only,  or 

the  committee   and  appoint  a   new  one.  argument  or  motive  were  needed,  the  task 

The  motion  prevailed   and  he  was  made  of  reformation  would  be  easy ;   Isut  argu- 

Chairman  of  the  new  committee.     On  the  ment  may  as  well  be   exerted  upon  the 

next  day  he  brought  in  a  report  which  wind,   and   motive  be  applied    to  chain 

he  says,  in  his  autobiography,  was  "  the  down  the  waves.     Thirst  and  the  love  of 

most  important  paper  that  I  ever  wrote."  filthy  lucre  are  incorrigible.     Many  may 

It  recommended  that  all  ministers  preach  be  saved  by  these  means;  but,  with  noth- 

onthesubjectofintemperance;thatintox-  ing  more,  many  will  be  lost  and  the  evil 

icating  liquors  be  banished  from  ministe-  will  go  down  to  other  ages. 

rial  and  church  meetings;  that   church  "  The  remedy,  whatever  it  may  be,  must 

members  abstain  from  drinking  or  traf-  be  universal — operating   permanently  at 

ficking  in   liquors;    that  parents  exclude  all  times  and  in  all  places.     Short  of  this, 

liquor  from  their  families  and  admonish  everything  which  can  be  done  will  be  but 

their  children   against   it ;  that  farmers,  the  application  of  temporary  expedients, 

manufacturers,  etc.,  provide  other  drinks  There  is  somewhere  a  mighty  energy  of 

than  alcoholic   beverages  for  their  labor-  evil  at  work   in  the  production  of  intem- 

ers;that   temperance   literature   be  pre-  perance;  and  until   we  can  discover  and 

pared  and   circulated,   and  that  associa-  destroy  this   vital   power  of  mischief  we 

tions  be  organized  for   the  promotion  of  shall  labor  in  vain.     Intemperance  in  our 

temperance    and    good    morals.      After  land   is  not   accidental ;  it   is  rolling  in 

much  discussion  these  reco-mmendations,  upon  us  by  the   violation   of   some  great 

extremely  radical  as  they  were  for  those  laws   of  human   nature.     In    our  views, 

days,  were  approved,   and   it  was  ordered  and  in  our  practice  as  a  nation,  there  is 

that  a  thousand   copies   be  printed  for  something    fundamentally    wrong;    and 

circulation.  the    remedy,     like    the     evil,    must  be 

Dr.  Beecher's  celebrated  "  Six  Sermons  found  in  the  correct  application   of  gen- 

on  Intemperance,"  delivered  in  1820  and  eral  principles.     It  must  be   a  universal 


Beer.] 


45 


[Belgium. 


and  national  remedy.  What,  then,  is  this 
universal,  natural  and  national  remedy  for 
intemperance  ?  It  is  the  banishment  of 
ardent  spirits  from  the  list  of  lawful  arti- 
cles of  commerce  by  a  correct  and  efficient 
public  sentiment,  such  as  has  turned 
slavery  out  of  half  of  our  land  and  will 
yet  expel  it  from  the  world." 

Beer.^See  Malt  Liquors. 

Belgium. — All  tradesmen  in  Belgi- 
um are  taxed,  but  no  special  license  is 
required  to  sell  intoxicating  drinks. 
Nothing  is  easier  than  to  start  and  con- 
duct a  liquor  business.  The  number  of 
places  selling  alcoholic  beverages  has 
increased  enormously  in  the  last  30  years. 
An  official  report  gives  the  following 
figures : 

Year.  Dnnk-.'<hopK. 

1850 50,000 

1880 135  000 

1884 130  000 

From  1850  to  1880  the  population  in- 
creased 25  per  cent.,  while  the  number  of 
drink-shops  increased  150  per  cent.  It 
is  estimated  that  there  is  now  one  drink- 
shop  for  every  41  inhabitants,  or  for  every 
nine  men  throughout  the  country.  The 
unlimited  opportunities  for  drinking,  the 
constant  tendency  among  nearly  all 
classes  of  people  to  drink  more  and 
more,  and  the  growing  impurity  of 
liquors  have  combined  to  increase  appall- 
ingly the  number  of  crimes,  suicides  and 
cases  of  insanity.  A  Belgian  writer  says: 
"  The  moral  level  of  the  people  is  being 
lowered  continually." 

I  present  a  few  startling  facts  from 
official  documents: 

From  1873  to  1881  the  people  spent  on 
an  average  474,323,000  francs,  or  194,- 
864,000  per  annum  for  intoxicating 
drink.  The  average  quantity  consumed 
each  year  per  inhabitant  from  1875  to 
1881  was  as  follows:  Beer,  55.9  galls.; 
spirits  (at  50^),  2.69  galls.;  wine,  0.85 
gaUs.  In  1840  the  number  of  suicides 
was  204,  or  51  per  1,000,000  inhabitants. 
In  1880  the  number  was  553,  or  97  per 
1,000,000  inhabitants.  In  1846  there  were 
720  cases  of  insanity  per  100.000  inhabit- 
ants. In  1881  there  were  1,470 — increase, 
104  per  cent.  The  increase  in  the  number 
of  crimes  since  1840  has  been  at  the  rate  of 
141  per  cent.,  allowing  for  the  increase 
in  population.  M.  Dupetiaux,  Inspector- 
General    of  Prisons   in    Belgium,    says: 


•*  My  experience  extends  now  over  a 
quarter  of  a  century,  and  I  declare  that 
four-fifths  of  the  crimes  and  misery  that 
have  come  before  me  in  my  professional 
or  private  life  have  been  the  result  of  in- 
temperance." It  has  been  repeatedly  stated 
on  the  best  authority  that  four-fifths  of 
the  deaths  in  the  hospitals  in  Brussels 
are  due,  directly  or  indirectly,  to  drink. 
What  has  been  done  to  remedy  this  state 
of  things  ?  "  La  Ligue  Patriotique  cen- 
tre I'alcoolism"  was  started  in  1879  under 
the  title  "  L  'Association  Beige  centre 
Tabus  des  boissons  alcoolique."  Its  work 
has  chiefly  been  (l)tocollect  information 
regarding  the  drinking  habits  of  the 
people,  together  with  the  evils  resulting 
therefrom,  and  to  spread  abroad  this  in- 
formation; (2)  To  endeavor  to  get  laws 
passed  to  lessen  intemperance.  All  the 
laws  hicherto  enacted  have  been  directed 
against  drunkenness  rather  than  for  less- 
ening the  temptations  to  drink. 

In  October,  1889,  the  League  took  a 
step  in  advance  by  establishing  a  "  Cafe 
populaire  "  in  Brussels,  where  all  spirit- 
uous liquors  are  excluded  and  refresh- 
ments are  served.  There  is  a  reading- 
room  fitted  up  with  a  library  and  news- 
papers, and  amusements  are  provided. 
A  circular  was  distributed  among  the 
workingmen,  calling  on  them  to  unite  in 
a  temperance  society  and  take  a  pledge 
against  distilled  liquors  while  retaining 
the  privilege  to  moderately  use  fermented 
liquors.  Aoout  80  members  have  been 
enrolled.  This  is  the  first  pledge  issued 
by  the  League. 

In  Antwerp  a  Good  Templars'  Lodge 
has  existed  for  over  12  years,  and  has 
done  useful  work,  especially  among  the 
seamen ;  but  as  its  proceedings  are  car- 
ried on  in  English  and  most  of  its  mem- 
bers are  Englishmen  it  naturally  cannot 
have  the  same  influence  that  a  distinct- 
ively Belgian  society  could  have. 

In  1885  an  International  Congress 
against  the  abuse  of  alcoholic  liquors  was 
held  in  Antwerp.  One  result  of  it  was 
the  introduction  into  Belgium  of  the 
Swiss  temperance  society,  known  as  "  La 
Croix  Bleue."  This  is  a  total  abstinence 
society,  and  it  has  made  some  progress 
in  the  South  of  Belgium,  chiefly  among 
the  Protestant  workmen.  "  La  Societe 
de  St.  Jean  Baptiste  "  is  the  name  of  an 
organization  started  at  St.  Frond  (in  Bel- 
gium) in  November,  1886,  and  now  en- 


Benefits  of  Prohibition.] 


46 


[Bible  and  Drink. 


joying  the  patronage  of  the  Lord  Bishop 
of  Liege.  It  issues  the  same  accommo- 
dating pledge  as  the  society  at  Brussels, 
At  the  close  of  1888  its  members  num- 
bered TOO  adults  and  4,000  children. 
This  society  has  received  the  benediction 
of  Pope  Leo  XIII. 

Charlotte  A.  Gray, 


Benefits  of  Prohibition. 

HiBiTiON,  Benefits  of. 


-See  Pro- 


Bible  and  Drink. — There  are  two 
possible  views  of  the  relation  which  the 
Hebrew  and  Greek  Scriptures  bear  to  in- 
toxicating wine,  drugs  and  strong  drink : 
either  (1)  that  they  are  harmonious  in 
all  their  statements  as  the  beliefs 
of  inspired  men,  or  (2)  that  they  are 
the  records  of  various  fallible 
opinions,  more  or  less  inaccurate.  Of 
course  the  proof  of  the  first  position 
fails  if  those  Scriptures  contradict  either 
the  laws  of  morals,  the  principles  of  sci- 
ence or  the  facts  of  life.  Any  claim  that 
contravenes  reason,  conscience  and  fact  is 
an  imposture.  We  must,  however,  always 
distinguish  between  the  Scrijotures  them- 
selves and  the  interpretations  put  upon 
them  by  prejudiced,  interested  or  igno- 
rant men.  As  the  "pure  in  heart"  can 
alone  see  God,  so  the  open-minded  truth- 
seeker  and  truth-lover  is  alone  fitted  to 
perceive  the  meaning  of  his  word. 

The  great  Italian  poet  has  said  of 
twisted  expositions  of  Holy  Writ : 

"Men  thus  at  variance  with  the  truth 

Dream,  tho'  their  eyes  be  opea  ;  reckless  some 

Of  error;  others  well  aware  they  err. 

Each  the  known  track  of  sa^e  philosophy 

Deserts,  and  has  a  by  way  of  his  own. 

Yet  this,  offensive  as  it  is  provokes 

Heaven's  anger  less  than  when  the  sacred  Book 

Is  forced  to  yield  to  man's  authority. 

Or  fiom  its  straightness  warped." — Dante. 

If  the  Bible  does  contain  contradictory 
statements  or  implications,  under  God's 
apparent  sanction,  then,  of  course,  its  au- 
thority ceases  and  the  known  facts  of  ex- 
perience and  science  become  the  guide  of 
duty.  On  the  contrary,  if  the  Bible  is 
consistent,  the  consistency  may  be  shown; 
and  we  may  add,  only  the  denier  of  its 
divinity  has  the  moral  and  logical  right  to 
contend  that  it  does  sanction  the  use  of 
strong  drink  or  disturbing  drugs.  Let 
us  then  examine  the  book  with  impartial- 
ity and  record  some  of  the  discovered  facts 
that  bear  on  the  subject  of  drink  and 
drinking: 


1.  The  institutes  of  the  Creator  are 
wise  ;  yet  in  Eden,  for  tho  most  organic- 
ally perfect  pair,  no  strong  drink  was 
provided;  the  fruits  of  the  earth  were 
their  appointed  food,  and  simple  water  or 
"■  meathes  from  many  a  berry  "  their  only 
but  sufficient  beverage. 

2,  It  is  also  the  fact  that  God  provided 
no  strong  drink  for  his  people,  even  when 
wandering  in  the  hot  atmosphere  of  an 
arid  wilderness,  but  only  water  from  the 
rock  ;  and  even  then,  from  the  presence 
of  palm-wine  made  by  the  foolish  sons  of 
Aaron,  "  strange  fire  "  was  ignited,  and 
the  offerers  perished,  being  the  occasion 
of  the  first  recorded  prohibition  of  intoxi- 
cants— a  divine  example  which  men  would 
do  well  to  follow, 

3,  In  the  symbolic  rites  it  was  not 
"wine  "  that  represented  "  the  washing  of 
regeneration,"  but  the  "water  of  life"; 
while  fermentation  was  the  type  of  moral 
corruption,     (1  Cor,  5  :  6-8,) 

4,  The  three  chief  elements  of  the  most 
sacred  institutes  of  Jews  and  Christians 
were  water,  bread  and  fruit,  and  the 
law  of  the  Passover  (Ex,  12  and  34:25) 
commands  (1)  that  the  Jews  shall  con- 
sume matzah,  sweet  or  fresh  things;  (2) 
that  seor  (the  sour  or  ferment)  shall  be 
put  out  of  siglit;  (3)  that  no  chomets 
(fermented  thing)  shall  be  used.  Strange 
that  a  thousand  years  later  the  Rabbins 
narrowed  the  broad  sense  of  matznli  into 
"  biscuit,"  while  now  some  churchmen 
would  fain  decree,  and  do  actually  con- 
tend, that  the  phrase  "  fruit  of  the  vine  " 
excludes  the  juice  from  its  significance, 
and  designates  only  fermented  wine — a 
dogma  in  which  Christ,  fact  and  science 
are  equally  repudiated. 

5.  In  singular  contrast  with  the  lan- 
guage of  the  opponents  of  abstinence  in 
this  age,  it  is  a  fact  that  there  is  not  in 
the  whole  40  books  of  the  Bible  one  soli- 
tary text  that  condemns  the  Nazarites' 
practice,  nor  one  which  commends  the  use 
of  intoxicating  wine. 

6.  The  Bible  records,  in  manifold  texts, 
how  patriarchs  and  priests,  princes  and 
prophets  "  went  out  of  the  way  through 
wine  and  strong  drink,"  and  in  language 
corresponding  to  the  fact  not  only  urges 
the  inherent  evil  tendency  of  the  article 
consumed,  but  denounces  a  woe  upon 
those  who  give  it  to  their  neighbors. 
(Ilab.  2:  15.)  Such  drink  is  called  a 
"  poison,"  a  "  deceiver,"  a  "  mocker  "  and 


Bible  and  Drink.] 


47 


[Bible  and  Drink. 


a  "  defrauder  "  ("  treacherous  dealer  "  in 
R.  v.).  The  first  and  last  time  in  which 
rheinnli,  the  generic  Hebrew  term  for 
"  poison  "  occurs,  it  is  applied  to  intoxi- 
cating;'wine  ;  and  in  descriptive  passages 
the  drink  of  tiie  drunkard  is  in  fact  de- 
clared to  be  a  narcotic  brain-poison  and 
a  paralyzer  of  the  Avill.  "  They  have 
beaten  me  and  I  felt  it  not  ...  I 
will  seek  it  yet  again."  (Prov.  23 :  35.) 

7.  The  word  for  "  poison  "  has  a  meta- 
phorical use  in  accordance  with  the  literal. 
It  is  the  word  which  characterizes  the 
contents  of  the  "  cup  of  wrath,"  and  is 
expressive  of  the  divine  punishment  upon 
sin  (Jer.  25 :  15,  etc.).  It  was  not  a  "cup 
of  blessing  "  ;  and  the  toxic  quality  is  the 
whole  point  and  meaning  of  the  figure, 
as  in  the  1-lth  chapter  of  the  Apocalypse, 
in  which  book  the  philosophy  of  Prohibi- 
tion is  also  distinctly  taught.  The  bind- 
ing of  Satan  precedes  the  millenium  of 
purity  and  peace.  The  divine  kingdom 
is  always  conditioned  upon  deliverance 
from  evil  and  from  the  pressure  of  per- 
petual temptation. 

8.  The  philology  of  the  Bible  plainly 
discriminates  between  good  and  bad  wine. 
The  phrase  "pure  blood  of  the  grape" 
cannot  point  to  the  same  thing  as  "  wine, 
the  poison  of  dragons"  ;  the  wine  of 
"  astonishment "  (lit.,  reeling)  cannot  be 
the  same  thing  as  the  contents  of  the  "  cup 
of  blessing."  We  must,  therefore,  dis- 
tin2:uish  between  the  Lord's  Kalon-oinon 
and  Satan's  Kakoii-oiuim. 

9.  The  Bible  not  only  discountenances 
drink  and  drinking  by  plain  and  strong 
words,  and  by  recording  evil  results,  but 
commends  and  commands  abstinence  in 
various  and  empha.tic ways.  "I  raised  up 
your  sons  for  prophets  and  your  young 
men  for  Nazarites ;  is  it  not  even  so?  saith 
the  Lord."  (Amos,  2 :  11,  12.)  The  strong 
champion  Samson  was,  before  his  birth, 
appointed  by  angelic  message  to  be  an 
abstainer,  and  his  mother  was  prohibited 
the  toxic  drink  likewise,  lest  he  should 
suffer  pre-natal  injury.  The  Nazarites 
are  described  as  fair,  ruddy  and  moral. 
The  priests  were  commanded,  on  pain  of 
death,  to  abstain  from  strong  drink  while 
doing  God's  work  in  tabernacle  and  tem- 
ple ;  and  one  greater  than  a  prophet,  the 
forerunner  of  the  Messiah,  was  made  an 
abstainer  "  that  he  might  be  filled  with 
the  Holy  Ghost." 

10.  Abstinence    teaching,    in     various 


forms,  permeates  both  the  Old  and  New 
Testaments,  as  well  as  the  Apocrypha,  but 
especially  and  distinctly  is  it  inculcated  in 
the  letters  of  Peter  and  Paul.  "We," 
says  the  latter,  "are  'sons  of  the  day,' 
and,  therefore,  should  be  Ncephonien,  '  no 
drinkers.'  "  (1  Thess.  5 :  6-8.) 

11.  Before  anything  can  be  proved 
against  abstinence,  either  as  a  doctrine  or 
a  "  counsel  of  perfection,"  a  test  must  be 
adduced  which  connects  together  three 
things — God,  sanction  and  intoxicating 
quality.  God's  word  is  one  thing;  man's 
opinion  about  it  is  another.  God's  sanc- 
tion is  one  thing — his  "  permission  " 
another.  Divorce,  slavery,  polygamy, 
even  rebellion,  were  expressly  "allowed." 
God  does  not  coerce  us.  Lastly,  intoxica- 
ting wine  is  one  thing—"  good  Avine  "  an- 
other. Moreover,  the  Bible,  like  any  other 
ancient  book,  must  be  read  in  the  light  of 
the  history  of  the  times  in  which  its  vari- 
ous books  were  written.  What  the  men 
of  that  day  would  understand  by  words 
and  laws  is  the  question — not  what  the 
moderns  may  wish  the  words  to  mean. 
Now  the  great  illuminating  fact  in  this 
inquiry  is  that  abstinence  was  apart  of  all 
the  great  religions  of  the  East — of  Egypt. 
Bactria,  Persia,  India — and  was  practiced 
or  taught  by  the  most  eminent  men 
of  Greece,  like  Pythagoras  and  Epicurus. 

12.  Two  centuries  before  Christ,  the 
following  passage  from  Phylarchus  shows 
that  its  essential  truth  penetrated  the 
religion  of  the  Pagan  world:  "The 
Greeks  who  sacrifice  to  the  Sun-God 
never  bring  wine  to  the  altars,  because  it 
is  fitting  that  the  God  who  keeps  the 
whole  universe  in  order  should  in  no  way 
be  connected  with  drunkenness."  {His- 
toria,  lib.  xii.)  In  the  writings  of  Jose- 
phus  and  Philon  the  doctrine  of  absti- 
nence is  distinctly  taught,  and  in  the  very 
words  of  the  Christian  apostles ;  the  early 
Church  at  Jerusalem  practiced  it,  and 
Eusebius,  in  the  17th  chapter  of  his  his- 
tory, tells  us  not  only  that  it  extensively 
prevailed  amongst  the  Essenes,  but  also 
that  it  was  the  practice  of  the  holy, 
apostles. 

13.  In  the  light  of  these  historic  facts, 
the  contention  that  Christ,  in  opposition 
to  the  teaching  of  the  prophets  and  the 
practice  of  the  Essenes  and  other  pious 
Jews,  should  transmute  innocent  water 
into  toxic  wine,  by  a  miraculous  brewing, 
without  exciting  any  remark  or  inquiry 


Bible  and  Drink. J 


48 


[Bible  Wines. 


from  either  friends  or  critics,  seems  the 
very  height  of  paradox,  and  cannot  be 
rationally  entertained. 

14.  Drugged  drinks  are  frequently 
named,  but  never  as  comforters,  blessings 
or  legitimate  luxuries.  Mixed  wine,  how- 
ever, is  shown  in  Proverbs  to  be  of  two 
sorts — one  the  syrup-wine  mingled  Avith 
water  at  Wisdom's  feast,  the  other 
drugged  wine,  upon  the  seekers  of  which 
a  woe  is  elsewhere  pronounced.  No  com- 
mentators, of  any  school  or  church,  have 
failed  to  see  that  the  Bible  condemns  such 
drinks.  The  last  act  of  the  Kedeemer 
was  to  refuse  the  "  wine  mingled  with 
myrrh,"  though  the  Jews  often  adminis- 
tered it  to  criminals  about  to  perish,  to 
abate  their  sensibility  to  pain  and  fear. 

15.  The  defenders  of  strong  drink  en- 
deavor to  prejudice  the  inquiry  by  putting 
a  false  issue  before  the  people,  and  by  as- 
suming an  absurd  principle  of  criticism. 
They  write  of  their  own  "  One- Wine 
theory"  and  of  our  "'  Two-Wine  theory" 
— language  utterly  unmeaning  and  inap- 
plicable. The  real  contention  is  whether 
the  Hebrew  words  yayin  and  shehar  are 
generic  or  speciiic  terms — a  question 
which  only  an  iiduction  of  the  terms  as 
used  can  ever  settle.  In  England,  for  ex- 
ample, corn  is  a  generic  term  for  grain, 
which,  indeed,  is  the  same  word  modified ; 
in  North  America  it  has  become  specific, 
meaning  Indian  corn,  not  all  sorts  of 
grain.  If  the  question  were  about  the 
quality  of  a  spirit,  a  wife,  a  man,  a  metal 
or  a  tree,  how  would  the  problem  be  ad- 
vanced by  a  foolish  clamor  about  a  "  one- 
spirit  "  or  "  two-spirit  "  theory,  a  "  one- 
wife  "  or  a  "  two-wife  "  theory,  etc  ?  The 
assumption  that  what  a  word  means  in 
one  text  it  means  everywhere  else  is 
equally  absurd ;  for  it  is  of  the  essence  of 
generic  terms  to  be  capable  of  receiving 
qualifying  adjectives.  It  is  the  same  kind 
of  fallacy  as  giving  a  definition  with  the 
differentiation  left  out.  As  a  matter  of 
fact,  we  have  hundreds  of  examples  of  the 
use,  during  two  thousand  years,  of  the 
word   ivine  (in   Hebrew,   Arabic,  Syriac, 

*  Greek,  Latin,  French,  German,  Spanish 
and  English)  for  the  expressed  juice  of 
the  grape ;  and  sometimes,  in  the  earliest 
use,  for  the  grnpe-frnit  in  the  cluster. 

16.  The  expression, "  fruit  of  the  vine," 
as  translated  from  both  the  Hebrew  and 
the  Greek,  was  applied  to  the  expressed 
juice  of  the  grape,  but  was  never  originally 


used,  like  "  corn,"  for  the  natural  fruit — 
the  grape  in  the  cluster.  For  that  pur- 
pose a  distinct  word  was  employed.  In 
the  course  of  time,  through  human  ig- 
norance, the  phrase  under  consideration 
came  to  be  applied  to  the  fermented  juice 
of  the  grape— also  called  "wine" — be- 
cause men  did  not  understand  the  change 
effected  by  fermentation,  as  few  do  even 
to-day.  When  employed  by  our  Saviour, 
however,  we  may  surely  assume  that  he 
did  not  fall  into  the  errors  of  the  Rabbins 
who  "  made  the  law  of  none  effect,"  but 
selected  that  form  of  wine  which  was  not 
only  innocent  but  "  good." 

I  close  by  giving  an  analysis  and  con- 
trast of  two  things,  which  may  helj)  to 
illuminate  the  whole  subject : 


The    Solid    Constituent 
Parts  op  Vine-Puuit: 

I.   NATURAL  JUICE. 

ni„*o^  )  These  totally  van- 

r^  ^      tish  from    the   fer- 

^"°^     \  mented  juice. 

Albumen 

Sugar  .... 

Tannin    .... 

Tartaric  Acid 

Potash  1  These    three 

Sulj)hur        Vspecially  valu- 

Phosphorus  )  able  for  blood. 


Constituents  of  Alco- 
holic Wine: 

II.   FERMENTED  JUICE, 

1  Alcohol,  2  Acetic  Acid,  3 
ODnanthic-^ther,  4  Suc- 
cinic Acid,  5  Glycerine. 

Albumen,  0  pts.  out  of  7  lost 

Sugar,  4  out  of  5  lost. 

Tannin,  4  out  of  C  lost. 

Tartaric  Acid,  1  out  of  2  lost 

Potash  ) 


Sulphur        V 
Phosphorus  ) 


Onc-half  less. 


At  the  top  of  the  left-hand  column  are 
the  names  of  two  constituents  not  found 
in  the  right-hand  column.  These  are 
wholly  destroyed  by  fermentation,  and  the 
first  is  the  distinctive  nutritive  constitu- 
ent of  the  fruit.  At  the  top  of  the  right- 
hand  column  will  be  seen  the  names  of 
five  constituents  not  contained  in  the 
grape.  They  are  new  products  generated 
by  the  destruction  of  the  gluten,  gum 
and  other  constituents  in  both  columns. 
Hence,  by  a  triple  process  of  destruction, 
addition  and  abstraction  (through  fer- 
mentation) grape-juice  loses  its  essential 
constituents,  and  its  nutritive  character 
vanishes.  In  scientific  fact,  therefore, 
alcoholic  "wine"  is  not  "the  fruit  of  the 
vine,"  but  an  artificial  product. 

F.  E.  Lees. 

Bible  Wines. — 1.  Reaso7is  Against 
the  Unfermentcd-Wine  TJicort/.  — 'No  one  in 
reading  the  Bible  from  Genesis  to  Revela- 
tion, without  prejudice,  would  imagine 
that  there  were  two  kinds  of  wine,  intox- 
icating and  the  non-intoxicating,  men- 
tioned in  the  holy  book.  He  would  find 
that  the  same  word  for  wine  is  used  for 
that  which  Noah  drank  to  drunkenness, 
and    that   which    Melchizedek    brought 


Bible  Winec] 


49 


[Bible  Wines, 


forth  to  Abraham;  for  that  which  is 
called  a  "  mocker/'  and  that  which  was 
used  as  a  drink-offerfng  at  God's  altar; 
for  that  which  inflames  man,  and  that 
Avhich  makes  glad  man's  heart;  for  that 
which  figures  God's  wratli  and  man's 
wickedness,  and  that  which  figures  our 
Lord's  salvation.  (See  Gen.  1):  24;  14: 18; 
Prov.  20:  1;  Ex.  29:  40;  Isa.  5:  11;  Ps. 
104 :  15 ;  Jer.  25 :  15 ;  51 :  T ;  Isa.  55 : 1.)  In 
the  ISTew  Testament  he  would  find  tlie 
same  thing.  The  same  word  in  Greek  is 
used  for  that  which  Jesus  drank  and 
made,  and  that  whose  excess  is  deprecated. 
In  neither  Testament  is  the  slightest 
hint  given  that  there  was  a  difference  in 
these  drinks.  If  there  had  been  a  dif- 
ference we  should  have  found  a  differ- 
ence in  the  word  used ;  or,  at  least,  if  the 
word  was  the  same  we  should  have  found 
some  adjective  or  explanatory  phrase  to 
warn  us  of  the  difference.  For  example, 
when  Paul  rebuked  the  Corinthian  Chris- 
tians for  their  drunkenness  at  the  Lord's 
Supper,  how  easy  it  would  have  been  for 
him  to  say  to  them :  "  Drink  only  the 
unintoxicating  wine."  If  there  had  been 
a  difference  between  wines,  as  intoxicat- 
ing and  unintoxicating,  it  was  his  apos- 
tolic duty  to  emphasize  that  distinction 
at  such  a  crisis.  So  again,  when  the 
same  apostle  tells  the  deacons  and  old 
women  not  to  use  wucli  wine  (1  Tim. 
:> :  8;  Tit.  2  :  3)  he  must  have  meant  in- 
toxicating wine,  for  what  reason  could  he 
frame  for  cautioning  them  not  to  use 
much  innocuous  juice  ?  He  did  not  ap- 
pear to  know  that  there  was  a  non-intox- 
icating wine.  He  advises  Timothy  (not 
as  a  physician,  but  as  a  friend)  to  use  a 
"  little,"  and  warns  against  its  excessive 
use.  (1  Tim.  5:  23;  Eph.  5:  18;  comp. 
1  Pet.  4 : 3.)  The  little  and  the  excess 
evidently  refer  to  the  same  liquid. 

That  "fruit  of  the  vine,"  in  the  ac- 
counts of  our  Lord's  Supper  (Matt.  26 :  29 ; 
Mark  14:25;  Luke  22  :  18),  is  the  same  as 
wine,  and  only  means  the  wine  used  at 
the  time,  is  evident  to  anyone  who  knoAvs 
that  the  phrase  "  fruit  of  the  vine  "was 
the  Jewish  formula  for  wine  at  the  Pas- 
chal feast.  The  Jews  mingled  water  with 
the  wine  at  the  Passover  to  avoid  driirik- 
emiess,  and  the  blessrng  said  over  it  was, 
"  Blessed  be  he  that  created  tJie  fruit  of 
the  vine.''  Our  Saviour  simply  used  the 
Paschal  term  for  intoxicating  wine.  (See 
Lightfoot  on  Matt.   26 :  29.)     Herodotus 


uses  the  same  phrase,  "fruit  of  the  vine,'' 
for  intoxicating  wine,  lie  represents 
queen  Tomyris  as  saying  to  Cyrus :  "  Be 
not  elated  .  .  .  that  by  the  fruit 
of  the  cine  with  whicli,  when  filled  with 
it,  ye  so  rave,"  etc.  (Herod.  1:212).  The 
Greek  fathers,  who  certainly  knew  M'hat 
"  fruit  of  the  vine"  meant,  always  speak 
of  our  Saviour  using  wine  at  the  Supper. 

Wine  is  grape-juice  fermented.  Grape- 
juice,  left  to  itself,  will  ferment.  To  pre- 
vent fermentation  and  keep  its  juice 
there  is  need  of  elaborate  restrictive  jjro- 
cesses,  and  they  are  these  that  Pliny  and 
Columella  refer  to,  but  nowhere  do  these 
and  other  ancient  authors  refer  to  these 
preserved  juices  as  the  wine  of  commerce 
and  the  country.  They  are  extraordinary 
productions,  while  wine,  intoxicating 
wine,  is  the  only  thing  known  by  the 
name  in  the  ancient  poets  and  essayists. 
To  prove  this  by  quotation  would  be  to 
write  a  book  of  quotations  from  scores  of 
writers.  And  what  is  true  of  the  ancient 
heathen  writers  is  true  of  the  early  Chris- 
tian fathers.  "We  find  not  the  slightest 
hint  of  two  kinds  of  wine,  the  intoxica- 
ting and  the  non-intoxicating,  in  any  of 
them.  Clement  of  Alexandria,  who  is 
especially  quoted  by  those  who  Avould 
sustain  the  two-wine  theory,  Avarns  the 
young  not  to  use  wine,  but  never  sug- 
gests an  unintoxicating  kind.  He  says 
of  the  one  kind,  which  alone  he  knows: 
"  Toward  evening,  about  supper-time, 
wine  may  be  used.  But  we  must  not  go 
on  to  intemperate  potations."  (Clem. 
Alex.  Pml.  2:2.)  If  preserved  grape- 
juice  were  a  common  thing  in  his  day, 
why  did  not  this  Christian  father 
urge  this  as  a  substitute  for  intoxicating 
wine  ? 

In  all  the  poets  of  Greece  and  Eome, 
such  as  Anacreon  and  Horace,  we  find 
wine  constantly  mentioned  as  an  intoxi- 
cating drink,  if  taken  to  excess.  No  one 
in  reading  these  classics  would  ever  sus- 
pect there  were  two  kinds  of  wine,  the 
intoxicating  and  unintoxicating.  We 
cannot  prove  a  negative  by  quotations. 
We  declare  that  no  ancient  author  hints 
even  at  two  kinds  of  wine,  the  intoxica- 
ting and  unintoxicating,  as  the  ordi- 
nary wine  drunk  by  the  people,  and  it  is 
for  the  two-wine  advocates  to  prove  their 
position  by  a  single  honest  quotation. 
There  have  been  plenty  of  twisted  quo- 
tations unfairly   used,  but  not  one  hon- 


Bible  Wines.] 


^0 


Bible  Wines. 


estly  quoted  with  its  context  that  sus- 
tains the  two-wine  theory.  Tlie  extraor- 
dinary preservation  of  must  has  been 
used  for  the  ordinary  making  o^'  wine. 
Now  must  stands  to  wine  just  as  dough 
stands  to  bread;  and  must  may  be  called 
wine  just  as  dough  may  be  called  bread. 
One  may  loosely  say  to  the  baker,  "  Put 
your  bread  into  the  oven "  before  it  is 
actually  bread ;  and  so  one  may  say,  "  Do 
not  touch  my  wine,"  to  one  who  is  med- 
dling with  the  must  before  it  becomes 
wine.  80,  also,  poetically,  one  may  say, 
"  My  vineyard  bears  the  repaying  wine;" 
just  as  another  poet  says,  "  My  ship  was 
then  the  growing  trees  of  the  forest." 
But  to  suppose  that  the  poet  meant  the 
grapes  were  wine  is  as  wise  as  to  suppose 
he  mrant  that  the  growing  trees  were  a 
ship.  We  must  use  common  sense  in  our 
interpretations.  These  anticipatory  or 
poetical  uses  of  the  word  "  wine "  are 
found  in  all  writers,  but  no  argument  can 
be  founded  on  their  literal  truth. 

The  two-wine  theory  is  a  modern  affair. 
It  began  in  our  own  century  with  a  few 
excellent  men  who  longed  to  meet  the 
intemperance  of  the  day  with  a  new  argu- 
ment, and  who  said  that  tlie  ordinary  in- 
terpretation of  the  word  **  wine  "  in  the 
Bible  was  an  obstacle  to  the  theory  and 
practice  of  total  abstinence.  They  hon- 
estly thought  that  they  detected  a  differ- 
ence in  terms  and  expressions  both  iii  the 
Hebrew  and  the  Greek,  on  which  they 
could  base  their  theory.  Two  or  three 
prominent  names,  of  the  highest  charac- 
ter and  of  good  scholarship  for  that  day, 
gave  currency  to  the  theory  among  the 
less  learned  philanthropists,  who  saw  no 
way  of  escape  from  the  curse  of  intem- 
perance but  by  the  total  denunciation  of 
wine.  The  temperance  literature  at  once 
gave  wide  circulation  to  this  error,  and 
now  there  are  thousands  and  tens  of 
thousands  who  firmly  believe  that  both 
the  Bible  and  the  ancient  writers  gen- 
erally recognize  two  kinds  of  wine,  one 
intoxicating  and  the  other  unintoxicat- 
ing;  one  to  be  condemned  and  the  other 
to  be  praised.  A  mighty  stream  of  sen- 
timent has  flowed  from  this  little  begin- 
ning, and  its  prevalenc^e  tends  to  sub- 
stantiate it.  Many  sound  and  strong 
minds,  who  have  not  personally  examined 
the  question,  give  in  their  adherence  to  the 
utterly  unfounded  theory.  This  is  the 
way  of  an  error  that  heooniies  inveterate. 


We  hazard  nothing  in  saying  that  the 
present  scholarship  of  the  world  repudi- 
ates the  theory  in  toto.  Etymologically. 
historically  and  scientifically,  the  theory 
is  condemned  by  every  scholar  who  has 
given  his  thought  and  study  to  it  in  late 
years.  In  a  brief  article  like  this  it  is 
impossible  to  take  up  each  department 
and  show  the  j^rocesses  and  results  of 
careful  observation.  The  onus  probandi 
belongs  to  those  who  assert  the  theory, 
which  was  never  heard  of  until  this  cen- 
tury. We  have  examined  scores  of  books 
that  advocate  the  theory,  and  have  yet  to 
find  the  first  evidence  of  its  truth.  It  is 
purely  an  invention,  honestly  prompted 
in  minds  to  which  the  w  sh  was  father 
to  the  thought,  and  naturally  grasped  by 
the  earnest  advocates  of  total  abstinence. 
We  do  not  wonder  at  the  zeal  of  such 
men  and  women.  It  is  most  laudable. 
A  mind  that  can  unmoved  see  the  dread- 
ful evils  of  intemperance  is  an  unenvia- 
ble one.  Every  lover  of  his  race  should 
be  most  earnest  to  meet  the  usages  that 
are  destroying  both  body  and  soul  with 
such  appalling  power.  We  cannot  but 
commend  the  energy  of  all  who  are  en- 
listed to  extirpate  the  baleful  influence 
of  the  saloon.  And  yet  we  should  be 
careful  in  the  warfai'e  to  use  no  improper 
weapons  and  to  wield  no  untruth  which 
will  only  react  against  us  and  stop  the 
progress  of  reform.  The  two-wine  the- 
ory, by  reason  of  its  baselessness,  is,  as 
promulgated,  only  an  advantage  to  the 
enemy,  who,  by  overthrowing:  one  weak 
defense,  will  impress  the  public  mind  that 
they  have  conquered  in  the  main  strife. 
If  we  are  to  make  steady  progress  we 
must  adhere  to  truth,  and  declare  wine 
an  evil  only  in  its  excessive  use;  and 
standing  by  and  with  God's  word,  and 
by  and  Avith  the  human  conscience, 
too,  denounce  and  hinder  excess  in  every 
legitimate  Avay.  Man's  wisdom  cannot 
take  the  place  of  God's  wisdom. 

Howard  Crosby. 

2.  Reasons  for  the  Unfermented-  Wi7ie 
Theory. — The  study  of  Bible  wines  re- 
quires notice  of  their  historic  mention, 
the  sources  of  knowledge  as  to  their  na- 
ture, the  methods  of  their  preparation, 
and  their  uses  as  beverages  and  medicines, 
and  in  religious  rites.  The  v/ord  "Avine" 
occurs  in  the  English  translation  of  the 
Old  Testament  about  200  times,  and  in 


Bible  Wines.] 


51 


[Bible  Wines. 


the  New  Testament  about  40  times.  Its 
special  nature  is  to  the  English  reader 
indicated  by  associated  terms  which  either 
directly  or  indirectly  explain  its  charac- 
ter. Thus,  the  special  terms  "  new  "  oc- 
ciirring  18  times  and  "sweet"  3  times, 
its  association  as  a  fresh  product  of  the 
field  25  times  with  "corn"  and  29  times 
with  "oil,"  as  also  its  issuing  from  the 
"press"  mentioned  about  20  times,  indi- 
ca..e  to  the  ordinary  reader  that  its 
nature  is  to  be  inferred  from  these 
associated  statements.  Turning  to  the 
inspired  Hebrew  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment and  to  the  inspired  Greek  of  the 
New  Testament,  the  specific  meanings  of 
the  several  terms  used,  as  explained  by 
translators,  lexicographers  and  commen- 
tators in  successive  ages,  make  specially 
aj^parent  what  the  ordinary  reader  has 
imperfectly  recognized. 

In  the  Hebi'ew  Old  Testament  no  less 
than,  ten  distinct  terms  are  translated  by 
the  word  "wine;"  only  two  of  which  re- 
quire special  attention.  The  eight  less 
important  terms,  in  the  order  of  the  lexi- 
con, are  the  following :  The  word  ashisliah, 
rendered  "  flagon,"  used  four  times,  re- 
fers doubtless  to  dried  grapes  or  raisins 
pressed  into  cakes.  The  passages  are,  2 
Sam.  6:  19;  1  Chron.  16:  3;  Cant.  2:  5, 
and  Hos.  3 :  1;  all  of  which  Fuerst,  the 
latest  and  ablest  in  archaeology  of  Hebrew 
lexicographers,  thus  interprets,  citing  as 
authority  both  the  Greek  translation  of 
the  LXX  and  the  Talmud.  The  term 
67m;»;-«,  Chaldee,  used  six  times  by  Ezra 
and  Daniel  in  Babylonia  (namely,  Ezra 
6:9;  7 :  22 ;  Dan.  5 :  1,  2,  4,  23),  and  its 
cognate  Hebrew  cliemar,  used  three  times, 
once  each  by  Moses  (Deut.  32 :  14),  David 
(Ps.  75:  8)  and  Isaiah  (Isa.  27:  2),  refers 
unquestionably,  as  do  its  cognate  Syriac 
chainro  and  Arabic  diemer  now  constantly 
used,  to  intoxicating  wines.  The  term  ya- 
9 ^/f!^,  meaning  wine-press,  used  16  times, 
indicates  fresh  grape-juice  issuing  from 
the  press.  (See  Num.  18 :  27, 30 ;  Deut.  15 : 
14;  16:  13;  Judges  7:  25;  2  Kings  6:  27; 
Job  24 :  11 ;  Prov.  3 :  10 ;  Isa.  5 :  2^;  16 :  10 ; 
Jer.  48:  33;  Hos.  9:22;  Joel  2:24;  3: 
13;  Hag.  2:  16;  Zech.  14:  10.)  The  term 
mimesak,  only  twice  used  (Prov.  23:  30; 
Isa.  65:  11),  rendered  "mixed  wine,"  in- 
dicates a  wine  made  pungent  in  taste  by 
spices.  The  word  soha,  three  times  used 
(Isa.  1:  22;  Hos.  4:  18;  Nah.  1:  10), 
rendered  "wine,"  "drink"  and  "drunken" 


and  described  in  Isa.  1 :  22  as  mixed 
with  water,  as  the  Latin  and  other  trans- 
lations ir  dicate,  is  a  syrup  made  of  fresh 
grape-juice,  like  those  used  in  making 
effervescinir  drinks,  and  common  anions: 
Mohammedans  as  the  drink  called  "sher- 
bet." The  word  anah,  meaning  "  grape- 
cluster,"  used  18  times,  once  only  trans- 
lated "  wine  "  (Hos.  3:1),  brings  to  notice 
the  fresh  Juice  yet  in  the  cluster.  (See 
Gen.  40:  10,  11;  49:  11;  Lev.  25:  5; 
Num.  6:3;  13 :  20,  23 ;  Deut.  23 :  24 ;  32 : 
14,  32;  Neh.  13:  15;  Isa.  5:  2,  4;  Jer.  8: 
13;  Hos.  3:1;  9:  10;  Amos  9:  13.)  The 
term  osis,  used  five  times,  rendered 
"sweet  wine"  (Isa.  49:  26,  and  /.mos  9: 
13),  "new  wine"  (Joel  1:  5,  and  3:  18), 
and  "juice"  (Cant.  8:2),  derived  from 
asas  meaning  to  "  press,"  indicat  s  the 
fresh  juice  oozing  from  the  fruit.  The 
word  sliemariin,  met  five  times  (Ps.  75 :  8; 
Isa.  25 :  6 ;  Jer.  48 :  11 ;  Zeph.  1 :  12),  ren- 
dered "dregs,"  "lees,"  and  "wine  on  the 
lees,"  indicates  manifestly  the  juice  in  the 
wine-vat  before  it  is  drawn  off  to  be  stored*. 
To  these  eight  terms  rendered  "wine" 
in  the  English  version  of  the  Old  Tester 
ment,  must  be  added  three  others  indicat- 
ing products  of  the  grape;  which,  with 
the  preceding,  present  the  succession  of 
products  in  ancient  and  modern  times — 
two  yet  to  be  considered  excepted — de- 
rived from  the  grape  referred  to  in  Old 
Testament  history  and  precept,  poetry 
and  prophecy.  The  word  debsh  is  met  54 
times.  (See  Gen.  43:  11;  Ex.  3:8,  17 
13:  5;  16:  31;  33:3;  Lev.  2:11;  20:24 
Num.  13:  27;  14:  8;  16:  13,  14;  Deut 
6:3;  8:8;  11:  9;  26:  9,  15;  27:  3;  31 
20;  32:  13;  Josh.  5:6;  Judges  14-8,  9 
18;  1  Sam.  14:  25,  26,  27,  29,  43;  2  Sam 
17:  29;  1  Kings  14:  3;  2  Kings  18:  32 
2  Chron.  31:  5;  Job  20:  17;  Ps.  19:  10 
81:  16;  119:  103;  Prov.  16:  24;  24:  13 
25:16,  27;  Cant.  4:  11;  5:1;  Isa.  7:  15 
22;  Jer.  11:5;  32:22;  41:8;  Ezek.  3:3 
16:  13,  19;  20:  6,  15;  27:  17.)  Its  abund- 
ance in  the  early  history  of  Israel,  and  its 
apparent  supplanting,  at  least  as  a  bever- 
age, by  tiro!<h  in  Nehemiah's  age,  is  signif- 
icant. It  is  rendered  "  honey,"  and  is  in 
all  instances  except  one,  the  modern  Arar 
bic  dibs,  a  sauce  of  stewed  grapes  with  or 
without  the  skins,  though  usually  strained 
juice — the  same  juice  in  Judges  14 :  8,  9, 
18  being,  as  now  on  all  the  shores  of  the 
Mediterranean,  extracted  by  the  bee  in- 
stead of  man. 


Bible  Wines.] 


53 


[Bible  "Wines. 


The  term  ^lielcar,  strong  drink,  as  indi- 
cated specially  by  the  Greek  translation  of 
the  Old  Testament  made  two  and  a  half 
centuries  before  Christ  and  quoted  by  Him 
and  His  Apostles,  was  a  highly  intoxica- 
ting wine.  It  is  alluded  to  23  times  in  the 
Old  Testament.  (See  Lev.  9:  10;  IVum. 
6:  3;  28:  7;  Deut.  14:  26;  29:  6;  Judg. 
13:  4,  7,  14;  1  Sam.  1:  15;  Ps.  69:  12; 
Prov.  20:  1;  31:4,  6;  Isa.  5:  11,22;  24: 
!);  28:  7;  29:  9;  56:  12;  Mic.  2:  11.) 
The  corresponding  verb  shakar  is  used  19 
times.  (Gen.  9:21;  43:  34;  Deut.  32: 
42;  1  Sam.  1:  14;  2  Sam.  11:  13;  Cant. 
5:1;  Isa.  29:  9;  49:  26;  51:  21;  63:  6; 
Jer.  25:  27;  51:  7,  21,  39,  57;  Lam.  4: 
21;  Nah.  3:  11;  Hab.  2:  15;  Hag.  1:  6.) 
It  is  rendered  "  drunken,"  except  in  Cant. 
5 :  1,  where  it  is  rendered  correctly,  as  the 
connection  shows,  "'  drink  abundantly  " 
— a  meaning  confirmed  by  the  figurative 
use  in  Deut.  32  :  42.  Shekar  or  sikera  in 
Greek  is  found  only  once  (Luke  1 :  15)  in 
the  New  Testament  citation  from  the  Old 
Testament. 

The  term  cliomets,  derived  from  the 
verb  chamsts,  meaning  "  to  leaven,"  refers 
to  and  is  rendered  "vinegar" — French 
vin  gar  or  sour  wine— which  is  the  ulti- 
mate product  of  the  grape  Avhen  the  alco- 
hol of  transient  ferment  is  transformed 
into  acetic  acid.  It  is  found  five  times. 
(Num.  6:3;  Euth  2:  14;  Psa.  69:  21; 
Prov.  10 :  26 ;  25 :  20.)  The  verb  chamets 
is  found  eight  times,  and  is  rendered 
literally  "leavened"  in  Ex.  12:19,  20, 
34,  39,  and  Hos.  7 :  4,  but  is  figuratively 
rendered  "cruel"  in  Psa,  71:  4,  and 
"  grieved  "  in  Psa.  73 :  21 — mental  agita- 
tion acting  like  leaven-while  it  is  rendered 
"dyed"  in  Isa.  63:  1,  since  the  grape- 
juice  exposed  to  the  air  soon  becomes 
acetic  acid  or  vinegar.  The  noun  chamets, 
found  ten  times,  is  rendered  "leavened 
bread"  in  Ex.  12:  15;  13:  3,  7;  23:  18; 
Lev.  7:  13;  Deut.  16:  3;  and  "leaven" 
in  Ex.  34:25;  Lev.  2:11;  6:17;  23:17; 
Amos  4:  5,  this  latter  meaning  justifying 
the  conclusion  that  fermented  wine  as 
wfell  as  bread  Avas  excluded  from  the  He- 
brew festivals. 

The  two  terms  on  which  the  interpre- 
tation of  the  important  laws  and  precepts 
of  the  Old  Testament  as  to  the  use  of 
wine  turns,  both  as  a  beverage  and  at  re- 
ligious festivals,  are  tirosh  and  i/aj/in. 
Tirosh  is  usedi  38-  times.  (See  Gen.  27 : 
28,  37;  Num.  18:  12;  Deut.  7:  13;  11: 


14;  12:  17;  14:  23;  18:  4;  28:  51;  33: 
28;  Judg.  9:  13;  2  Kings  18:  32;  2 
Chron.31:5;  32:28;  Neh.  5:11;  10:37, 
39;  13:5,12;  Ps.  4:7;  Prov.  3:10;  Isa. 
24:  7;  36:  17;  62:  8;  65:8;  Jer.  31:12; 
Hos.  2:8,9,22;  4:11;  7:  14;  9:2;  Joel 
1:  10;  2:  19,24;  Mic.  0:15;  Hag.  1:11; 
Zech.  9:  17.) 

Tirosh  is  first  mentioned  by  the  En- 
glish word  "wine"  in  Isaac's  blessing,  Gen. 
27:  28,  37;  it  occurs  throughout  the  en- 
tire history  of  Israel,  and  is  specially  prom- 
inent at  two  eras  when  Israel  reached 
Canaan,  in  Nehemiah  and  in  the  prophets 
from  Isaiah  to  Zechariah.  The  entire  his- 
tory of  translations,  of  renderings  by  lexi- 
cographers and  of  Hebrew  and  Oriental 
Christian  commentators,  confirms  the  be- 
lief that  tirosh  is  unfermented  wine. 
Fuerst,  the  latest  and  best  archaeological 
lexicographer,  renders  \tn  n  gegorener  wein, 
"  unfermented  wine."  This  was  prepared, 
as  representations  to  the  life  on  Egyjitian 
tomb-walls  indicate,  by  drawing  off  from 
the  top  of  the  vat  through  a  strainer,  or 
in  a  twisted  sack,  the  sweet  watery  juice 
of  the  grapes,  dipping  it  at  once  into 
oiled  jars,  and  covering  it  with  a  film  of 
olive  oil — a  method  now  revived  and  em- 
ployed by  New  York  importers  from 
Italy  and  Spain.  This  method  was  tested 
in  February,  1881,  at  the  Columbia  Col- 
lege School  of  Mines,  New  York,  when 
strained  grape-juice  put  up  in  a  glass  phial 
covered  wdtli  olive  oil  in  October,  1879, 
was  found  not  to  have  the  least  trace  of 
alcoholic  fermentation.  The  only  excep- 
tion urged  in  modern  discussion  has  been 
based  on  the  interpretation  of  tirosh  in 
the  Greek  translation  of  Hos.  9:11  by  the 
word  methusma,  and  the  translation  in 
the  Latin  Vulgate  of  mdlmsma  by  ehrietas, 
or  partial  intoxication.  This  objection  is 
removed  by  the  statement  of  Stephanus 
in  his  Greek  Thesaurtis,  issued  at  Paris, 
1575.  Stephanus,  though  alioman  Catho- 
lic scholar,  correcting  tliis  translation, 
thus  declares:  ''Methusma  ebrietas  qui- 
dem  reddilur  in  VV LL;  sed  abs'/ue  ullo 
exeinplo  aut  nomine  auctoris—Mdl.ustia 
is  indeed  rendered  in  ancient  versions  by 
ehrietas,  but  without  any  example  or  the 
name  of  an  authority." 

The  other  mainly  important  Hebrew 
term  for  wine  is  yai/in,  used  no  less  than 
141  times.  (See^Gen.  9:  21,  24;  14:  18; 
19:  32,  33,  34,  35;  27:  25;  49:  11,  12; 
Ex.  29:40;  Lev.  10:  9;  23:13;  Num.6: 


Bible  Wines.] 


53 


[Bible  Wines. 


n,  4,  20;  15:  5,  7,  10;  28:  14;  Deut.  14: 
2G;  28:  39;  29:  6;  32:  33,  38;  Josh.  9: 
4,  13;  Judg.  13:  4,  7,  14;  19: 19;  1  Sam. 
1:  14,  15,  24;  10:  3;  16:  20;  25:  18,  37; 
2  Sam.  13:  28;  16:  1,  2;  1  Chron.  9:  29; 
12:  40;  27:  27;  2  Chron.  2:  10,  15;  11: 
11;  Neh.  2:1;  5:15,18;  13:15;  Esther 
1:  7,  10;  5:  6;  7:  2,- 7,  8;  Job.  1:  13,18; 
32:  19;  Ps.  60:  3;  75:  8;  78:  65;  104: 
15;  Prov.  4:  17;  9:  2,  5;  20:  1;  21:  17; 
23:20,30,31;  31:4,6;  Eccl.  2:  3;  9:7; 
10:  19;  Cant.  1:  2,  4;  2:  4;  4:  10;  5:  1; 
7:  9;  8:  2;  Isa.  5:11,  12,22;  16:10;  23: 
13;  24:  9,  11;  28:  1,7;  29:  9;  51:21;  55: 
1;  56:  12;  Jer.  13:  12;  23:9;  25:15;  35: 
2,  5,  6,  8,  14;  40:  10,  12;  48:  33;  51:  7; 
Lam.  2:  12;  Ezek.  27:  18;  44:  21;  Dan. 
1:5,8,  16;  10:3;  Hos.  4:11;  7:  5;  9:4; 
14:  7;  Joel  1:  5;  3:3;  Amos.  2:  8,  12;  5: 
11;  6:6;  9:  14;  Mic.  2r  11;  6:15;  Hab. 
2:5;  Zeph.  1:13;  Hag.  2 :  12 ;  Zech.  9 : 
15;  10:7.)  1^(7 //i;?,  in  fact,  like  "  wine  " 
in  English,  is  the  generic  term  covering 
all  kinds  of  wine,  whose  varieties  are  indi- 
cated specially  in  the  age  of  Solomon  and 
in  his  three  inspired  books.  As  all  lexi- 
cographers allow,  yayin  is  cognate  with 
Greek  oinos,  Latin  vinum,  Italian  and 
Spanish  vino,  French  vin,  German  wein 
and  English  "  wine." 

The  proofs  that  yayin  was  a  term  cov- 
ering all  kinds  of  wine  are  these :  First, 
It  is  not  found  in  any  of  the  languages 
of  the  Hebrew  or  Semitic  family,— ancient 
Chaldee,  Aramaean  or  modern  Syriac  and 
Arabic.  Second,  The  family  of  Abraham 
in  Canaan  were  brought  into  contact  with 
Phoenecian  and  Egyptian  trade,  carried 
on  with  all  the  nations  bordering  on  the 
Mediterranean  from  Greece  westward ;  so 
that  yayin  was  introduced  among  the 
Hebrews  alone  of  the  Semitic  family, 
alike  in  the  days  of  Abraham,  of  Moses, 
of  Solomon  and  of  Joel;  and  Joel,  800 
years  before  Christ  and  only  700  years 
after  Moses,  alludes  (3:6)  to  commerce 
with  the  "  Grecians  "  as  an  ancient  traflfic. 
Third,  The  term  yayin  manifestly  in- 
cludes firosh,asa,  single  palpable  instance 
proves.  In  Num.  18:  12  Moses  ordains 
that  offerings  for  the  use  of  the  Levites 
and  Tabernacle  service  shall  be  in  quality 
of  clieleh  tirosli,  or  fresh  unfermented 
wine;  the  word  clieleh  being  now  used  by 
Arab  servants  in  asking  for  "  fresh  "  milk, 
meat  or  any  perishable  article  of  food. 
Again,  in  Num.  28:14,  where  the  cjuantity, 
not  the  quality  of  the  drink  is  made  prom- 


inent, it  is  said  that  it  shall  be  "  half  a 
hin  of  yayin."  Every  Jurist  interpreting 
this  book  of  law,  as  many  like  Grotius  in 
ages  past  have  done,  would  rule  that  tlie 
specific  statute  as  to  quality  cannot  be  set 
aside  by  the  general  statute  as  to  quantity. 
The  accumulated  proofs  that  yayin  is  not 
restricted  to  intoxicating  wine,  but  that, 
like  its  cognate  terms  oinos,  vinnin,  vino, 
vin.  ivein,  and  loine,  in  all  ancient  and 
modern  languages,  it  is  used  for  wines  of 
every  character,  is  made  demonstrable  in 
this  example.  That  yayin,  in  tlie  follow- 
ing passages,  does  not  refer  to  intoxica- 
ting wine,  but  as  in  Num.  28:  14  to  an 
unintoxicating  product  of  the  grape,  is 
shown  by  the  context,  by  the  associated 
history  and  by  the  testimony  of  the  ablest 
commentators  in  successive  ages.  The 
wine  of  Gen.  14:  18  cannot  be  that  of  9: 
21,  this  incident  being  regarded  as  pre- 
figuring the  Passover  and  Lord's  Supper. 
The  washing  of  garments  in  yayin,  Gen. 
49 :  11,  is  parallel  to  the  use  of  chamets  in 
Isa.  63:  1.  The  association  of  ?/a//?'/i  with 
fresh  products  of  the  field  (as  in  1  Chron. 
9:  29;  12:40;  27:  27;  2  Chron.  2:  15; 
Neh.  13:  15;  Jer.  40:.  10,  12;  Lam.  2:  12; 
Hag.  2 :  12)  has  always  attested  to  Hebrew 
and  Christian  scholars  a  fresh  product  of 
the  grape.  The  store  of  "  all  sorts  of 
yayin"  (Neh.  5  :  18)  is  a  declaration  as 
palpable  in  Hebrew  as  in  Italian,  French 
or  English,  that  yayin  covers  every  va- 
riety of  wine.  The  terms  used  with  yayin 
(Psa.  104 :  15),  as  well  as  its  association 
with  oil  and  bread,  have  led  both  Hebrew 
and  Christian  commentators  to  the  assur- 
ance that  an  unintoxicating  wine  is  re- 
ferred to.  The  purity  of  the  youthful 
affection  pictured  in  Canticles,  the  poem 
of  Solomon's  true,  early  love,  the  country 
life  pictured  among  vineyards,  as  well  as 
laws  of  interpretation,  have  restrained  in 
all  ages  the  thought  that  intoxicating  wine 
is  referred  to  in  the  mention  of  yayin 
seven  times  in  this  "  Song  of  Songs  which 
is  Solomon's."  The  heaven-wide  contrast 
between  yayin  in  Isa.  55  :  1  and  in  28  : 1 ; 
56:12,  has  never  permitted  any  interjoreter 
to  regard  the  wine  referred  to  as  the  same. 
The  failing  of  yayin  (Jer.  48:  33)  is  cer- 
tainly the  failing  of  the  harvest  of  grape- 
clusters.  The  yayin  which  Daniel  re- 
fused (1:  5,  8)  certainly  is  not  the  yayin 
which  he  drank  as  an  ordinary  beverage 
(10:  8)  except  during  his  fast. 
In  the  English  version  of  the  New  Tes- 


Bible  Wines.] 


54 


[Bible  Wines. 


tament,  the  term  "  wine  "  occurs  44  times 
— 21  times  unassociated,  ten  times  witli 
"new,"  twice  with  "good,"  three  times 
with  "oil,"  five  times  with  "press,"  once 
with  "  fat"  or  "  vat,"  twice  in  the  com- 
pound word  "wine-bibber,"  and  once  in 
"  excess  of  wine."  The  Greek  term  for 
wine,  with  a  single  exception,  in  all  cases 
used  in  the  inspired  New  Testament,  is 
oiuos  ;  this  term  covering,  as  do  all  its 
cognate  terms  in  other  languages,  every 
varietij  of  wine.  It  occurs  uncompounded 
33  times ;  eight  times  associated  with  neos, 
"new,"  and  twice  with  kalos,  rendered 
"good;"  once  associated  with  lenos, 
"press;  "  also  three  times  in  compounds, 
in  oinopotes  ("  wine-bibber  "),  and  once  in 
ohiophlugia  ("excess  of  wine").  In  the 
English  version  the  term  rendered  "  new 
wine"  (Acts  2:  13)  is  gleukos,  or  a  drink 
grape-syrup;  the  term  lenon,  rendered 
"wine-press,"  has  the  Greek  oinon  only 
in  Rev.  19:  15;  and  the  term  rendered 
"wine-vat"  (Mark  12:  1)  is  hypolenion. 

The  fact  that  oinos  covers  every  variety 
of  wine  is  (Remonstrated:  First,  from 
usage  in  classic  Greek ;  second,  from  the 
Greek  translation  used  by  Christ  and  his 
apostles,  in  which  tirosli,  which  had  no 
intoxicating  element,  is  generally  rendered 
•by  oinos;  third,  from  Latin  terms  used  in 
allusion  to  unfermented  wines  described 
by  Roman  writers  from  Cato  (B.  C.  200) 
to  Pliny  (A.  D.  100) ;  fonrth,  from  the 
usage  of  Mark,  who,  writing  for  Romans 
familiar  with  their  own  unfermented 
wines,  calls  the  beverage  offered  to  Christ 
when  nailed  to  the  cross  oinos  (15:  23), 
while  Matthew  uses  the  term  oxos,  still 
called  in  French  vin-gar,  sour  wine; 
though  in  vinegar,  the  last  natural  and 
divinely-ordered  product  of  grape-juice, 
the  alcohol  developed  in  the  temporary 
process  of  fermentation  is  converted  into 
acetic  acid. 

The  application  of  these  attested  facts 
and  principles  to  the  divine  precepts  con- 
cerning wine  used  as  a  beverage,  as  a  medi- 
cine and  as  a  symbol  in  religious  rites, 
may  be  concisely  stated.  (1)  The  error 
of  Noah  (Gen.  9:  20-27)  and  its  influence 
on  his  three  sons  is  universally  traced  by 
Hebrew  and  early  Christian  writers  in 
Palestine  and  the  East  to  the  specially 
significant  statement  of  Moses,  in  har- 
mony with  all  his  history  from  Eden  to 
Egypt — "  Noah  began  to  be  a  husband- 
man ; "  inexperience,  guarded  by  no  such 


express  command  like  that  given  to  Adam 
the  first  head  of  the  human  race,  being 
the  natural  and  excusable  cause  of  the  fall 
of  the  second  head  of  the  human  race. 
(2)  The  second  stage  in  this  history  of 
Moses,  "learned  in  all  the  wisdom  of 
Egypt,"  has  led  to  statements  from  an- 
cient Hebrew  and  Christian  equally  well 
attested,  that  in  the  age  when  unfermented 
wine,  known  to  Moses  in  Egypt,  had  re- 
ceived the  specific  name  tirosli  used  by 
Isaac  (Gen.  27:  28,  37)  it  was  also  the 
yagin  brought  forth  by  Melchizedek  to 
Abraham  (Gen.  15:  18);  the  same  writers 
seeing  in  this  a  precursor  of  the  Passover 
and  Lord's  Supper  provision.  (3)  The 
fall  of  Lot  through  the  temptation  of  his 
erring  daughters,  recognized  as  parallel  to 
that  of  Eve  (Gen.  19:  34,  35),  is  as  univer- 
sally attested  to  have  been  the  point  of 
contrast  between  two  kinds  of  wine,  since 
the  "  vine  "  is  not  affected  on  the  hills  of 
Sodom  by  other  causes  than  in  the  neigh- 
boring valley  of  Eshcol  (Deut.  32:  32,  33, 
38),  one  kind  being  used  by  pure  men 
like  Melchizedek,  and  an  opposite  kind 
by  the  debauched  in  Sodom.  (4)  The 
life  of  Joseph  in  Egypt  brings  out  the 
fact,  before  his  day  inscribed  on  the  tomb- 
walls  of  Egypt,  with  whose  scenes  in  real 
life  Moses  was  familiar  when  he  wrote  of 
the  fresh  grape-cluster  pressed  into  Pha- 
raoh's cup  (Gen.  40:  11,  13).  (5)  It  is 
significant  that  when  the  second  Passover 
was  observed  at  Mt.  Sinai  (Num.  9:  5)  it 
was  in  accord  with  the  prospective  direc- 
tion that  it  was  to  be  annually  observed 
only  when  they  came  into  the  Land  of 
Promise  (Ex.  12:  24-27;  Lev.  23:  9-14); 
that  at  the  second  observance  the  people 
had  still  stores  brought  out  of  Egypt 
(Ex.  12:  36;  Lev.  7:  1-80;  9:  3),  after 
which  no  Passover  was  or  could  be  observed 
till  they  had  entered  into  the  land  of 
wheat  and  of  the  vine  (Josh.  5 :  10,  11). 
(G)  It  is  yet  more  significant  that  imme- 
diately preceding  the  observance  of  this 
second  Passover,  the  law  for  the  Nazarites, 
who  never  drank  intoxicating  wine,  as 
did  not  the  Egyptian  priests  with  Avhom 
they  had  been  associated  for  generations, 
is  given ;  that  law  exempting  them  from 
the  extreme  vow  of  tasting  nothing  made 
from  the  grape,  though  in  the  days  of 
Samson,  of  Samuel,  of  Elijah,  of  Jere- 
miah, of  Daniel  and  of  devout  Jews  after 
Clirist's  coming,  abstinence  from  intoxi- 
cating wine  was  required.    (Num.  G  :  3,  4, 


Bible  Wines.] 


55 


[Bible  Wines. 


13;  Judg.  13:  4,  7,  14;  1  Sam.  1:  11,  15; 
Jer.  35  :  1,  19 ;  Dan.  1:8;  10  :  3 ;  Luke  1 : 
15;  Acts  21:  2^20.)  (?)  It  is  yet  more  to 
be  carefully  and  conscientiously  noted, 
that  it  was  directly  after  this  law  for  the 
Nazarites,  and  when  these  gifts  from  re- 
served stores  for  the  second  Passover  were 
exhausted,  that  the  spies  entered  Canaan 
and  brought  from  Eshcol  the  clustered 
grapes;  on  which  palpable  occasion  the 
special  law  as  to  the  quality  of  wine  offer- 
ings, now  indicated  as  possible  when  they 
should  come  into  that  land  of  the  vine, 
was  written ;  soon  after  which  the  general 
statute  as  to  quantity  was,  in  the  same 
connection,  added  by  Moses  (Num.  13:  23, 
24;  IS:  12;  28:  14).  That  law  as  to  the 
quality  of  wine-off'ering  to  be  brought,  for 
the  priests'  use  as  well  as  for  the  public 
festivals,  requires  that  it  be  chcleh  tirosli; 
the  English,  like  other  versions,  making 
the  word  clieh'^  an  adjective,  as  does  Faerst 
in  his  Lexicon;  cheleb  in  modern  Arabic 
meaning  "  fresh "  as  applied  to  milk, 
etc. 

A  clear  light  is  thus,  by  this  meaning 
of  yayin,  cast  on  the  writings  of  David, 
Solomon  and  the  prophets,  who  con- 
demned always  the  use  of  intoxicating 
wine  and  commended  the  simple  "  cup  " 
of  the  country  laborers,  which  was  the 
fresh  grape-juice  now  pressed  into  the 
"  overrunning  cup  "  in  Southern  France, 
Spain,  and  Italy,  and  also  brought  now 
fresh  and  unfermented  from  Mediterra- 
nean ports  to  New  York.  The  reader  has 
only  to  contrast  the  statements  of  the 
vsame  writers  to  see  this  truth  demonstrat- 
ed, comparing  Psalm  75:  8  with  23:  5 
and  104:  15;  again  Prov.  20:  1  and  23: 
29,  31  with  Cant.  5:  1  and  7:  9;  again, 
Dan.  1 :  5  with  10:  3 ;  again,  Neh.  2 :  1 
with  5:18  and  13 :  15 ;  a  contrast  which 
the  wayfaring  man  sees,  and,  if  pure  in 
heart,  he  heeds. 

There  is  but  one  plain  allusion  in  the 
Old  Testament  to  wine  used  as  a  medicine 
(Prov.  31  :G),  and  this  is  in  perfect  accord 
with  the  laws  of  the  priests  of  Egypt  and 
of  India,  with  both  of  which  Solomon 
had  commerce;  intoxicating  wine  being 
used  only,  as  afterwards  among  the 
Greeks  and  Romans,  to  produce  stupe- 
faction and  rest  to  the  nerves  in  acute 
pain,  as  in  strangury,  and  as  an  anaes- 
thetic in  surgical  operations,  when  dead- 
ness  to  sensibility  was  necessary.  In  the 
New  Testament  it  is  inconceivable  that 


Jesus  should,  in  example  and  precept, 
have  been  behind  the  law  of  Greeks  and 
of  Roman  moralists  in  his  use  and  teach- 
ings as  to  intoxicating  wine;  as  it  is  in- 
conceivable that  he  should  have  appoint- 
ed for  his  Supper  a  wine  that  would  have 
excluded  from  his  church  his  chosen 
forerunner.  The  five  incidents  of  Christ's 
life  and  teachings,  which  attest  Christ's 
law  as  to  wines,  are  among  the  clearest 
in  the'  New  Testament,  being  especially 
explained  by  Christian  writers  from  the 
2d  to  the  Gth  centuries.  First,  The 
wine  which  He  made  for  the  wed- 
ding (Jno.  2 ,  10)  is  by  divine  guidance 
ruling  the  writer  Jolm,  as  well  as  in  the 
statement  of  the  governor  of  the  feast, 
which  John  heard,  designated  as  kalon. 
The  same  word  is  distinctively  applied  by 
Christ  to  fruit  (Matt.  7:1G,  20);  Jesus 
with  manifest  design  using  the  term 
agatlion,  "  permanently  good,"  as  applied 
to  the  tree,  but  the  word  Icalon,  "beauti- 
ful," for  the  fruit,  which  is  good  only 
when  fresh  and  unaffected  by  decay.  The 
inspired  disciples  of  Jesus,  therefore, 
manifestly  recognized  that  as  fruit-juice 
unexpressed,  so  fruit-juice  expressed  is 
good  only  when  fresh.  Second,  The 
"  new  wine  "  preserved  in  "  new  bottles  " 
(Matt.  9 :  17  and  Mark  2 :  22),  in  which 
the  term  "new"  is  necessarily  added  to 
both  wine  and  bottles  for  the  contrast,  is 
an  attestation  of  the  existence  and  use  of 
oiled-skin  bottles,  as  Origen  states;  which 
oiled  skins  preserved  wine  from  ferment. 
Third,  The  charge  that  Jesus  was  a 
"wine-bibber"  (Matt.  11:  19  and  Luke 
7:  34)  is  united  with  three  other  charges, 
recognized  as  calumnies,  namely,  tuat  ho 
was  "  gluttonous,"  "  avaricious"  and 
"  licentious ; "  calumnies  revived  by  Mar- 
cion,  the  apostate,  in  the  2d  century, 
and  from  that  day  in  every  age  fully  an- 
swered. Fourth,  The  provision  for  the 
communion  of  the  Lord's  Supper  is  never 
alluded  to  as  "wine,"  but  as  the  "cup," 
both  of  the  Hebrew  Passover  and  of 
Christian  communion.  It  is  significantly 
designated  as  the  "  fruit  of  the  vine," 
figuratively  and  literally  "new,"  to  be 
drunk  in  Christ's  coming  kingdom ;  all  of 
which  statements  are  declared  by  early 
Christian  writers  as  making  it  clear  that 
the  unfermented  wine  of  the  Passover  is 
to  be  that  of  the  communion  (Matt. 
20:27,29;  Mark  14:23,  25  and  Luke 
22 :  17,  18, 20) ;  whose  special  significance. 


Black,  James.] 


56 


[Black,  James. 


as  the  early  Christian  writers  note,  is 
emphasized  by  Christ's  aHusion  to  himself 
as  the  "  vine  "  (John  15 : 1),  from  which 
the  pure  •'  fruit  of  the  vine,"  alike  in  the 
cup  and  its  symbol,  flows  for  man.  Fifth, 
The  refusal  by  Christ  of  a  palliative  at 
the  commencement  of  his  agony  on  the 
cross,  and  its  reception  only  when  he  was 
expiring,  to  which  is  added  the  statement 
that  this  palliative  called  oinos,  ''  wine," 
by  Mark,  was  oxos,  "  vinegar,"  as  stated 
by  Matthew  and  John,  who  were  eye- 
witnesses. These  cumulative  and  com- 
bined statements  have  in  all  ages  led  to 
the  recognition  of  this  double  fact :  (1)  that 
the  wine  Christ  drank  in  life  Avas  the  pure 
fruit  of  the  vine;  and  {'I)  that  even  the 
unintoxicating  palliative  was  refused 
that  his  suffering  might  be  perfect. 

There  are  only  two  allusions  to  wine  in 
the  apostolic  writings  requiring  notice. 
The  first  is  Paul's  allusion  to  the  Corin- 
thian feast  made  to  precede  the  Lord's 
Supper  (1  Cor.  11:  21-26),  in  which 
the  term  wine  is  not  used,  while  the 
Greek  term  m.etliuo,  in  English  rendered 
"  drunken,"  is  opposed  to  "  hungry," 
referring  to  the  food,  not  to  the  drink 
provided ;  and  it  means  simply  "  gorged." 
The  second  noteworthy  allusion  is  to 
medicinal  wine  (1  Tim.  5 :  23) ;  which 
wine,  as  Greek  medical  writers  from  Hip- 
pocrates to  Galen  state,  and  as  French 
medical  writers  now  note,  was  made  from 
fresh  unfermented  juice  of  the  grape. 

G.  W.  Samson. 

Black,  James,  the  first  candidate  of 
the  Prohibition  party  for  President  of 
the  United  States.  He  was  born  in  Lewis- 
burg,  Pa.,  Sept.  23, 1823.  He  lived  upon 
a  farm  until  12  years  of  age,  occasionally 
working  as  a  canal-driver  during  the 
summer  months.  Removing  with  his 
parents  to  Lancaster,  Pa.,  in  1836,  he 
found  employment  in  a  sawmill  and 
earned  enough  to  engage  a  private 
teacher  to  give  him  instruction  during 
the  winter.  Two  years  later  he  entered 
the  Lancaster  High  School.  In  1839,  at 
the  age  of  16,  he  Joined  an  engineer 
corps  at  work  upon  the  Susquehanna  and 
Tide- Water  Canal,  and  his  savings  ena- 
bled him  in  1841  to  enter  the  Lewisburg 
Academy,  which  he  attended  for  three 
years.  In  1844  he  began  the  study  of  the 
law,  and  in  1846  was  admitted  to  practice 
at  the   bar  in   Lancaster,  where  he  has 


since  resided.  His  success  in  his  profes- 
sion and  in  other  pursuits  has  placed  him 
in  comfortable  circumstances.  When  a 
lad  of  16  years  he  was  associated  with 
drinking  engineers.  He  was  once  intox- 
icated, but  that  experience  was  sufficient 
to  make  him  a  total  abstainer  for  the 
remainder  of  his  life,  and  a  radical  tem- 
perance worker.  In  1840  he  Joined  the 
Washingtonians,  the  first  temperance 
organization  in  his  neighborhood.  In 
1846  he  helped  to  institute  a  division  of 
the  Sons  of  Temperance.  Prominent  in 
the  "  Maine  law  "  Prohibitory  movement 
of  1852  in  Pennsylvania,  Mr.  Black  was 
that  year  elected  Chairman  of  the  Lan- 
caster County  Prohibition  Committee  by 
a  convention  of  men  determined  to  carry 
the  temperance  question  into  politics  and 
secure  a  State  Prohibitory  law  like 
Maine's.  A  temperance  legislative  ticket 
having  been  nominated,  Mr.  Black,  a  few 
days  later,  made  his  first  public  Prohibi- 
tion speech.  It  was  large^  due  to  Mr. 
Black's  personal  efforts  that  the  Maine 
law  movement  became  popular  in  Lan- 
caster County  and  resulted,  in  1855,  in 
the  election  of  two  of  the  five  temperance 
legislative  candidates.  Besides  making 
speeches  and  writing  for  the  cause,  Mr. 
Black  sometimes  contributed  as  much  as 
$500  yearly  to  it. 

The  Anti-Slavery  agitation  about  this 
time,  and  the  Civil  War  a  little  later,  in- 
terrupted the  temperance  work  and  en- 
gaged the  attention  and  interest  of  Mr. 
Black.  He  aided  in  organizing  the  Re- 
publican party  in  Pennsylvania,  and  was 
a  delegate  to  the  first  National  Conven- 
ton  of  that  party  in  1856.  He  was  a  Re- 
publican in  politics  until  the  formation 
at  Chicago  in  September,  1869,  of  the 
National  Prohibition  party.  He  was 
chosen  Permanent  President  of  this  body. 
At  the  new  party's  Columbus  (0.)  Con- 
vention, in  February,  1872,  Mr.  Black 
was  nominated  as  its  candidate  for  Pres- 
ident of  the  United  States,  and  in  the 
election  that  followed  he  received  5,608 
votes.  For  the  four  years  from  1876  to 
1880  he  was.  Chairman  of  the  National 
Committee  of  the  Prohibition  party. 

He  has  also  been  an  active  temperance 
worker  outside  strict  party  lines.  He 
was  one  of  the  founders  of  the  National 
Temperance  Society  and  Publication 
House.  In  a  paper  read  in  a  National 
Convention  held  at  Saratoga,  in  1865,  he 


Blue  Ribbon  Movements.] 


57 


[Brewing. 


presented  the  plan  of  this  society,  and  he 
afterwards  prepared  its  charter,  constitu- 
tion, by-hiws,  rules  of  publication,  etc., 
and  was  Chairman  of  the  Committee 
appointed  to  secure  a  capital  of  $100,000 
as  a  basis  of  operations.  Having  identi- 
fied himself  with  the  Good  Templars  in 
1858,  two  years  later  Mr.  Black  was 
elected  Grand  Worthy  Chief  Templar  of 
Pennsylvania,  a  position  which  he  held 
for  four  successive  years.  In  1864  he 
prepared  and  presented  to  President  Lin- 
coln a  memorial  for  the  abolition  of  the 
whiskey  rations  in  the  United  States 
army.  Mr.  Black's  '  Cider  Tract "  caused 
the  Good  Templars  to  declare  against  the 
use  of  cider  as  a  beverage.  Prominent  as 
a  layman  in  the  Methodist  E;jiscopal 
Church,  he  was  one  of  the  26  who  in  1869 
organized  the  Ocean  Grove  Camp  Meet- 
ing Association,  under  whose  auspices 
one  of  the  most  delightful  seaside  resorts 
of  the  country  is  conducted. 

Mr.  Black  owns  probably  the  largest 
collection  of  temperance  literature  con- 
tained in  any  private  library  in  the  world, 
about  1,"300  volumes  being  included  in  it. 
Among  the  works  published  by  him  are 
a  pamphlet  entitled,  "  Is  there  a  Neces- 
sity for  a  Prohibition  Party?"  (1875); 
"Brief  History  of  Prohibition"  (1880), 
and  "  History  of  the  Prohibition  Party  " 
(1885). 

Blue  Ribbon  Movements. — A  dis- 
tinguishing feature  of  many  of  the  move- 
ments for  the  reformation  of  drinking 
men  has  been  the  bit  of  ribbon,  generally 
blue  or  red,  worn  by  the  reformed  men 
and  others  interested.  The  red  ribbon 
was  adopted  by  Dr.  Henry  A.  Reynolds, 
Sept.  10,  1874,  as  the  badge  of  the  Ban- 
gor (Me.)  Reform  Club,  which  he  organ- 
ized at  that  time,  and  which,  consisting 
of  reformed  drinking  men,  was  the  first 
club  of  its  kind  ever  formed.  Through- 
out the  remarkable  pledge-signing  cam- 
paigns that  followed  in  Massachusetts, 
Connecticut,  New  Hampshire,  Rhode  Is- 
land, Mighigan,  Illinois  and  other  States, 
Dr.  Reynolds  made  the  red  ribbon  the 
sign  of  membership  in  the  clubs  he  start- 
ed, and  they  came  to  be  known  as  Red 
Ribbon  Reform  Clubs.  The  white  ribbon 
was  adopted  by  Dr.  Reynolds  in  connec- 
tion with  the  red,  the  former  to  be  worn 
by  women  and  by  young  men  under  18. 
The  white  ribbon  is  also  worn  by  all  ladies 


of  the  Woman's  Christian  Temperance 
Union.  But  the  blue  ribbon  has  been 
associated  with  temperance  reform  move- 
ments more  extensively  than  any  other 
badge.  It  was  adopted  by  Francis  Mur- 
phy, and  has  been  donned  by  very  many 
thousands  in  this  country  Avliom  he  has 
induced  to  sign  the  pledge. 

The  idea  was  borrowed  in  England. 
On  Feb.  10,  1878,  a  conference  of  tem- 
perance workers  was  held  in  London  and 
a  total  abstinence  campaign  was  deter- 
mined on.  A  central  mission  was  to  be 
established  in  London  with  town  organ- 
izations in  the  provinces  as  the  work 
spread.  The  blue  ribbon  was  chosen, 
and  the  "Blue  Ribbon  Army"  was 
adopted  as  the  name  of  the  organization. 
Mr.  William  Noble,  who  took  a  promi- 
nent part  in  the  inauguration  of  this 
work,  had  recently  returned  from  a  visit 
to  the  United  States,  where  he  had  seen 
something  of  the  methods  employed  in 
the  Muiphy  and  Reynolds  movements. 
Pledge-cards  were  issued  and  scattered 
throughout  the  British  Empire,  and  du- 
ring the  years  since  they  have  been  trans- 
lated into  several  languages,  and  have 
found  their  way  into  various  countries  of 
Europe,  into  Africa  and  the  Sandwich 
Islands.  More  than  1,000,000  pledges 
have  been  officially  issued,  in  addition  to 
the  ]3ledges  issued  by  independent  work- 
ers co-operating  with  the  movement.  A 
change  in  the  name  from  "Blue  Ribbon 
Army"  to  "Blue  Ribbon  Gospel  Tem- 
perance Movement "  has  been  made,  and 
several  branch  organizations,  such  as  the 
"Help-Myself  Society  "among  men,  and 
the  "'  Help-One- Another  Society  "  among 
women,  have  grown  out  of  the  original 
movement.^ 

Brandy. — See  Spirituous  Liquors. 

Brewing. — The  process  of  changing 
grains  or  fruits  to  fermented  liquor.  It 
has  been  known  and  practised  from  very 
early  times.  The  process  of  brewing  beer 
involves  two  chief  operations : 

I.  Producing  the  Malt. — This  includes 
four  successive  steps:  (1)  Steeping  the 
grain  in  water  for  two  or  three  days,  to 
swell  and  soften  it.  (2)  Concliing  or 
throwing  swollen  grain  into  a  large  heap 
where,  in  one  or  two  days,  it  will  sweat 


1  The  editor  is  indebted  to  Mr.  William  Noble  for  par- 
ticulars of  the  Blue  Ribbon  work  in  Great  Britain. 


Briggs,  George  N.] 


58 


[Brcoks,  John  Anderson. 


and  begin  to  germinate.  (3)  Flooring, 
or  spreading  it  to  an  even  depth  of  12  to 
16  inches,  to  favor  more  rapid  germina- 
tion. It  is  sometimes  stirred  with  shovels 
and  spread  over  a  wider  surface,  to  pre- 
vent unequal  heating  and  too  rapid 
growth.  This  stage  requires  two  or  three 
weeks.  (4)  Kihi-dn/imj,  or  spreading  it 
from  4  to  10  inches  thick  on  a  stone  or 
metallic  floor,  perforated  and  made  so  hot 
as  to  kill  the  grain-germ  and  check  fur- 
ther growth.  The  starch  has  now  been 
changed  to  sugar.  The  process  is  called 
"  malting,"  and  the  grain  is  called 
*'malt."" 

2.  Brewing  the  Malt. — Six  distinct 
operations  are  involved:  (1)  Crushing 
the  malt  between  two  iron  cylinders.  (2) 
Mashing,  or  mixing  the  crushed  material 
with  warm  water,  to  extract  the  saccha- 
rine matter.  The  mixture  is  now  called 
"sweet  wort."  (3)  Boiling  the  wovt  with 
hops,  the  object  being  to  convert  any 
residuary  starch  into  sugar,  and  to  ex- 
tract from  the  hops  certain  elements  which 
give  the  liquor  a  bitter  flavor  and  tend  to 
preserve  it.  (4)  Cooling  the  wort,  which 
must  be  done  very  rapidly  to  prevent 
acidity.  (5)  Fermenting  the  liquid, 
drawn  off  into  vats  of  various  kinds,  and 
kept  at  a  temperature  of  GO"  to  70°  F.  To 
produce  fermentation,  from  1  to  1^  per 
cent,  of  yeast  is  added.  (6)  Clearing  and 
storing.  Impurities  are  carried  off 
through  an  orifice  left  at  the  top  for  that 
purpose.  The  resulting  liquid  is  beer, 
ready  now  to  be  stored  in  oaken  barrels. 

Briggs,  George  N. — Born  in  Adams, 
Mass.,  April  13, 1796;  died  Sept.  12, 1861. 
He  was  of  humble  parentage,  and  in  his 
youth  served  an  apprenticeship  to  a  hat- 
maker.  As  Governor  of  Massachusetts 
from  1844  to  1851,  J^is  whole  influence 
was  exercised  to  promote  total  abstinence, 
and  no  liquors  were  given  to  his  guests. 
While  in  Congress  he  became  President 
of  the  Congressional  Temperance  Society. 

British  Columbia. — See  Canada. 

British  Women's  Temperance 
Association.— This  Association  was 
founded  by  a  conference  of  ladies  at 
Newcastle-on-Tyne,  April  21,  1876.  The 
purpose  of  the  conference  was  to  effect  a 
federation  of  all  women's  temperance  or- 
ganizations based  on  total  abstinence,  it 
being  believed  that  by  such  united  effert 


more  could  be  accomplished  to  promote 
temperance  and  suppress  the  liquor  traf- 
fic. The  Association  is  entirely  unsec- 
tarian,  and  welcomes  all  women  who  will 
accept  its  simple  pledge  and  work  for  the 
common  cause.  An  annual  business  meet- 
ing is  held  every  May  in  London,  and  an 
autumnal  meeting  in  some  provincial 
town.  Organizing  agents  are  engaged  in 
forming  new  brandies  and  encouraging 
old  ones.  The  oflicial  organ  of  the  Asso- 
ciation is  the  British  Won/en's  Ihnperance 
Journal  ( London  >,  published  monthly  at 
one  penny  a  copy.  Among  the  other 
publications  are  the  Non-Alcohoha  Cookery 
Book,  and  a  wall-card  of  "  Simple  Kem- 
edies,"  both  intended  to  show  that  alcohol 
is  equally  unnecessary  in  food  and  medi- 
cine. The  Association  has  sent  numerous 
petitions  to  Parliament  for  the  repeal  of 
licenses  and  the  concession  of  Sunday- 
closing,  and  has  also  urged  clergymen  to 
use  unfermented  wine  for  sacramental 
purposes.  Tlie  local  branches  are  en- 
gaged in  all  forms  of  beneficient  endeavor, 
and  "-.he  work  done  by  them  includes  the 
cultivation  of  total  abstinence  sentiment 
and  practice  through  gospel  temperance 
missions,  public  meetings,  medical  lec- 
tures, drawing-room  meetings,  garden 
parties,  meetings  in  young  ladies'  schools. 
Bands  of  Hope  and  other  societies  for  the 
young,  cottage  and  factory  meetings,  sew- 
ing classes,  tract  distribution,  etc.  The 
branches  also  make  appeals  to  magistrates 
at  the  annual  licensing  sessions.  Several 
homes  for  intemperate  women  have  been 
established.  The  thirteenth  annual  re- 
port (for  the  year  ending  April  30,  1889) 
shows  a  total  of  409  affiliated  societies, 
with  a  membership  of  about  30,000,  all 
officered  and  conducted  by  women.  The 
gross  receipts  for  the  year  were 
£708  lis.  7d.  Mrs.  Margaret  Bright 
(See   Lucas,  Margaret  Bright.) 

Brooks,  John  Anderson,  the  fifth 
candidate  of  the  Prohibition  party  for 
Vice-President  of  the  United  States,  born 
in  Germantown,  Ky.,  June  3,  1836.  His 
father  was  of  Irish  and  Welsh  descent, 
and  combined  the  occupations  of  farmer, 
lawyer  and  preacher,  but  derived  from 
them  only  a  meagre  support.  Despite  the 
disadvantages  of  his  early  years  the  boy 
was  resolved  to  rise.  AVhen  12  years  old 
he  joined  a  debating  society,  and  soon 
became  a  proficient  speaker.     At  16  he 


Brooks,  John  Anderson.] 


59 


[Burmah. 


made  temperance  speeches.  At  the  age 
of  17  he  entered  Bethany  College,  and 
three  years  later  (185())  he  graduated 
with  honors.  While  in  college  he  partici- 
pated in  the  heated  discussions  of  the 
slavery  issue,  taking  the  view  that  the 
negro  was  an  inferior  being  and  cham- 
pioning slavery  and  the  customs  and  tra- 
ditions of  the  South.  But  he  advocated 
free  speech  and  honorable  treatment  of 
opponents,  and  on  one  occasion  risked  his 
life  to  rescue  an  Abolitionist  from  a  pro- 
slavery  mob.  Althougli  he  had  looked 
forward  to  fitting  himself  for  the  legal 
profession,  he  decided,  after  his  conver- 
sion to  Christianity  under  the  preaching 
of  Alexander  Campbell,  to  enter  the  min- 
istry, and  accordingly  he  became  a  clergy- 
man of  the  sect  known  as  Christians  or 
Disciples.  He  began  his  work  in  his 
native  town,  and  for  several  years  after- 
wards was  engaged  in  successful  evangel- 
istic labor.  In  1857  he  was  married,  but 
his  young  wife  died  three  weeks  after  the 
wedding.  Two  years  later  he  married 
again.  During  two  years  of  the  Civil 
War  he  was  President  of  the  college  at 
Flemingsburg,  Ky.  His  sympathies  were 
with  the  South,  but  he  extended  hospi- 
talities to  soldiers  on  both  sides.  After- 
wards he  filled  pastorates  at  Winchester, 
Ky.,  and  at  St.  Louis,  Mexico,  Warrens- 
burg  and  Bolton  in  the  State  of  Missouri. 
He  is  now  minister  of  a  large  church  in 
Kansas  City,  Mo. 

From  his  youth  he  was  an  ardent  tem- 
perance advocate,  and  at  different  times 
he  was  connected  with  the  Sons  of  Tem- 
perance, Good  Templars  and  the  Francis 
Murphy  pledge-signing  movement.  In 
Missouri  h?  was  identified  with  the  vari- 
ous Prohibitory  movements  growing  out 
of  the  Convention  at  Sedalia,  July  4, 1880. 
At  that  convention  the  Missouri  Prohibi- 
tion Alliance  was  organized,  Avith  Dr. 
Brooks  as  its  President.  A  notable  agita- 
tion followed,  and,  without  salary  and  at 
his  OAvn  risk,  he  canvassed  the  State, 
speaking  in  100  counties.  The  first  year's 
work  resulted  in  the  election  of  a  Legis- 
lature pledged  to  submit  a  Prohibitory 
Amendment  to  the  people ;  but  treachery 
in  the  State  Senate  caused  the  defeat  of 
the  submission  bill,  and  the  Downing 
High  License  law  was  enacted  as  a  com- 
promise. After  three  more  years  of  en- 
ergetic work  Dr.  Brooks  (1884),  received 
an  independent  Prohibition   nomination 


for  Governor  of  Missouri.  Although  tliere 
had  been  no  previous  organization  of  the 
Prohibition  party  in  the  State,  and  al- 
though the  entire  vote  of  Missouri  for  the 
Prohibition  Presidential  ticket  in  1884 
was  only  2,153,  Dr.  Brooks  polled  10,436 
votes. 

In  the  next  four  years  he  worked  earn- 
estly and  with  excellent  results  to  pro- 
mote Prohibition  sentiment  throughout 
the  country,  making  addresses  in  many 
States.  At  the  National  Convention  of 
the  Prohibition  party,  held  at  Indian- 
apolis, May  30  and  31,  1888,  he  was  nom- 
inated for  Vice-President  on  the  ticket 
Avith  Gen.  Clinton  B.  Fisk.  He  made 
many  speeches  during  the  campaign.  His 
record  as  a  Southern  sympathizer  in  sla- 
very times  was  persistently  used  against 
him  by  political  enemies,  and  the  most 
unscrupulous  misrepresentations  and  at- 
tacks were  made.  Yet  he  had  unequivo- 
cally repudiated  his  former  views. 

Burmah. — Drink  appears  to  have  been 
unknown  among  the  Burmese  until 
southern  Burmah  was  conquered  by  the 
English  in  the  early  part  of  the  present 
century.  Then  liquor  came  in  like  a 
flood.  One  reason  for  its  rapid  spread 
was  given  to  me  by  an  old  native  school- 
teacher, for  many  years  past  a  Christian. 
"  We  saw,"  said  he,  "  that  the  English 
armies  were  stronger  than  ours,  and  that 
man  for  man  they  were  better  physically 
than  we.  The  main  difference  in  habit 
was  that  they  drank  alcoholic  drinks  and 
we  did  not;  so  we  concluded  that  must 
make  the  difference,  and  we  began  drink- 
ing deliberately  for  the  purpose  of 
strengthening  ourselves.  But  a  few  years 
showed  us  that  Ave  had  made  a  great  mis- 
take, and  we  drink  much  less  noAV  than 
we  did  years  ago."  King  ThebaAv  kept 
drink  out  of  Upper  Burmah  as  long  as  he 
Avas  in  poAver;  but  as  soon  as  the  English 
came  in  a  brewery  was  erected  near  Man- 
dalay  "  to  snjDply  the  British  soldiers  with 
beer."  Very  soon  shops  were  open  for  the 
sale  of  all  sorts  of  intoxicating  drinks, 
and  no  restriction  Avas  placed  upon  the 
sale  to  natives.  This  I  saAV  on  my  visit  to 
that  city  in  June,  1887,  when  the  first 
temperance  society — a  Woman's  Christian 
Temperance  Union — Avas  organized.  The 
Presbyterian  chaplain  to  the  forces  Avas 
then  doing  good  work  in  the  garrison. 
In  June,  1889,  Miss  Phenney  commenced 


Cadets  of  Temperance.] 


60 


[Canada. 


the  publication,  in  Burmese,  of  monthly 
Band  of  Hope  leaflets.  Each  contains  a 
temperance  song  and  a  series  of  questions 
and  answers  on  the  effects  of  alcohol, 
opium,  tobacco,  etc.,  on  the  human  sys- 
tem. About  500  of  these  leaflets  are  used 
every  month,  in  16  different  schools  and 
in  12  different  stations,  from  Mandalay  in 
Upper  Burmah  to  Tavoy  in  Lower  Bur- 
mah.  Mary  Clemext  Leavitt. 

Cadets  of  Temperance. — This  so- 
ciety of  juveniles  originated  with  the 
Sons  of  Temperance  in  1843,  but  has 
grown  into  an  independent  organization. 
By  its  constitution  young  persons  (of 
either  sex)  of  good  moral  character,  be- 
tween the  ages  of  12  and  21  years,  are 
eligible  to  membership.  Every  person,  in 
Joining,  is  required  to  take  an  obligation 
not  to  drink,  as  a  beverage,  any  intoxi- 
cating liquor,  wine  or  cider,  so  long  as  he 
remains  a  member.  Many  of  the  States 
and  several  of  the  Canadian  Provinces 
have  branches.  The  Order  is  sub-divided 
into  Grand  Sections  and  Sections.  The 
entire  membership  io  about  10,000.  Penn- 
sylvania is  the  banner  State.  The  pres- 
ent national  officers  (March,  1891)  are: 
Most  Worthy  Patron,  Charles  C.  Augus- 
tine, Philadelphia;  Most  AVorthy  Vice- 
Patron,  Frank  E.  Parker,  Charlestown, 
Mass. ;  Most  Worthy  Secretary,  Fred.  J. 
King,  Philadelphia;  Most  Worthy  Treas- 
urer, J,  H.  Courtenay,  New  York  City. 

California. — See  Index. 

Canada. — A  slight  knowledge  of  cer- 
tain prominent  physical  and  political 
characteristics  of  the  Dominion  of  Can- 
ada is  necessary  to  a  clear  comprehension 
of  the  position  of  the  temperance  cause 
in  the  Dominion.  Canada  covers  an  area 
a  little  less  in  extent  than  that  of  the  Unit- 
ed States.  It  includes,  besides  an  enormous 
extent  of  unorganized  territory,  seven 
provinces,  each  with  a  separate  Legisla- 
ture and  Government,  but  all  united  for 
national  purposes  under  a  Federal  Par- 
liament. The  population  of  the  Domin- 
ion is  about  4,500,000.  Partly  because 
of  geographical  conditions  this  population 
may  be  considered  as  separated  into  four 
groups,  (1)  The  Maritime  Provinces  of 
Nova  Scotia,  New  Brunswick  and  Prince 
Edward  Island,  on  the  Atlantic  seaboard, 
with  an  aggregate  population  of  nearly 
900,000.     (2)  the  Province  of  Quebec,  on 


the  St.  Lawrence  River,  population  nearly 
1,300,000  (largely  French),  and  the 
wealthy  Province  of  Ontario  with  a  pop- 
ulation of  nearly  2,000,000.  (3)  the 
Province  of  Manitoba  in  the  central  prai- 
rie region,  population  about  35,000.  (4) 
the  Province  of  British  Columbia  on  the 
Pacific  coast,  population  about  60,000. 
Outside  these  Provinces  the  scattered  pop- 
ulation is  largely  governed  from  Ottawa, 
which  is  the  national  capital. 

The  powers  and  relations  of  the  differ- 
ent Provincial  Legislatures  and  the  Do- 
minion Parliament  are  fixed  by  an  act 
of  the  Imperial  Parliament  of  Great  Brit- 
ain ;  and  the  Privy  Council  of  Great 
Britain  is  the  highest  judicial  Court  to 
which  appeals  in  reference  to  matters 
of  legislation  or  administration  can  be 
referred.  Such  appeals  are  not,  however, 
of  fi-equent  occurrence.  Canada  man- 
ages her  own  affairs.  No  imperial  troops 
are  stationed  in  the  Dominion.  The 
principal  connecting  link  between  the 
nation  and  the  British  Empire  lies  in 
the  appointments  to  the  Governor-Gen- 
eralship of  Canada,  which  are  made  by 
the  British  Crown.  Eoughly  speaking, 
it  may  be  said  that  the  Parliament  of 
Canada  has  jurisdiction  over  all  matters 
relating  to  commerce,  national  revenue, 
military  and  naval  affairs,  postal  service 
and  the  government  of  extra-Provincial 
territory,  while  Provincial  Legislatures 
have  charge  of  matters  relating  to  inter- 
nal Provincial  government,  the  police 
power  necessary  to  enforce  law  and 
secure  order  and  the  control  of  legisla- 
tion, creating  municipalities  and  fixing 
and  regulating  their  powers.  Nearly  all 
of  the  Dominion  is  divided  into  munic- 
ipalities, varying  in  size  and  functions  in 
the  different  Provinces,  and  exercising 
very  extensive  local  powers. 

Under  its  power  to  deal  with  questions 
affecting  trade  and  commerce,  the  Do- 
minion Parliament  enacted,  in  1878,  a 
stringently-worded  law  of  Local  Option, 
by  which  the  total  Prohibition  of  the 
retail  traffic  in  intoxicating  beverages 
may  be  secured  by  any  city  or  county  in 
the  Dominion.  There  is  also  a  general 
law  of  total  Prohibition  for  unorganized 
territor3\  subject,  however,  to  a  provision 
under  which  special  permits  to  take  liquor 
into  this  territory  may  be  issued.  Na- 
tional law  also  prohibits  the  sale  of  liquor 
to  Indians  and  prohibits  sale  to  any  per- 


Canada.] 


61 


[Canada. 


son  on  the  days  on  whicli  Parlimentary 
elections  are  held.  The  ditierent  Prov- 
inces enact  laws  for  the  licensing,  con- 
trolling and  regulating  of  the  liquor 
traffic  within  their  respective  limits. 
About  35  years  ago  the  Province  of  New 
Brunswick,  then  a  Crown  colony,  enacted 
a  law  of  Prohibition,  which  was  repealed 
by  the  next  Legislature  before  it  had  any 
opportunity  to  show  its  value  or  even  to 
reveal  its  defects.  Many  years  after,  in 
the  Legislature  of  the  Provinces  of  Onta- 
rio and  Quebec,  which  were  at  that  time 
united,  a  proposed  measure  of  Prohibi- 
tion was  defeated  by  the  casting  vote  of 
the  Speaker. 

CANADIAN  TEMPERANCE  SENTIMENT. 

The  temperance  question  has  always 
been  in  Canadian  politics.  Shortly  after 
the  discovery  of  the  New  World,  when 
the  northern  part  of  this  continent  was 
under  military  government — established 
with  the  dual  object  of  enlarging  the 
possessions  of  France  and  spreading  the 
doctrines  of  Christianity — a  fierce  con- 
flict was  waged  between  the  ecclesiastical 
authorities  who  desired  to  prohibit  the 
liquor  traffic  among  the  Indians  and  the 
military  authorities  who  were  in  favor  of 
permitting  that  ti-affic.  Ever  since  that 
time,  in  some  form  or  other,  the  country 
has  been  endeavoring  to  deal  with  the 
difficulties  arising  out  of  the  inevitable 
contest  between  men  willing  to  make 
money  from  their  fellow  beings'  degrada- 
tion and  those  opposed  to  a  business  so 
detrimental  to  the  progress  of  true  civil- 
ization. 

When  secret  temperance  organizations 
were  first  set  on  foot  they  found  in  C'an- 
ada  an  inviting  field  which  Washington- 
ian  and  Blue  Ribbon  movements  had  to 
some  extent  made  ready  for  them.  These 
societies  still  hold  their  own.  There  are 
Grand  Lodges  of  the  Independent  Order 
of  Good  Templars,  Grand  Divisions  of 
the  Sons  of  Temperance  and  Woman's 
Christian  Temperance  Unions  in  every 
Province  of  the  Dominion.  The  Royal 
Templars  of  Temperance  are  also  very 
strong,  and  have  lately  been  making 
remarkably  rapid  advances.  Nearly  all 
branches  of  the  Christian  church  are  sound 
on  the  question  of  temperance,  and  most  of 
them  have  made  emphatic  utterances  in 
favor  of  total  Prohibition.  In  this  con- 
nection   the    following    recent    deliver- 


ances, respectively,  of  the  General  Con- 
ference of  the  Methodist  Church  and  the 
General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church  may  be  taken  as  specimens : 

Presbyterian  General  Assembly. 
"  This  Assembly  declares  its  conviction  that 
the  general  traffic  in  intoxicating  liquors  is  con- 
trary to  the  word  ot  God  and  to  the  spirit  of  the 
Christian  religion  ;  that  total  Prohibition  would 
be  the  most  effective  form  of  temperance  legis- 
lation, and  that  it  is  highly  expedient  that  the 
State  pass  a  Prohibitory  hxw,  and  that  this 
result  is  to  be  earnestly  sought  by  all  right 
means.  This  Assembly,  with  renewed  earnest- 
ness and  emphasis,  again  expresses  the  hope 
that  the  electors,  in  their  choice  of  representa- 
tives, will  elect  only  able  and  good  men  who 
are  well  known  to  be  in  sympathy  with  Pro- 
hibitory legislation." 

Methodist  General  Conference. 
"It  gives  us  unbounded  satisfaction  to  know 
that  there  is  a  great  popular  uprising  all  over 
the  land  against  the  great  liquor  crime.  It  stands 
between  us  and  religious,  social,  moral  and 
political  reform.  The  ballot  must  execute  the 
will  of  a  free  people,  and  must  not  be  cast  for 
that  which  is  a  sin  asiaiust  God  and  a  crime 
against  humanity.  The  time  has  come  to  draw 
the  line  between  those  who  stand  with  the 
saloon  and  against  the  people,  and  those 
who  stand  with  the  people  and  against  the 
saloon.  We  therefore  recommend  that  our 
people,  in  all  municipal  and  Parliamentary  elec- 
tions, vote  only  for  candidates  who,  in  addition 
to  other  necessary  qualifications,  are  known 
and  profes.sed  Prohibitionists,  and  we  heartily 
pledge  ourselves  to  co-operate  with  the  Domin- 
ion Alliance  and  all  temperance  organizations 
in  their  efforts  to  educate  the  electors  of  the 
Dominion  on  the  necessity  of  Prohibitory  leg- 
islation. We  cannot  admit  the  statement  so 
often  made  by  those  having  little  or  no  sympa- 
thy with  Prohibition,  that  the  country  is  not 
yet  ready  for  a  Prohibitory  law;  on  the  con- 
trary, we  are  convinced  that  the  country,  by 
adopting  the  Scott  act,  showed  it  was  ready  for 
such  legislation.  We  believe  the  wide  growth 
of  public  sentiment  in  favor  of  Prohibition  ren- 
ders it  the  duty  of  our  Parliament  to  pass  a  Pro- 
hibitory law  that  will  brand  the  traffic  with 
pubic  condemnation." 

THE   DOMINION   ALLIANCE. 

Shortly  after  the  federation  of  the  dif- 
ferent Provinces  of  Canada  in  one 
Dominion  in  the  year  18G6,  an  agitation 
was  inaugurated  looking  toward  a  law 
of  total  Prohibition.  Great  petitions 
from  every  part  of  the  country  were  piled 
up  in  the  Dominion  Parliament,  and  sev- 
eral Provincial  Legislatures  passed  reso- 
lutions, all  asking  the  national  body  for 
the  enactment  of  such  a  law.  A  call  for 
a  Prohibitory  Convention  was  issued  by 
16  members  of  the  House  of  Commons 


Canada.] 


62 


[Canada. 


in  the  year  1875.  In  response  to  the 
appeal,  :iSO  representatives  from  the  dif- 
ferent Provinces  assembled  at  Montreal. 
The  meeting  was  presided  over  by  Hon. 
Senator  A.  Vidal,  and  had  the  advice  and 
assistance  of  lion.  Neal  Dow  of  Port- 
land, and  John  N.  Stearns  of  New  York, 
who  were  present  as  visitors.  The  con- 
clusions of  this  Convention  were  summa- 
rized ir-  the  following  resolutions: 

"1.  Tbat  the  manufacture,  importation  and 
sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  to  be  used  as  com- 
mon bevt  rages  are  found  by  the  Parliamentary 
Committees,  as  well  as  the  experience  of  soci- 
ety, to  be  a  fruitful  source  of  crime  and  pauper- 
ism, alike  sub^  ersive  of  public  morality  and 
social  order. 

'  2.  That  all  attempts  to  restrict  the  traffic  by 
license  law  are  unsatisfactory,  inasmuch  as  in- 
temperance and  all  the  evils  connected  there- 
with ar.;  con,st:mtly  increasing. 

"3  Ti!at  nothing  short  of  the  entire  Prohi- 
bition of  the  manufacture  importation  and  .'-ale 
of  intoxicating  liqi'.crs  as  beverages  would  be 
satisfactory  to  this  Convention, 

■'4.  That  in  order  that  a  Prohibitory  liquor 
law,  when  passed  may  have  the  sympathy  and 
support  so  indispensably  necessary  to  its  suc- 
cess, it  is  the  oninion  of  this  Convention  that 
the  Dominion  Parliament  should  be  urged  to 
frame  such  a  law,  subject  to  ratilication  by  pop 
ular  vote. 

Out  of  this  Convention  grew  an  organ- 
ization called  '•  The  Dominion  Alliance 
for  the  Total  Suppression  of  the  Liquor 
Traffic,"  that  is  still  the  recognized  rep- 
resentative body  of  the  Prohibitionists  of 
the  Dominion  of  Canada.  A  branch  of 
it  was  formed  in  every  Province,  and 
another  for  the  Northwest  Territories. 
The  President  of  the  Dominion  Alliance 
is  still  Hon.  A.  Vidal  of  Sarnia,  Ont., 
who  has  held  that  important  position  for 
14  years  and  enjoys  the  respect  and  con- 
fidence of  Prohibition  workers  of  all 
classes  and  opinions.  The  Secretary  is 
F.  S.  Spence  of  Toronto,  Ont. 

THE  CANADA  TEMPERANCE  ACT. 

The  proposal  of  the  Montreal  Conven- 
tion of  1875  did  not  find  favor  with  the 
Dominion  Parliament.  Several  commit- 
tees were  appointed  from  year  to  year  to 
consider  the  question,  A  special  Board 
of  Commissioners  was  sent  to  investigate 
the  Prohibitory  laws  in  the  United  States. 
The  result  of  the  researches  of  these  gen- 
tlemen was  published  in  an  extensive 
blue-book.  A  resolution  was  adopted  by 
the  House  of  Commons  assenting  to  the 
principle  of  Prohibition.  Finally,  in  1878, 


there  was  enacted  the  Canada  Temper- 
ance act,  popularly  known  as  the  Scott 
act  because  it  was  introduced  into  Parlia- 
ment by  Hon.  R.  W.  Scott,  then  Secretary 
of  State.  Its  principal  provisions  may 
be  summarized  as  follows : 

The  act  is  divided  into  three  parts.  The  first 
part  provides  the  machinery  by  which  the 
second  part  may  be  adopted  or  rejected.  The 
second  part  is  the  Prohibition  part  and  does 
not  come  into  force  until  it  has  been  adopted  by 
a  vote  of  the  electors.  The  third  part  provides 
for  the  enforcement  of  the  law  after  its  adop- 
tion. The  following  is  a  synopsis  of  the  provis- 
ions of  these  respective  parts: 

Part  I. 

One-fourth  of  the. electors  in  any  city  or 
county  may  petition  the  Governor-General  in 
Coimcil  to  have  a  vote  taken  upon  the  act  in 
such  city  or  county.  The  Governor-General  in 
Council  may  then  appoint  a  returning  officer, 
fix  a  day  for  voting,  and  make  all  other  needful 
arrangements  for  the  polling  of  votes.  Very 
severe  penalties  are  provided  for  any  corrupt 
practices.  No  treating  of  voters  is  allowed  and 
all  places  where  liquor  is  sold  must  be  kept 
closed  the  whole  of  the  day  of  voting.  If  a 
majority  of  the  votes  polled  are  in  favor  of  the 
act,  a  proclamation  will  be  issued  bringing  it 
into  force ;  but  in  counties  where  licenses  are  in 
operation  it  cannot  come  into  force  before  al 
least  five  months  after  the  voting,  nor  until  all 
licenses  in  force  at  the  end  of  these  five  mouths 
have  expired.  If  no  licenses  are  in  force  in  a 
county,  the  act  may  be  brought  into  operation 
in  that  county  after  three  months  from  the  day 
of  the  voting  adopting  it.  If  the  act  be  adopted 
it  cannot  be  repealed  for  at  least  three  years, 
nor  until  the  repeal  has  baen  voted  upon  and 
adopted  by  the  electors  If  the  act  Ije  rejected 
or  rep?aled  it  cannot  be  again  voted  upon  for 
three  years. 

Part  II. 

From  the  day  of  the  coming  into  force  of  the 
act  in  any  county  or  city,  and  as  long  as  it  re- 
mains in  force,  no  intoxicating  liquor  sh  dl  be 
sold  in  any  manner  or  under  any  pretext  except 
in  the  cas?s  hereinafter  mentioned.  Pv^^rsons  who 
are  specially  licensed  may  sell  liquor  by  whole- 
sale, but  only  in  quantities  of  not  less  than  ten 
gallons,  or  in  case  of  ale  or  beer  eight  gallons, 
and  only  to  licensed  druggists,  or  other  whole- 
salers or  to  persons  whom  they  have  good  rea- 
son to  believe  will  carry  it  to  and  have  it  con- 
sumed in  some  place  where  the  Hcott  act  is  not 
in  force.  Producers  of  native  wine  made  from 
grapes  grown  by  themselves  may,  when  licensed, 
sell  such  wine  to  any  person  inquantities  of  not 
less  than  ten  gallons,  unless  it  be  for  medic- 
inal or  sacramental  purposes,  when  they  may 
sell  as  small  a  quantity  as  one  gallon.  Liicensed 
druggists  may  sell  in  quantities  of  not  less  than 
one  pint.  Not  more  than  one  druggist  may  be 
licensed  in  a  township,  not  more  tliun  two  in  a 
town,  and  not  more  than  one  for  every  4,000  in- 
habitants in  a  city.  Druggists  are  only  allowed 
to  sell  liquor  for  mf^dicinal  or  sacramental  use, 
or  for  use  in  some  bona,  fide  art,  trade  or  raanu- 


Canada.] 


63 


[Canada. 


facture.  Liquor  can  be  sold  for  sacrament  on 
n  certiticate  signed  by  a  clersiyman  ;  for  niedi- 
ciue  only  on  a  certificate  sigi;ed  by  a  medical 
man,  and  for  any  other  purpose  only  on  a  ccrti- 
ca:e  signed  by  two  Justices  of  the  Peace.  The 
licensed  druggist  must  file  all  these  certificates, 
must  keep  r  full  record  of  all  Ihe  sales  he  makes 
and  lepnrt  the  same  to  the  Collector  of  Inland 
Ke  venue. 

Part  III. 

The  penalties  for  illegal  sale  are:  For  the  first 
offense  a  fine  of  not  less  than  s!50;  for  the  sec- 
ond offense,  a  fine  of  not  less  than  !?100  and  for 
the  third  and  each  subsequent  offense,  imprison- 
ment for  not  more  than  two  montlis.  The 
clei'k  or  agent  who  sells  for  another  person  shall 
be  held  guilty  as  well  as  his  employer  and  shall 
be  liable  to  the  same  punishment.  All  liquor 
and  all  ves.sels  containing  liquor  in  respect  to 
which  offensei  have  been  committed  shall  be 
forfeited.  Any  person  may  be  a  prosecutor  for 
a  violation  of  the  act.  The  Collector  of  Inland 
Revenue  is  required  to  prosecute  when  he  has 
reason  to  believe  that  an  offense  has  been  com- 
mitted. In  a  prosecution  it  is  not  necessary  that 
a  witness  shall  be  able  to  state  the  kind  or 
price  of  liquor  unlawfully  sold.  It  is  enough  to 
show  that  unlawful  dispo,sal  of  intoxicating 
liquor  took  place.  The  finding  in  any  place  of 
liquor,  and  also  of  appliances  for  its  sale,  is 
prima  fade  evidence  of  unlawful  keeping  for 
sale,  unless  the  contrary  is  proved.  The  husband 
or  wife  of  a  person  charged  with  an  ofi'ense 
against  the  Scott  act  is  a  competent  witness. 
Any  person  attempting  to  tamper  with  a  wit- 
ness in  any  prosecution  under  the  act  shall  be 
liable  to  a  fine  of  $50.  Any  person  who  is  a 
par!y  to  an  attempt  to  compromise  or  settle  any 
offense  against  this  act  with  a  view  of  saving  the 
violator  from  prosecution  or  conviction  .shall,  on 
conviction,  be  imprisoned  for  not  more  than 
three  months.  No  appeal  shall  be  allowed 
against  any  conviction  made  by  any  Judge, 
Stipendiary  or  Police  Magistrate,  Sheriff,  Re- 
corder or  Parish  Court  Commissioner. 

THE  CANADA  TEMPERANCE  ACT  IN  OPERA- 
TION. 

Immediately  after  its  enactment,  the 
Canada  Temperance  act  was  taken  hold 
of  by  temperance  people,  the  city  of 
Fredericton,  the  capital  of  New  Bruns- 
wick, being  the  first  place  to  vote.  A 
large  majority  was  recorded  in  favor  of 
the  law.  Other  cities  and  counties  fell 
into  line,  and  in  a  short  time  the  greater 
part  of  the  Maritime  Provinces  was  placed 
under  the  act.  Later  on  the  Province  of 
Ontario  was  brought  to  a  great  extent  under 
the  operation  of  this  law,  but  unfortu- 
nately political  complications  interfered 
with  its  success.  In  Ontario  all  liquor 
laws  are  administered  by  local  Boards  of 
Commissioners  appointed  directly  by  the 
Provincial  Government  from  year  to  year. 
This  system  necessarily  makes  the  issuing 


of  licenses  to  sell  liquor  a  piece  of  party 
patronage  and  brings  the  liqtior  traffic 
actively  and  interestedly  into  Provincial 
politics.  The  enforcement  of  the  law  was 
defective  and  irregular.  Where  it  was 
fairly  and  effectively  carried  out,  the 
liquor  traffic  became  arrayed  against  the 
party  then  in  power.  Where  it  was  not 
properly  enforced,  friends  of  law  and 
ord^^r  were  disgtisted  and  offended.  The 
liquor  traffic  took  advantage  of  the  oppor- 
tunity, and  when  the  question  of  re})eal 
was  submitted  to  the  electors  the  active 
political  workers  who  cared  more  for 
party  than  principle  united,  in  1887  and 
1888,  to  defeat  a  measure  that  was  an  an- 
noyance to  them  although  a  blessing  to 
the  community.  The  law  was  repealed  in 
every  jDlace  in  Ontario  in  which  it  had 
been  adopted.  Some  repeal  movements 
were  also  successful  in  the  Province  of 
Quebec.  The  other  Provinces  of  the 
Dominion  not  being  affected  by  the  con- 
siderations referred  to,  have  stood  loyally 
by  the  act;  and  in  them  it  is  accompiisn- 
ing  very  much  good.  In  the  Province  of 
Prince  Edward  Island  the  legalized  retail 
liquor  traffic  is  extinguished,  the  Canada 
Temperance  act  being  in  operation  in 
every  city  and  county. 

The  results  of  the  adoption  and  en- 
forcement of  the  act  in  the  different  parts 
of  the  Dominion  have  been  very  encour- 
aging to  the  friends  of  moral  reform.  The 
consumption  of  strong  drink  has  fallen 
off  to  a  remarkable  degree,  and  there  has 
been  an  equally  remarkable  reduction  in 
drunkenness  and  its  attendant  evils.  The 
annual  report  of  the  Inspector  of  Prisons 
of  the  Province  of  Ontario  for  the  year 
1888  contains  a  tabulated  list  of  the 
commitments  to  jail  for  drunkenness  in 
all  the  counties  of  Ontario  for  11 
years.  The  figures  for  all  the  counties 
that  were  entirely  under  the  Canada  Tem- 
perance act  in  1888  show,  as  compared 
with  the  figures  for  the  year  1884  (the 
last  year  in  which  they  were  entirely 
under  license),  a  falling  off  of  50  per  cent, 
in  commitments  to  jail  for  criminal 
drunkenness.  It  is  startling  to  find  at 
the  same  time  that  the  figures  for  all  the 
counties  that  were  entirely  under  license 
for  the  two  years  named  show  an  increase 
in  1888  as  compared  with  1884  of  25  per 
cent,  in  commitments  to  jail  for  drunken- 
ness. Many  similar  official  statements 
might  be  quoted  to  show  the  good  that 


Canada.] 


64 


[Canada. 


has 
law. 


resulted  from  the  workings  of  this 


THE   LICENSE    LAWS    OF   THE    DIFFERENT 
PROVINCES. 

The  salient  features  of  the  different 
license  laws  in  operation  in  the  diiferent 
parts  of  tlie  Dominion  are  briefly  given  in 
the  following  summary : 

Nova  Scotia. 

This  Province  has  19  counties  and  cities,  in 
11  of  which  the  Bcott  act  is  now  (Jan.  1.  1890) 
in  operation  The  license  law  affects  only  the 
remainder  of  the  Province.  This  law  provides 
for  three  classes  of  licenses:  (1)  A  hotel  license, 
permitting  the  sale  of  liquor  in  quantities  of  not 
over  one  quart.  Sale  may  be  made  only  to 
bona  fide  guests  or  lodgers  to  be  used  in  rooms 
or  at  meals.  If  a  hotel-keeper  sells  in  any  other 
way  he  is  lined  $100  for  the  first  offense,  and 
for  a  second,  flOO  and  imprisonment  for  not 
more  than  two  months.  A  person  misrepresent- 
ing himself  to  be  a  guest  is  liable  to  a  fine  of 
$50.  The  fee  for  a  holel  license  is $150.  (2) 
A  shop  license,  fee  $^100,  permitting  sale  in 
quantities  of  not  less  than  a  pint  and  not  more 
than  two  gallons  to  be  taken  away  for  consump- 
tion. (3)  A  wholesale  license,  fee  §150,  permit- 
ting sale  in  quantities  of  not  less  than  12  gallons. 
Every  sale,  under  any  license,  of  more  than  one 
gallon,  must  be  specially  registered.  The  penal- 
ties for  selling  wathout  license  are  $50  for  first 
offence,  ^80  for  second,  $80  and  imprisonment 
for  third.  Licenses  are  issued  by  the  Municipal 
Councils.  The  Councils  appoint  Inspectors  who 
are  confirmed  by  the  Government.  Every  In- 
spector must  be  a  m(  mber  of  a  temperance  so- 
ciety in  good  standing  at  the  time  of  his  appoint- 
ment and  throughout  his  term  of  office.  No 
license  may  be  issued  unless  the  applicant  pre- 
sents a  petition  signed  by  two-thirds  of  the  rate- 
payers in  his  polling  district.  No  sale  of  liquor 
is  permitted  brtwec^u  9  p.  m.  and  7  a.  m.  Selling 
is  also  prohibited  between  6  p.  m.  on  Saturdays 
and  7  a.  m.  Mondays.  No  sale  is  allowed  on 
any  election  day  or  to  any  person  under  21  years 
of  age  or  to  any  unlicensed  person  who  intends 
to  sell.  Two  Justices  of  the  Peace  may 
prohibit  all  dealers  from  selling  to  any 
particular  person  addicted  to  drunkenness.  The 
husband,  wife  father,  mother,  child,  master, 
curator,  guardian  or  caretaker  of  any  personad- 
dicted  to  drink,  may  prohibit  any  particular 
dealer  from  selling  to  such  person.  In  case  of 
a  death  through  drink,  the  legal  representatives 
of  the  deceased  may  recover  damages  up  to 
11,000  from  the  person  who  sold  the  liquor. 
Any  one  injured  in  person  or  property  by  a 
drunken  person  has  recourse  for  damages  against 
either  the  person  who  did  the  mischief  or  the 
person  who  sold  the  drink.  Liquor  in  resj.ect 
of  which  offences  have  been  committed  is  for- 
feited and  destroyed. 

New  Brunswick. 

This  Province  has  16  counties  and  cities,  of 
which  nine  are  under  the  Scott  act.  In  other 
parts  of  the  Provin(!e  two  kinds  of  licenses  are 
issued  :  (1)  Tavern  licenses,  varying  in  prices  at 


the  option  of  the  Municipal  Council,  from  ft25 
to  $200.  This  license  permits  sale  in  quantities 
not  over  a  quart,  to  be  drunk  on  the  premises. 
(2 )  Wholesale  licenses,  fee  varying  from  $50  to 
$200.  This  license  permits  sale  in  bulk  not 
to  be  consumed  on  the  premises,  in  quantities 
not  less  than  one  pint.  Licenses  are  issued  by 
the  Municipal  Council,  which  also  appoints  a 
License  Inspector.  The  applicant  for  the  license 
must  have  a  petition  signed  by  one-third  the 
ratepayers  in  his  district.  The  penalties  for  un- 
licensed selling  are  $50  for  first  offence,  ^80  for 
second,  $80  and  imprisonment  :or  not  more  than 
three  months  with  hard  labor  for  third.  The 
maximum  number  of  licenses  that  can  be  issueil 
in  a  municipality  is  limited  in  cities  and  towns 
to  four  for  the  first  1,000  of  population  and  one 
to  each  500  after.  In  rural  places  the  maximum 
number  is  three  to  the  first  1,200  of  population 
and  one  to  each  1,000  thereafter.  The  Munici- 
pal Councils  may  still  further  limit  the  number. 
No  sale  is  allowed  between  10  p.  m.  and  6  a.  m. 
or  between  7  p.  m.  on  Saturday  and  6  a  m.  on 
the  following  Monday.  Prohibitions  in  relation 
to  election  days,  minors  and  persons  addicted  to 
drink  are  the  same  as  in  Nova  Scotia.  The  Civil 
Damage  and  liquor  forfeiture  provisions  are  the 
same  as  in  Nova  Scotia. 

Prince  Edward  Island. 

This  Province,  being  entirely  under  the  Scott 
act,  has  no  license  law  in  force  in  any  part  of 
it. 

Qaebec. 

In  this  Province  licenses  are  issued  by  the 
Collector  of  Provincial  Revenue.  They  are  of 
seven  classes,  namely:  Licenses  for  (1)  inns, 
(2)  restaurants,  (3)  steamboat  bars,  (4)  railway 
buffets,  (5)  taverns  at  mines,  (6)  retail  liquor 
shops,  and  (7)  wholesale  liquor  shops.  Any  per- 
son applying  for  a  new  license  must  pre.'-ent  a 
petition  signed  by  one-fourth  of  the  voters  in  a 
rural  municipality,  or  the  ward  of  a  city  in 
which  the  license  is  to  operate.  If  the  number 
of  voters  is  less  than  50  the  petition  must  be 
signed  by  a  majority  of  them.  Except  in  the 
cities  of  Quebec  and  Montreal  the  petition  must 
also  be  ratified  by' the  Municipal  Council,  and 
no  license  can  be  issued  to  any  person  who  has 
permitted  drunkenness  on  his  premises,  or  has 
been  twice  fined  for  selling  without  a  license. 
Fees  range  from  |56.25  up  to  $512.50.  Penalties 
for  illicit  selling  range  from  $75  to  $95  for  a 
first  offense,  double  that  amount  for  a  second 
offense,  and  for  a  third,  not  Ic^s  than  three 
months  nor  more  than  six  months  imprisonment. 
No  liquor  can  be  sold  after  8  p.  m.  to  soldiers, 
sailors  or  servants,  or  to  any  person  between 
midnight  and  5  a.  m.,  or  at  all  on  Sundays,  or 
to  drunken  persons,  or  persons  under  21  years  of 
age.  A  provision  against  selling  to  habitual 
drunkards  is  somewhat  similar  to  that  of  Nova 
Scotia,  with  the  addition  that  any  one  purchas- 
ing liquor  for  a  habitual  drunkard  is  liable  to  a 
fine  of  5^50,  or  three  months'  imprisonment  in 
default  of  payment  of  this  fine.  The  law  relat- 
ing to  Civil  Damages  is  the  same  as  that  of  Nova 
Scotia.  Outside  of  cities,  towns  and  villages 
no  liquor  may  be  sold  within  three  miles  of  any 
public  work  under  conslructiou.    There  is  also 


Canada.] 


65 


[Canada. 


in  the  municipal  law  a  Local  Option  provision 
by  which  any  Municipal  Council  may  entirely 
suppress  th"  sale  of  liquor  within  its  limits  by  a 
by-law  either  absolute  or  dependent  upon  popu- 
lar vote  for  ratification. 

Ontario. 
In  this  Province  licenses  are  issued  and  con- 
trolled by  a  board  of  three  Commissioners  and 
an  Inspector,  appointed  by  the  Government,  for 
each  electoral  division.  There  are  three  classes 
of  licenses -tavern,  shop  and  wholesale.  The 
number  of  tavern  licenses  that  may  be  issued  is 
limited  to  four  for  the  first  1,000  of  the  popula- 
tion in  a  municipality,  and  one  to  each  subse- 
quent 400.  A  Municipal  C'Uncil  may  pass  a  by- 
law limitino:  the  number  below  tliis  maximum. 
For  example,  the  city  of  Toronto,  with  a  popula- 
tion of  about  180,000,  limits  the  number  of  tavern 
and  saloon  licenses  to  150  An  applicant  for  a 
license  is  required  to  secure  endorsement  by  a 
majority  of  the  voters  in  his  electoral  precinct, 
and  thus  license  can  issue  only  upon  special 
appeal  of  the  majority.  Fees  vary  in  differ- 
ent places  and  for  different  classes  of  licenses, 
the  lowest  possible  fee  being  ?90  and  the  highest 
$400.  JS'o  liquor  is  sold  from  7  o'clock  Satur- 
day night  till  6  o'clock  on  Monday  morning,  or 
on  election  days.  The  purchaser  of  liquor  sold 
illegally  is  liable  to  a  tine  not  exceeding  ^10. 
A  licensee  who  sells  out  of  hours  is  fined  for  a 
first  offense  *;40,  for  a  second  offense  $80.  and 
for  a  third  offens3  ;S^100,  with  an  alternative  of 
imprisonment.  A  third  offense  forfeits  the  li- 
cense and  the  licensee  is  (liscj[ualified  from  ob- 
taining another  for  two  years.  No  liquor  may 
be  sold  to  any  person  under  18  years  of  age.  The 
Civil  Damage  law  is  similar  to  that  of  Nova 
Scotia.  Provisions  prohibiting  sale  to  intem- 
perate persons  are  also  similar  to  those  of  Nova 
Scotia.  The  penalties  for  illicit  sale  by  persons 
unlicensed  are  for  a  first  offense  not  more  than 
$100  and  co.sts,  for  a  .second,  imprisonment  for 
four  months  with  hard  labor,  and  for  a  third, 
imprisonment  for  six  months  with  hard  labor. 

Manitoba. 
Licenses  in  Manitoba  are  issued  by  a  Board  of 
Comraissiouers  and  Inspector,  and  are  controlled 
as  in  Ontario.  Outside  a  city  or  town  with 
2.000  population,  each  applicant  for  a  license 
must  present  a  petition  signed  by  14  out  of  the 
20  householders  nearest  to  his  place  of  business. 
There  are  three  classes  of  licenses  as  in  other 
Provinces.  The  lowest  possible  fee  is  §^100  and 
the  highest  $500.  The  statutory  limit  for  the  num- 
ber of  license3  is  almost  the  same  as  in  Ontario. 
No  sale  is  allowed  between  10  Saturday  night  and 
7  Monday  morning,  or  between  11.30  p.  m.  and 
6  A.  M.  on  other  nights,  or  on  election  days,  or 
to  persons  under  16.  Penalties  for  selling  out 
of  hours  are  very  heavy.  Penalties  for  selling 
without  licenses  are,  for  first  offense  $50  to 
$250,  for  second  offense  $250  to  $500,  for  third 
offense  $500  to  $1,000.  Alternative  imprison- 
ments range  from  two  months  to  two  years. 
Provisions  prohibiting  sale  to  drunkards  are 
similar  to  those  of  other  provinces,  with  the  ad- 
dition that  any  two  clergymen  or  two  Justices 
of  the  Peace  may  prohibit  any  such  sale,  and 
any  licensee  who  violates  this  provision  is 
heavily  punished  and  loses  his  license.     Occu- 


pants of  premises  are  responsible  for  any  viola- 
tion of  the  law  that  takes  place  in  their  houses. 
Civil  Damages  are  recoverable  up  to  $1,000  by 
legal  representatives  of  any  per.-on  who  comes 
to  his  death  through  drunkenness.  This  Prov- 
ince has  also  a  Local  Option  law  of  its  own. 
Twenty-five  per  cent. of  the  voters  of  any  munic- 
ipality may  demand  a  poll  on  the  question  of 
Prohibition.  If  two-thirds  of  the  votes  cast  are 
in  favor  of  the  proposal,  then  license  is  aban- 
doned. Under  this  provision  four-fifths  of  the 
territory  of  Manitoba  is  now  under  Prohibition. 

British  Columbia. 

The  law  in  this  Province  is  simple.  The 
whole  control  of  licenses  is  in  the  hands  of  the 
Municipal  Council.  Fees  vary  from  $30  to  $100 
for  each  six  months.  A  Board  of  Commissioners 
partly  appointed  and  partly  elective  agrees  to  or 
refuses  all  applications.  There  is  no  limit  to 
the  number  of  licenses  that  may  be  issued. 
Two-thirds  of  the  electors  in  a  polling  district 
must  endorse  an  application  for  a  new  license. 
The  penalty  for  illicit  liquor-selling  is  a  fiae  up 
to  $250.  besides  the  amount  that  should  have 
been  paid  for  a  license.  Outside  these  provis- 
ions selling  is  almost  unlimited. 

TOTAL    PROHIBITIOJn'. 

The  general  plan  of  work  endorsed  by 
the  Dominion  Alliance  is  that,  while  us- 
ing every  means  to  immediately  restrict 
or  prohibit  the  liquor  traffic,  nothing 
should  be  allowed  to  distract  attention 
from  progress  towards  the  goal  of  total 
Prohibition.  It  is  expected  that  this  end 
will  be  attained  by  securing  the  election 
to  the  National  Parliament  of  men  who 
are  known  and  avowed  Prohibitionists, 
and  who  can  be  relied  upon  to  support, 
regardless  of  party,  a  law  for  the  entire 
legal  suppression  of  the  traffic  in  intoxi- 
cating beverages.  To  this  end  Prohibi- 
tionists are  urged  to  use  all  their  personal 
influence  in  their  respective  political 
caucuses  to  obtain  the  nomination  of  men 
who  are  sound  on  the  Prohibition  ques- 
tion. Only  where  these  efforts  fail  to  se- 
cure the  nomination  of  a  Prohibitionist 
by  one  of  the  existing  parties,  is  an  inde- 
pendent Prohibitionist  to  be  nominated! 
and  supported.  The  Prohibitionist  senti- 
ment in  the  House  of  Commons  is  rapidly 
growing.  A  resolution  was  introduced 
into  that  body  in  1884  declaring  in  favor 
of  Prohibition.  This  resolution  was 
amended  so  as  to  make  it  declare  for  Pro- 
hibition when  public  opinion  should  be 
pronouncedly  in  favor  of  it.  A  further 
amendment  for  immediate  Prohibition 
was  defeated  by  a  vote  of  55  to  107.  The 
amended  resolution  in  favor  of  Prohibir 
tion  at  some  time  was  adopted  by  a  vote 


Canada.] 


66 


[Canada. 


of  122  to  40.  Since  then  some  electoral 
changes  have  taken  place.  Sentiment  has 
been  advancing.  In  1889  the  question  of 
immediate  Prohibition  was  defeated  by  a 
vote  of  59  to  99,  and  the  resolution  in 
favor  of  Prohibition  at  some  time  was 
adopted  by  a  unanimous  vote.  The  Al- 
liance, on  this  line,  hopes  to  ultimately 
secure  the  object  it  has  in  view. 

POLITICAL  ACTION. 

The  plan  on  which  Canadian  Prohibi- 
tionists in  general  are  working  has  been 
outlined.  Their  principles  and  methods 
are  laid  down  in  the  following,  which  is 
the  platform  of  tne  Alliance : 

"  1.  That  it  is  of  the  highest  importance  to 
obtain  united  political  action  on  the  part  of  all 
those  who  are  in  favor  of  the  immediate  total 
Prohibition  of  the  liquor  traffic. 

•'2.  That  we  endorse  the  action  of  our  friends 
in  the  House  of  Commons,  in  introducing  and 
supporting  the  Prohibition  resolution  of  1887, 
and  we  request  them  to  take  like  action  at  every 
session  of  Parliament  until  the  resolution  be 
adopted  and  Prohibition  secured. 

"  3.  That  we  call  upon  the  friends  of  Prohi- 
bition to  organize  in  each  of  the  constituencies 
for  the  purpose  of  preventing  the  re-election  of 
any  member  who  does  not  favor  such  a  resolu- 
tion, and  for  securing  the  nomination  and  elec- 
tion of  candidates  who  are  known  and  publicly 
avowed  Prohibitionists. 

"  4.  That  where  the  nomination  of  such  a 
Prohibition  candidate  is  not  otherwise  secured, 
an  independent  Prohibition  candidate  be  nom- 
inated and  supported  at  the  polls." 

This  action,  however,  does  not  meet 
the  approval  of  all  Canadian  temperance 
workers.  Some  are  of  the  opinion  that 
Prohibition  obtained  on  the  lines  pro- 
posed would  not  be  sufficiently  effective. 
They  believe  that  the  only  hope  for  suc- 
cess lies  in  Prohibition  secured  through 
an  independent  political  party.  In  the 
Maritime  Provinces  a  Prohibition  party 
has  been  formed  and  has  taken  part  in 
several  contests,  polling  in  some  cases  a 
not  inconsiderable  vote.  The  head  of 
this  movement  is  J.  T.  Bulmer  of  Halifax, 
editor  of  the  Canadian  Voice,  the  organ 
of  the  party  named.  In  the  Province  of 
Ontario  there  is  also  an  organization 
known  as  "  Canada's  New  Party,"  which 
is  definitely  committed  to  total  Prohibi- 
tion. The  leader  of  the  movement  and 
President  of  the  organization  is  Rev.  A. 
Sutherland,  D.  D..  of  Toronto.  The 
party  is  not  solely  a  Prohibition  party. 
Its  platform  contains  the  following 
planks: 


"  1.  Righteousness  and  truth  in  public  affairs 
as  well  as  in  private  business,  and  no  compro- 
mise with  wrong. 

"  2.  Equal  rights  for  all  creeds,  classes  and 
nationalities,  but  exclusive  privileges  to  none. 

•'3.  A  national  sentiment,  a  national  litera- 
ture and  in  all  matters  of  public  policy,  our 
country  first. 

"  4.  The  prompt  and  absolute  Prohibition  of 
the  liquor  traffic,  and  the  honest  and  vigorous 
enforcement  of  all  laws  for  the  repression  cf 
vice  and  intemperance. 

"  5.  Retrenchment  and  economy  in  public 
expenditure,  with  the  view  of  reducing  our 
enormous  national  debt 

"6.  Manhood  suffrage  with  an  educational 
qualification — that  is,  a  vote  to  every  freeman  of 
legal  age  who  can  read  and  write. 

'■  7.  The  extension  of  the  franchise  to  women. 

'  8.  An  elective  Senate. 

"9.  Civil  Service  Reform." 

CONSUMPTION   OF    LIQ.UOPt. 

From  what  has  been  said  it  will  be 
seen  at  once  that  Canada  is  largely  a  Pro- 
hibition country.  The  consumption  of 
liquor  has  been  steadily  decreasing  (not- 
withstanding the  increase  in  population) 
as  laws  have  been  increased  in  stringency 
and  Prohibitory  territory  has  increased 
in  area.  (See  Consumption  of  Liquors.) 
Taking  our  different  Provinces  all  the 
the  way  through,  the  amount  of  drink 
consumed  is  proportionate  to  the  extent 
of  territory  that  is  under  Prohibition, 
going  gradually  from  British  Columbia, 
in  which  the  Scott  act  has  not  yet  been 
tried  and  where  license  laws  are  ex- 
tremely lax,  down  to  Prince  Edward  Is- 
land, where  the  Scott  act  is  in  operation 
over  the  whole  Province.  British  Colum- 
bia's consumption  is  over  eight  gallons 
per  head ;  Prince  Edward  Island's  con- 
sumption is  less  than  three-fourths  of  a 
gallon.  The  following  table,  showing 
the  per  capita  consumption  for  the  year 
1888,  will  make  the  point  very  clear : 

Gallons  of  Liquor   consumed  per  capita  in 
different  Provinces  in  1888. 

British  Columbia SJ 

Ontario 5+ 

Quebec 3i 

Manitoba  and  Northwest  Territory 2 

New  Brunswick IV 

Nova  Scotia  li 

Prince  Edward  Island  (less  than) f 

Dominion  of  Canada  .  (.less  than) 4 

During  the  year  (1888)  the  Scott  act 
was  not  in  operation  in  any  part  of  Brit- 
ish Columbia.  It  was  in  force  in  about 
20  cities  and  counties  in  Ontario,  not 
including,  however,  any  large  cities.  A 
large  portion  of  Quebec  was  under  local 


Candidates.] 


67 


[Carson,  Thomas  L. 


Prohibition.  A  large  portion  of  Mani- 
toba was  under  Prohibition  through  Pro- 
vincial Local  Option;  all  the  Northwest 
Territories  were,  however,  under  Prohi- 
bition. The  Scott  act  was  the  law  in  10 
out  of  New  Brunswick's  IS  counties  and 
cities.  In  Nova  Scotia  it  was  in  force  in 
12  out  of  19  counties  and  cities.  It  was 
in  operation  over  the  whole  Province  of 
Prince  Edward  Island. 

LAW   ENFORCEMENT. 

It  is  worth  while  noting  that,  generally 
speaking,  the  liquor  law  in  Canada  is  well 
enforced.  The  difficulties  that  are  met 
with  everywhere  in  dealing  with  the 
liquor  traffic  exist  here,  but  the  traffic  is 
not  so  openly  defiant  and  is  more  under 
control  than  in  most  other  countries. 
Persons  holding  retail  liquor  licenses  are 
prohibited  from  occupying  seats  in  any 
Municipal  Council.  Law  and  Order 
Leagues  exist  and  do  a  good  work  in  the 
larare  cities  where  the  traffic  is  best  oraran- 
ized  and  most  as^gressive.  Public  senti- 
ment  is  decidedly  against  liquor-selling, 
and  the  whole  business  is  disreputable. 
This  healthy  sentiment  is  growing  and  laws 
are  becomins:  more  and  more  stringent  and 
better  enforced.  At  the  present  time 
there  are  in  several  Provinces  efforts 
being  made  for  further  legislation  of  an 
even  stronger  character,  and  Canada  act- 
ually presents  the  probably  unique  spec- 
tacle of  a  steadily  diminishing  liquor 
power  and  a  steadily  popular  progress, 
on  actually  effective  lines,  towards  gen- 
eral sobriety  and  total  Prohibition. 

F.  S.  Spestce. 
(Formerly  editor  of  the  Canada  Citizen.) 

Candidates. 

TY. 


-See  Prohibition  Par- 


Carson,  Thomas  L. — Born  in  Salem, 
N.  Y.,  March  3,  1807,  and  died  in  Syra- 
cuse, N.  Y.,  Nov.  21,  18G8.  AVhile  still 
a  boy  he  removed  with  his  parents  to  the 
town  of  Elbridge,  N.  Y.  Here  he  lived 
during  the  greater  part  of  his  life.  He 
early  became  an  earnest  worker  in  the 
temperance  cause.  Under  the  Local 
Option  law  of  18-46  many  towns  in  New 
York  State  voted  for  "  no  license ;"  but 
numbers  of  liquor-dealers  continued  to  sell 
in  violation  of  law.  Mr.  Carson  conceived 
a  plan  of  organization  for  the  punishment 
of  these  offenders  and  the  complete  sup- 


pression of  their  unlawful  business.  The 
Carson  League  was  established,  composed 
of  persons  committed  in  writing  to  the 
enforcement  of  anti-liquor  laws  and 
pledged  to  the  payment  of  the  necessary 
funds  to  procure  counsel  and  obtain  evi- 
dence against  the  law-breakers.  When- 
ever money  was  needed  a  pro  rata  assess- 
ment was  made  upon  the  League  mem- 
bers. This  organization  spread  into 
many  sections  of  New  York  and  extended 
into  other  States.  A  newspaper,  the 
Carson  League,  was  established  by  Mr. 
Carson  at  Syracuse  about  the  year  1853, 
in  support  of  the  enforcement  movement 
and  in  opposition  to  the  legalized  drink 
traffic  as  well.  By  means  of  this  paper 
Mr.  Carson  did  much  toward  securing 
the  nomination  and  election  of  Myron  H. 
Clark  as  Governor  of  New  York  in  1854, 
and  the  consequent  enactment  of  the 
Prohibitory  law  of  1855.  After  this  ap- 
parent triumph  of  Prohibition  he  remov- 
ed with  his  paper  to  New  York  City,  but 
there  it  was  discontinued  and  he  returned 
to  Elbridge.  The  Court  of  Appeals 
found  a  flaw  in  the  Maine  law,  as  the 
Prohibitory  statute  of  New  York  was 
called,  and  instead  of  amending  the 
measure  the  Legislature  in  1857  repealed 
it  and  passed  a  license  law.  Mr.  Carson 
immediately  renewed  the  war  on  the 
drink  traffic,  employing  much  the  same 
tactics  as  were  used  in  the  organization 
of  the  Carson  League.  The  new  society 
was  known  as  the  State  League,  and  a 
new  paper,  the  ^Slafe  League,  was  started 
to  support  it.  Each  Leaguer  pledged  at 
least  $1  a  year  in  payment  for  the  paper, 
and  also  agfeed  not  to  use  or  sell  intoxi- 
cating drinks,  or  vote  for  any  but  enemies 
of  the  liquor  traffic  to  fill  offices  that  had 
to  do  with  the  enactment  or  enforcement 
of  liquor  laws.  This  paper  he  continued 
to  publish  until  his  death.  He  was  a 
philanthropist  and  a  brave,  energetic  and 
self-denying  worker,  and  he  died  in  the 
midst  of  his  labors  asrainst  the  leo^alized 
and  defiant  liquor  traffic.  He  believed 
that  in  order  to  destroy  the  business  law 
must  be  brought  to  bear  against  it.  One 
of  his  sayings  was  that  "  the  best  temper- 
ance tracts  he  knew  of  were  rumsellers' 
tracks  to  jail."  With  this  conviction,  on 
one  occasion  he  secured  the  prosecution 
of  his  own  brother  (with  whom  he  was  on 
friendly  terms)  for  keeping  a  hotel  with 
a  bar  in  violation  of  law. 


Catholic  Temperance  Societies.]     68 


[Cause  and  Consequence. 


Catholic  Temperance  Societies. 

—On  Washington's  Birthday,  Feb.  22, 
1872,  the  Catholic  Total  Abstinence  Union 
was  formed  in  the  city  of  Baltimore,  Md, 
It  was  organized  for  the  purpose  of  assist- 
ing to  stem  the  tide  of  intemperance ;  and 
following  in  the  footsteps  of  the  glorious 
apostle  of  total  abstinence,  Theobald 
Mathew,  his  plan  of  individual  pledges 
was  adopted. 

The  objects  of  the  Union  are  as  fol- 
lows: 1.  To  secure  to  its  members  the 
privilege  of  being  received  into  societies 
connected  with  the  Union  in  any  part  of 
America.  2.  To  encourage  and  aid  com- 
mittees and  pastors  to  establish  new  so- 
cieties. 3.  To  spread,  by  means  of  Catho- 
lic total  abstinence  publications,  correct 
views  regarding  total  abstinence  princi- 
ples. 

The  constitution  states  that  to  accom- 
plish these  objects  we  rely  upon :  1.  The 
practice  of  our  holy  religion  by  all  mem- 
bers, individually.  2.  The  observance  by 
our  members  of  the  maxims  laid  down  for 
our  guidance  by  the  reverend  clei'gy.  3, 
The  influence  of  good  example  and  kind 
persuasion  by  our  members  upon  our  fel- 
low-Catholics. 4.  Our  connection  with 
the  association  of  prayer  in  honor  of  the 
sacred  thirst  and  agony  of  Jesus.  5.  The 
appointment  of  a  lecture  and  publication 
bureau. 

The  pledge  of  the  Union  is  as  follows : 

"  I  promise,  with  the  Divine  assistance  and  in 
honor  of  the  sacred  thirst  and  agony  of  our  Sav- 
iour, to  abstain  from  all  intoxicating  drinks; 
to  prevent  as  much  as  possible,  by  advice  and 
example,  the  sin  of  intemperance  in  others:  and 
to  discountenance  the  drinking  customs  of  so- 
ciety." 

The  officers  of  the  Union  are  a  Spiritual 
Director,  President,  1st  and  2d  Vice-Pres- 
idents, Treasurer  and  Secretary.  While 
the  Total  Abstinence  Union  is  the  prin- 
cipal temperance  organization  of  the 
Eoman  Catholic  Church,  there  are  various 
subordinate  and  dependent  societies  in 
States  and  dioceses  where  the  Union  has 
not  been  regularly  formed.  All  those 
have  been  approved  by  the  Plenary  Coun- 
cil of  the  Church  in  America;  and  the 
Holy  Father,  Pope  Leo  XIII,  has  formally 
commended  and  blessed  the  work  in 
which  the  various  total  abstinence  socie- 
ties of  the  church  are  engaged.  (See  Ro- 
man Catholic  Church.) 

With  these  approvals  of  our  spiritual 


fathers  the  Union  has  achieved  much  suc- 
cess. It  is  earnestly  working  to  have  a 
total  abstinence  society  in  every  parish ; 
and  as  a  means  toward  this  end,  it  has 
provided  that  the  1st  Vice-President  shall 
appoint  an  organizer  for  each  diocese. 
The  system  is  now  being  tried,  and  good 
results  are  hoped  for.  Special  efforts  are 
being  made  to  form  cadet  orgatiizations 
in  order  to  bring  up  the  youth  free  from 
the  cravings  of  appetite.  Many  societies 
of  women  have  been  formed  for  the  pur- 
pose of  cultivating  the  home  influence  so 
necessary  for  the  successful  continuance 
of  oitr  labors. 

The  Union  has  sent  out  lecturers  to 
all  sections  of  the  country,  and  has  dis- 
seminated a  large  number  of  total  absti- 
nence documents — especially  the  lectures 
of  Most  Rev.  Archbishop  Ireland  and  the 
pamphlets  of  Rev.  Dr.  T.  J.  Conaty. 
Thus  the  work  of  the  Union  is  being  car- 
ried on  from  Maine  to  California  and 
from  Minnesota  to  Texas.  Our  peojile 
are  advised  to  shun  the  flowing  bowl  and 
seek  safety  for  home  and  family  under 
the  banner  of  the  Catholic  Total  Absti- 
nence Union.  The  enrolled  membership 
in  good  standing  is  now  about  r)(),UUO. 

Philip  A.  Nolan, 
General  Secretary  Catholic  Total  Ab- 
stinence Union. 

Cause  and  Consequence. — The  ori- 
gin of  the  stimulant  habit  is  lost  in  the 
cloudland  of  prehistoric  tradition,  but 
the  antiquity  of  the  vice  does  not  warrant 
the  belief  in  the  physiological  necessity 
of  its  practice.  The  undoubted  fact  that 
there  have  been  manful,  industrious  and 
intelligent  nations  of  total  abstainers 
would  be  an  almost  sufficient  refutation 
of  that  inference,  which  is  sometimes 
qualified  by  the  assertion  that  the 
vicissitudes  of  a  rigorous  climate  have  to 
be  counteracted  by  the  stimulus  of  alco- 
holic beverages.  For  it  can,  besides,  be 
proved  that  the  alleged  invigorating 
action  of  alcohol  is  an  absolute  delusion, 
and  the  pathological  records  of  contem- 
porary nations  establish  the  fact  that  the 
epidemic  increase  of  intemperance  can 
nearly  always  be  traced  to  causes  wholly 
independent  of  any  increased  demands 
upon  the  physical  or  intellectual  energies 
of  the  afflicted  community.  Those  ener- 
gies, in  fact,  have  lamentably  decreased 
among  numerous  races  that  ouce  managed 


Cause  and  Consequence.]                    C9  [Cause  and  Consequence. 

to  combine  nature-abiding  habits  with  an  time  when  the  sumptuary  laws  of  Leo  de 

abundance  of  vital  vigor.  Medici  were  defeated  by  street  riots  and 

The   inevitable   progressiveness   of  all  a  shrieking  procession  of  the  Florentine 

stimulant  habits  (see  Poisons)  is  an  addi-  tavern-keepers. 

tional  argument  in  favor  of  the  theory  The  efforts  of  such  agitators  are  second- 
that  the  poison  vice  has  grown  up  f roui  ed  by  the  instinct  of  imitation.  "  In 
very  small  beginnings,  and  the  genesis  of  large  cities/'  says  Dr.  Schrodt,  "  one  may 
the  fatal  germ  has  probably  been  supplied  see  gamins  of  nine  or  ten  grubbing  in 
in  the  hypothesis  of  Tabio  Colonna,  an  rubbish-heaps  for  cigar-stumps;  soon  after 
Italian  physician  of  the  17th  Century,  leaning  against  a  board  fence,  groaning 
'•'  Before  people  used  wine/'  says  he,  "■  they  and  shuddering,  as  they  pay  the  repeated 
drank  sweet  must,  and  preserved  it,  like  penalties  of  nature,  yet  all  the  same  re- 
oil,  in  jars  or  skins.  But  in  a  warm  cli-  peating  the  experiment  with  the  resigna- 
mate  a  saccharine  fluid  is  apt  to  ferment,  tion  of  martyrs.  The  rich,  the  fashionable 
and  some  avaricious  housekeeper  may  do  it;  those  whom  they  envy  smoke; 
have  drunk  that  spoiled  liquid  till  she  be-  smoking,  they  conclude,  must  be  some- 
came  fond  of  it,  and  learned  to  prefer  it  thing  enviable."  Without  any  intentional 
to  must/'  Avarice,  aided  perhaps  by  arts  of  jaersuasion,  the  Chinese  business 
dietetic  prurience  or  indifference  to  the  men  of  San  Francisco  have  disseminated 
warnings  of  instinct,  planted  the  baneful  a  new  poison  vice  by  smoking  poppy-gum 
seed,  and  the  laws  of  evolution  did  the  in  the  presence  of  their  Caucasian  em- 
rest,  ployees  and  accustoming  them  to    asso- 

As  soon  as  the  sale  of  intoxicating  ciate  the  sight  of  an  opium  debauch  with 
liquors  had  become  extensive  enough  to  be  the  idea  of  enjoyment  and  recreation, 
profitable,  the  managers  of  the  traffic  had  Would  the  opponents  of  Prohibition  at- 
a  personal  interest  in  disseminating  the  tempt  to  deny  that  analogous  influences 
poison  habit.  Attempts  at  reform  were  (the  custom  of  "treating"  friends  at  a 
met  by  appeals  to  the  convivial  instincts  public  bar,  the  spectacle  of  lager  beer  or- 
of  the  stimulant  dupes,  by  the  seduction  gies  in  public  gardens,  etc.)  have  a  great 
of  minors  and  by  charges  of  asceticism;  deal  to  do  with  the  initiation  of  boy- 
later  by  nostrum  pufl^s  and  opium  wars,  topers  ? 

More  than  2,000  years  ago  the  worship  of  Ignorance  does  not  lead  our  dumb  fel- 

Bacchus  was  propagated  by  force  of  arms,  low-creatures  to  vicious  habits,  and  prej- 

The  disciples  of  Ibn  Hanbal,  the  Arabian  udice   is    therefore,   perhaps,   the    more 

Father    Mathew,    were    stoned    in    the  correct    name   for   the    sad   infatuation 

streets  of  Bagdad.     The  persecution  and  which  prompts  so  many  millions  of  our 

repeated  expulsion  of  the  Grecian  Pytha-  young   men  to  defy  the  protests   of  in- 

goreans  had  a  good  deal  to  do  with  the  stinct  and  make  themselves  the  slaves  of 

temperance  teachings  of  their  master.    In  a   life-destroying    poison.     Ignorance  is 

Palestine,  in  India,  in  medieval  Europe  nescience.     Prejudice  is  mah-cieiice,  mis- 

eyery  apostle  of  nature  had  to  contend  creance,   trust   in    erroneous    teachings, 

with   a   rancorous   opposition,   often  in-  Millions  of  children  are  brought  up  in  the 

spired  by  motives  of  sordid  self-interest;  belief  that  health  can  be  secured  only  by 

and  our  own  age  in  that  respect  cannot  abnormal    means.      A    pampered     child 

boast  of  much  improvement.     In  spite  of  complains  of  headache,  of  want  of  appe- 

our  higher  standards  of  philanthropy  and  tite.     Instead  of  curing  the  evil  by  the 

their  numerous  victories  in  other  direc-  removal  of  the  cause,  in  the  way  so  plain- 

tions,  the  heartless  alliance  of  Bacchus  ly  indicated  by  the  monitions  of  instinct, 

and  mammon  still  stands  defiant.     In  our  the  mother  sends  to  the  drug-store.     The 

own    country   nearly   200,000   men,   not  child  must  "  take  something."     iV  young 

half  of  them  entitled  to  plead  the  excuses  rake,  getting  more  fretful  and  dyspeptic 

of  ignorance  or  poverty,  unblushingly  in-  from   year   to   year,  is  advised   to    "  try 

voke  the  protection  of  the  law  in   behalf  something" — an  aloe-pill,  a  bottle  of  med- 

of  a  traffic  involving  the  systematic  prop-  icated  brandy,  any  quack  "  specific  "   re- 

agation  of    disease,    misery   and    crime,  commended  by  its  bitterness  or  nauseous- 

Wherever  the  interests  of  the  poison  ven-  ness.     The  protests  of  nature  are  calmly 

dors  are  at  stake,  the  nations  of  Europe  disregarded   in    such   cases.     A   dose  of 

have  not  made  muck  progress  since  the  medicine,  according  to  popular  impres- 


Cause  and  Consequence.] 


70 


[Chambers,  John. 


sion,  cannot  be  very  effective  unless  it  is 
very  repulsive.  Our  children  thus  learn 
to  mistrust  the  voice  of  their  natural  in- 
stincts. They  try  to  rely  on  the  aid  of 
abnormal  agencies  instead  of  trusting 
their  troubles  to  nature.  Boys  whose 
petty  ailments  have  been  palliated  with 
stimulants  will  afterwards  be  tempted  to 
drown  thir  sorrows  in  draughts  of  the  same 
nepenthe,  instead  of  biding  their  time, 
like  Henry  Thoreau,  who  preferred  to 
"■  face  any  fate  rather  than  seek  refuge 
in  the  mist  of  intoxication." 

We  have  seen  that  the  milder  stimu- 
lants often  form  the  stepping-stones  to  a 
passion  for  stronger  poisons.  A  pencliant 
for  any  kind  of  tonic  drug,  nicotine,  nar- 
cotic infusions,  the  milder  opiates,  etc., 
may  thus  initiate  a  stimulant  habit  with 
an  unlimited  capacity  for  development, 
and  there  is  no  doubt  that  international 
traffic  has  relaxed  the  vigilance  which 
helped  our  forefathers  to  guard  their 
homes  against  the  introduction  of  foreign 
jjoison  vices.  Hence  the  curious  fact  that 
drunkenness  is  most  prevalent,  not  in  the 
most  ignorant  or  despotic  countries 
(Spain,  Eussia,  Turkey),  nor  in  regions 
where  alcoholic  drinks  of  the  most  seduc- 
tive kind  are  cheapest,  but  in  the  most 
commercial  countries — western  France, 
Great  Britain,  Holland  and  North  Ame- 
rica. Hence  also  the  fallacy  of  the 
brewers'  argument  that  the  vise  of  lager 
beer  would  prevent  the  dissemination  of 
the  opium  habit.  No  stimulant  vice  has 
ever  prevented  the  introduction  of  worse 
poisons.  Among  the  indirect  causes  of 
intemperance  we  must  therefore  include 
our  mistaken  toleration  of  the  minor 
stimulants,  and  of  the  traffic  in  "  medi- 
cated "  quack  brandies. 

Alcohol  in  the  course  of  the  last  2,000 
years  has  proved  a  direr  enemy  to  the 
welfare  of  the  human  race  than  war, 
pestilence  and  the  rage  of  all  the  hostile 
elements  of  nature  taken  together.  Un- 
questionable statistics  demonstrate  the 
fact  that  the  total  loss  of  life  (by  shorten- 
ing the  average  of  human  longevity) 
caused  by  strong  drink  equals  the  havoc 
of  perennial  warfare.  The  loss  of  health 
more  than  equals  the  consequences  of 
malaria  in  the  most  unhealthy  regions  of 
the  globe.  The  waste  of  land  can  be  es- 
timated only  by  millions  of  square  miles, 
devoted  to  the  production  of  food-stuffs 
to  be  devoured  by  breweries  and  distiller- 


ies. The  loss  of  labor  diverts  from  use- 
ful or  harmless  pursuit  the  energies  of 
some  thirty  to  forty  millions  of  our  fel- 
low men.  The  moral  loss  is  not  confined 
to  the  direct  influence  of  the  brutalizing 
poison.  The  liquor  traffic  defiles  all  par- 
ticipants of  a  transaction  which  involves 
a  sin  against  nature,  a  crime  against 
society  and  posterity,  and  an  outrage 
against  the  moral  instincts  of  all  un- 
prejudiced human  beings. 

Felix  L.  Oswald. 

Central  America. — The  hereditary 
abstemiousness  of  the  Spanish  people  of 
Mexico  and  Central  America  has  been 
somewhat  modified  by  the  influence  of 
foreign  manners,  but,  on  the  other  hand, 
that  evil  tendency  has  been  checked  by 
the  lesson  of  practical  experience  in  the 
intertropical  seaport  towns  where  the 
alcoholized  foreigners  succumb  by  hun- 
dreds to  epidemics  that  spare  the  temper- 
ate natives.  The  history  of  fever  and 
epidemics  on  the  Isthmus  of  Panama  has 
for  centuries  confirmed  the  verdict  of  Dr. 
H.  E.  Ward,  who  passed  many  years  on 
the  deadly  swamp-coasts  of  the  Sunda  Is- 
lands. "  I  have  had  the  opportunity," 
he  says,  "of  observing  for  20  years  the 
comparative  use  of  coffee  in  one  class  of 
natives  and  of  spirituous  liquors  in 
another — the  native  Sumatrans  using 
the  former  and  the  natives  of  British  In- 
dia, settled  here,  the  other;  and  I  find 
that  while  the  former  expose  themselves 
with  impunity  to  every  degree  of  heat, 
cold  and  wet,  the  latter  can  endure  neither 
for  even  a  short  period  without  danger 
to  their  health."  The  intelligent  natives  of 
the  Central  American  seaport  towns 
regard  the  rumshops  of  the  foreign  resi- 
dents very  much  as  the  Caucasians  of  San 
Francisco  regard  the  "opium  hells"  of 
their  Chinese  fellow-citizens,  and  in  ex- 
tensive districts  of  the  interior  alcohol  is 
used  only  in  the  form  of  pulque,  the 
fermented  juice  of  the  aloe  plant.  Occa- 
sional excesses  in  the  use  of  that  beverage 
are  not  wholly  confined  to  the  Jadinos — 
the  Spanish-Indian  country  population, — 
but  habitual  intemperance  is  very  rare 
among  the  educated  classes. 

Felix  L.  Oswald. 

Chambers,  John.— Born  in  Stew- 
artstown.  County  Tvrone,  Ireland,  Dec. 
19,  1797,  and  died  Sept.  23,  1875.  His 
father,  William   Chambers,  was  involved 


Chambers,  John.] 


[Chauniug,  William  Ellery. 


iu  Irish  revolutionary  enterprises,  and 
fled  with  his  wife  and  infant  son  John 
to  America.  The  refugee  settled  on  an 
Ohio  farm.  The  hoy  at  the  age  of  16 
entered  the  store  of  a  cousin  in  Balti- 
more. At  17  he  united  with  the  Asso- 
ciate Reformed  Presbyterian  Church. 
Deciding  to  become  a  minister  he  spent 
five  years  in  a  school  in  Baltimore.  In 
1825  he  was  appointed  jiastor  of  the 
1st  Independent  Church  of  Pliiladelphia. 
He  was  gifted  with  exceptional  oratorical 
powers,  and  it  was  not  long  before  he 
began  to  use  his  talents  to  arouse  public 
sentiment  against  the  indulgence  in  in- 
toxicating beverages.  He  presided  over 
the  first  public  temperance  meeting  held 
in  Philadelphia,  and  in  1840  organized 
among  the  young  men  of  his  congrega- 
tion a  Youths'  Temperance  Society  by 
means  of  which  many  temperance  work- 
ers received  their  early  training.  In  18-49 
he  was  introduced  to  an  audience  as 
"the  war-horse  of  the  temperance  cause,'' 
and  ever  after  he  was  known  as  "  The 
A¥ar  Horse."  In  the  early  days  of  his 
ministry  it  was  the  common  custom  to 
serve  liquors  at  funerals.  Mr.  Chambers 
gave  notice  from  his  pulpit  that  he  would 
enter  no  house  where  liquors  were  pro- 
vided, and  on  one  occasion  he  stood  out- 
side in  a  drenching  rain  and  refused  to 
officiate  until  the  corpse  had  been  brought 
to  him.  Throughout  his  long  ministry 
he  continued  the  work,  seeking  by  ser- 
mons, by  addresses,  by  prayers,  by  pledge- 
taking,  by  pecuniary  contributions  for 
the  aid  of  reformed  inebriates,  by  train- 
ing young  men  and  by  all  other  availa- 
ble methods  to  promote  the  temperance 
reform.  His  efforts  made  bitter  enemies 
for  him  among  the  liquor-dealers.  Once 
he  was  confronted  on  the  street  by  a 
rumseller,  who  seizing  him  by  the  collar, 
heaped  profanity  and  abuse  upon  him. 
Mr.  Chambers  listened  quietly  until  his 
assailant  Avas  out  of  breath  and  then 
politely  lifted  his  hat,  thanked  him  and 
went  on  his  way.  He  was  especially  suc- 
cessful with  young  men.  About  two 
score  of  the  young  men  of  his  congrega- 
tion became  clergymen,  and  a  company  of 
thirty  youths  of  his  church,  headed  by 
John  Wanamaker  (afterwards  Postmas- 
ter-General), founded  the  widely-known 
Bethany  Sunday-school  of  Philadelphia. 
In  the  half  century  of  his  Christian  min- 


istry he  admitted  3,585  members  to  his 
church. 

Champagne. — See  Vinous  Liquors. 

Channing,    William    Ellery,    an 

eminent  American  clergyman,  reformer 
and  writer,  born  in  Newport,  K.  1.,  April 
7,  1780,  and  died  in  Bennington,  Vt., 
Oct.  2,  1842.  At  the  age  of  12  he  was 
sent  to  New  London,  Conn.,  to  prepare 
for  college,  and  two  years  later,  in  1794, 
he  entered  the  Freshman  class  at  Har- 
vard. He  graduated  from  the  institu- 
tion in  1798  and  spent  the  following  18 
months  as  tutor  in  a  private  family  at 
Richmond,  Va.  In  1800  he  returned  to 
Newport  and  continued  his  studies, 
dividing  his  time  between  the  public 
library  and  the  sea-shore.  In  1801  he 
removed  to  Cambridge,  Mass.,  and  being 
elected  Regent  of  the  University  entered 
upon  the  study  of  theology.  He  received 
approbation  to  preach  in  1802,  and  his 
sermons  attracted  immediate  attention 
for  their  fervor  and  solemnity.  He  was 
ordained  pastor  of  the  Federal  Street 
Church  of  Boston,  June  1,  1803.  In  the 
disagreement  between  the  "  liberal "  and 
"  orthodox  "  Congregationalists  of  New 
England,  Dr.  Channing  was  the  recog- 
nized leader  of  the  "liberals,"  since 
known  as  Unitarians,  Soon  after  his 
marriage  in  1814  he  began  the  study  of 
the  German  philosophers,  Kant,  Schel- 
ling  and  Fichte.  After  Napoleon's  over- 
throw at  Waterloo  he  preached  a  sermon 
on  the  "  goodness  of  God  in  delivering  the 
Christian  world  from  military  discipline." 
In  1822  he  visited  Europe,  and  upon  his 
return  to  this  country  in  1824  the  ap- 
pointment of  Rev.  Ezra  Gannett  as  his 
colleague  in  pastoral  work  permitted  him 
to  devote  much  more  of  his  time  to  liter- 
ature and  social  reforms.  He  lectured 
and  preached  sermons  against  slavery 
and  in  behalf  of  temperance,  education 
and  prison  reform.  His  best-known 
effort  in  advocacy  of  temperance  was 
his  "  Address  on  Temperance,"  delivered 
in  Boston,  Feb.  28,  1837.  In  this  he 
took  radical  ground  on  the  question  of 
total  abstinence.  "  It  is  very  plain," 
said  he,  "too  plain  to  be  insisted  on, that 
to  remove  what  intoxicates  is  to  remove 
intoxication.  In  proportion  as  ardent 
spirits  are  banished  from  our  houses,  our 
tables,  our  hospitalities,  in  proportion  as 


Chickering,  John  White.] 


I  4 


[China. 


those  who  have  influence  and  authority 
in  the  community  abstain  themselves 
and  lead  their  dependents  to  abstain 
from  their  use,  in  that  proportion  the 
occasions  of  excess  must  be  diminished, 
the  temptations  to  it  must  disappear." 
]5ut  while  convinced  that  the  liquor  traf- 
fic ought  to  be  prohibited.  Dr.  Channing 
was  doubtful  whether  public  opinion  at 
that  time  (1837)  was  sufficiently  aroused 
to  successfully  enforce  Prohibitory  stat- 
utes. This  is  manifest  in  the  same  ad- 
dress: "What  ought  not  to  be  used  as  a 
beverage  ought  not  to  be  sold  as  such. 
What  the  good  of  the  community  requires 
us  to  expel  no  man  has  a  moral  right  to 
supply.  That  intemperance  is  dreadfully 
multiplied  by  the  number  of  licensed 
shops  for  the  retailing  of  spirits  we  all 
know.  That  these  should  be  shut  every 
good  man  desires.  Law,  however,  can- 
not shut  them  except  to  a  limited  extent, 
or  only  in  a  few  favored  parts  of  the 
country.  Law  is  here  the  will  of  the 
people,  and  the  Legislature  can  do  little 
unless  sustained  by  the  public  voice.  To 
form,  then,  an  enlightened  and  vigorous 
public  sentiment,  which  will  demand  the 
suppression  of  these  licensed  nurseries  of 
intemperance,  is  a  duty  to  which  every 
good  man  is  bound  and  a  service  in 
which  each  may  take  a  share."  His 
nephew  and  biographer,  Rev.  William  H. 
Channing,  says  of  his  attitude  on  the 
temperance  question  ("  Memoirs  of  Wil- 
liam Ellery  Channing,"  vol.  3,  p.  30) : 

"  With  his  habitual  love  of  individual  free- 
dom and  his  excessive  dread  of  the  t^'rauny  in- 
cid^'nt  to  associated  action,  he  refrained,  indeed, 
from  joining  the  temperance  societies  and  never 
adopted  or  advised  others  to  adopt  their 
pledges.  But  by  precept  and  example  he  lent 
the  full  weight  of  his  influence  to  the  temper- 
ance reform." 

In  1833  Dr.  Channing  himself  wrote : 
"  The  temperance  reform  which  is  going 
on  among  us  deserves  all  praise,  and  I 
see  not  what  is  to  hinder  its  complete 
success.  ...  I  believe  the  movements 
now  made  will  succeed  because  they  are 
in  harmony  with  and  seconded  by  the 
general  spirit  and  progress  of  the  age." 
("  Memoirs,"  vol.  3,  p.  36.) 

Chickering,  John  White.— Born  in 

Woburn,  Mass.,  March  19,  1808,  and  died 
in  Brooklyn,  N.  Y.,  Dec.  9, 1888.  He  came 
from  an  old  New  England  family,  and  was 
the  fourth  in  a  line  of  Congregational  min- 


isters. He  graduated  from  Middlebury 
College  in  182G,  and  from  Andover  Theo- 
logical Seminary  in  1829.  In  1830  he  was 
ordained  pastor  of  the  Congregational 
Church  at  Bolton,  Mass.,  and  after  a  nine 
years'  pastorate  accepted  a  call  to  the 
High  Street  Congregational  Church  of 
Portland,  Me.,  where  he  remained  for  30 
years.  Dr.  Chickering  was  a  contributor 
to  various  newspapers,  and  published  two 
books,  "The  Hill-Side  Church"  and 
"  Sermons  on  the  Decalogue."  He  wrote 
a  number  of  tracts  on  temperance  and 
gospel  subjects,  and  some  of  them  have 
been  translated  into  other  languages  and 
widely  circulated.  He  also  preached  of- 
ten from  the  pulpit  on  the  temperance 
question,  advocating  total  abstinence  for 
the  individual  and  Prohibition  of  the 
liquor  traffic  by  the  State. 

China.  ^  — Intoxicating  drinks  have 
been  used  in  China  from  the  remotest 
times.  The  earliest  historical  records, 
which  begin  at  a  period  more  than  2,000 
years  before  the  Christian  era,  mention  a 
spirituous  liquor  as  an  article  already  in 
common  use  and  speak  of  the  drunken- 
ness of  some  of  the  early  Emperors  and 
their  ministers  as  a  matter  of  shame  and 
a  source  of  calamity.  The  art  of  distil-, 
lation,  in  all  probability,  was  first  dis- 
covered by  the  Chinese,  but  at  such  an 
early  date  that  there  is  no  record  of  it. 
One  tradition  ascribes  its  invention  to 
Tu  K'ang,  who.  Dr.  Williams  says,  was  a 
woman  of  the  Scythian  tribes.  Dr.  Legge, 
however,  says  it  is  not  known  who  Tu 
K'ang  was.  Another  Chinese  tradition 
declares  that  this  liquor  was  first  made  by 
(Iti,  probably)  a  cook  in  the  household  of 
Yii,  who  reigned  in  the  23d  Century  be- 
fore Christ.  Dr.  Edkins  has  denied  that 
distillation  was  known  among  the  Chinese 
before  1280  A.  D.,  and  would  have  us  be- 
lieve that  this  early  liquor  was  simply  fer- 
mented. But  Dr.  Legge  has  shown  that 
the  phrase  for  distilled  liquor,  on  which 
this  argument  turns,  was  used  at  least  as 
early  as  G18  A.  D.  At  any  rate  there  has 
been  no  such  thing  as  native  beer  made 
in  modern  times.  Grapes  are  grown  in 
many  places,  but  no  wine  is  manufactured. 
All   Chinese   liquors  to-day  are  distilled. 

1  The  editor  is  indebted  to  Rev.  E.  T.  Williams  (Nankin. 
China),  Kev.  C.  Hartwell  (formerly  of  Foochow,  China), 
Rev.  T.  Lanrie  (Providence,  R.  I.),  and  Rev.  S.  L.  Bald- 
win ( Recording  Secretary,  Mission  Rooms  of  the  Methodist 
Episcopal  Church,  New  York}. 


China.] 


73 


[China. 


ANCIENT   TESTIMONY. 

Whatever  opinion  as  to  the  period  of 
the  discovery  of  distillation  is  accepted, 
it  is  certain  that  alcoholic  liquors,  how- 
ever prepared,  were  in  use  among  the 
Chinese  in  the  most  distant  ages.  The 
literature  of  the  nation  abounds  in  testi- 


monies 


concerning 


the  evils  wrought 
by  intemperance,  impressive  utterances 
against  indulgence  and  Imperial  decrees 
of  a  restrictive  or  Prohibitory  nature. 
Mencius  has  told  us  of  Yii  the  Great,  the 
founder  of  the  Hia  Dynasty  (2305  B.  C.) : 
"Yii  hated  the  pleasant  wine"  (Legge, 
"  Chinese  Classics,"  vol.  2,  p.  202).  The 
common  Chinese  explanation  of  this  is 
also  given  by  Legge  in  a  quotation  from 
"  The  Plans  of  the  Warring  States,"  a 
history  of  the  times  next  succeeding  Con- 
fucius :  "  Eteih  (or  Iti)  made  wine  which 
Yii  tasted  and  liked,  but  he  said,  'In 
after  ages  there  will  be  those  who  through 
wine  Avill  lose  their  kingdoms  '\  so  he  de- 
graded Eteih  and  refused  to  drink  plea- 
sant wine."  It  should  be  noticed  here 
that  Legge,  like  many  other  writers,  uses 
the  term  "  wine  "  for  fermented  liquors 
made  from  millet,  rice  or  any  kind  of 
grain. 

And  Yii's  prediction  was  too  sadly  ful- 
filled. The  dynasty  he  founded  came  to 
an  end  in  B.  C.  1766,  through  the  over- 
throw of  Kieh,  the  abandoned  tyrant,  who 
to  gratify  his  favorite  concubine  lavished 
treasures  "  in  providing  her  with  a  splen- 
did palace,  and  in  the  park  that  sur- 
rounded it  a  lake  of  wane  was  formed  at 
which  '  three  thousand  men  drank  at  the 
sound  of  a  drum,'  while  the  trees  hung 
with  dried  meats,  and  '  hills  of  flesh '  were 
piled  up."  (Mayers's  Manual,  p.  82.)  He 
was  followed  by  Tang  the  Completer  who 
overcame  him  and  founded  the  Shang 
dynasty.  But  this  dynasty  came  to  an 
end  in  1122,  by  the  suicide  of  Chow  Sin, 
an  even  more  abandoned  and  cruel  tyrant 
than  Kieh  if  possible,  with  whom  he  is 
classed  by  the  Chinese  as  one  of  the ''  two 
wicked  Emperors."  The  book  of  "  Shu 
King  "  reports  the  words  of  the  Count  of 
AVei  in  1123  B.  C,  when  lamenting  the 
impending  fall  of  the  Shang  dynasty. 
"  The  House  of  Y^in,"  said  Wei,  "  we  may 
conclude  can  no  longer  exercise  rule  over 
the  four  quarters  of  the  kingdom.  The 
great  deeds  of  our  founder  were  displayed 
in  former  ages,  but  by  our  maddened  in- 
dulgence in  spirits  we  have  destroyed  the 


effects  of  his  virtues  in  these  after  times." 
(Legge's  translation.)  And  Wu  Wang, 
who  overthrew  Cbow  Sin,  in  a  "Gre^t 
Declaration  "  to  the  princes,  officers  and 
people,  declared  respecting  the  fallen 
monarch  that  "■  He  has  been  abandoned 
to  drunkenness  and  reckless  in  lust." 

But  the  dissolute  royal  example  had  led 
to  a  sad  state  of  morals  among  the  people 
both  high  and  low,  and  when  Wu  Wang 
appointed  his  brother  Fung  to  rule  over 
the  region  around  the  former  capital,  in. 
the  present  Province  of  Honan,  he  ad- 
dressed to  him  the  "  Announcement  about 
Fermented  Liquors  "  found  in  Book  X  of 
the  "  Shu  King."  This  remarkable  "  An- 
nouncement "  antedates  the  admonitions 
of  Solomon  in  the  Book  of  Proverbs,  and 
is  probably  the  oldest  temperance  dis- 
course on  record.  It  is,  in  j^art,  as  fol- 
lows : 

"  When  your  reverend  father,  King  Wan, 
founded  our  kingdom  in  the  western  region, 
he  delivered  announcements  and  cautions  to 
the  princes  of  the  various  states,  their  officers, 
assistants  and  managers  of  affairs,  morning  and 
evening,  saying,  '  For  sacrifices  spirits  should  be 
employed.  When  Heaven  was  sending  down 
its  favoring  commands  and  laying  the  founda- 
tions of  our  people's  sway,  spirits  were  used 
only  in  ths  great  sacrifices.  But  when  Heaven 
has  sent  down  its  terrors,  and  our  ])eople  have 
been  thereby  greatly  disorganized  and  lost  their 
sense  of  virtue,  this  too  can  be  ascribed  to  noth- 
ing else  than  their  unlimited  use  of  spirits;  yea, 
further,  the  ruin  of  the  feudal  states,  small  and 
great,  may  be  traced  to  this  one  sin,  the  free 
use  of  spirits.'  King  Wan  admonished  and  in- 
structed the  young  and  those  in  office  managing 
public  affairs  that  they  should  not  habitually 
drink  spirits.  In  all  the  states  he  enjoined  that 
their  use  be  confined  to  times  of  sacrifices  ;  and 
even  then  with  such  limitations  that  virtue 
should  prevent  drunkenness." 

Continuing,  Wu  Wang  establishes  se- 
vere Prohibitory  rules,  as  follows : 

"If  you  are  told  that  there  are  companies 
who  drink  together,  do  not  fail  to  apprehend 
them  all  and  send  them  to  Chow,  where  I  may 
put  them  to  death.  As  to  the  ministers  and 
officers  of  Yin  [another  term  for  the  Shang 
dynasty],  who  have  been  led  to  it  and  been  ad- 
dicted to  drink,  it  is  not  necessary  to  put  them 
to  death  ;  let  them  be  taught  for  a  time.  If  they 
keep  my  lessons  I  will  give  them  bright  dis- 
tinction. If  you  disregard  my  lessons,  then  I, 
the  one  man,  will  show  you  no  pity.  As  you 
cannot  cleanse  your  way,  you  shall  be  classed 
with  those  who  are  to  be  put  to  death.  The 
king  says,  O  Fung,  give  constant  heed  to  my 
admonitions.  If  you  do  not  manage  right  your 
officers,  the  people  will  continue  lost  in  drink." 

Afterwards  other  expedients  were  tried 
to    prevent    intemperance.     About    Wu 


China.] 


74 


[China. 


AVang's  time  elaborate  ceremonies  in  con- 
nection with  drinking  were  prescribed. 
Etiquette  required  that  host  and  guest 
should  bow  to  each  other  so  many  times 
before  each  drinking  that  if  they  drank 
together  all  day  "  they  could  not  get 
drunk."  Near  the  beginning  of  the  Han 
dynasty  (B.  C.  20G)  and  afterwards,  a 
fine  of  four  ounces  of  silver  was  put  on  all 
guilty  of  meeting  together  and  drinking 
in  companies  of  more  than  three  persons. 
In  B.  C.  98  liquors  could  be  made  and 
sold  only  by  the  Government.  An  Em- 
l^eror  of  the  Northern  Wei  dynasty,  A, 
D.  459,  made  a  very  severe  Prohibitory 
law.  All  liquor-makers,  liquor-vendors 
and  liquor-drinkers  were  to  be  beheaded. 
In  781  an  Emperor  of  the  T'ang  dynasty 
invented  a  peculiar  scheme  of  Prohibition. 
All  the  liquor-shops  were  divided  into 
three  grades,  to  pay  a  monthly  tax  to  the 
Government  according  to  size,  and  then 
all  persons,  officers  and  people  were 
strictly  forbidden  to  buy  or  drink.  In 
the  Kin  Tartar  dynasty,  1160,  the  law 
was  that  all  officials  who  drank  should  be 
beheaded.  In  1279  the  Mongol  Emperor 
had  a  law  that  all  liquor-makers  should 
be  banished  and  enslaved,  and  all  their 
property  and  children  should  come  under 
the  control  and  care  of  the  Government. 
During  the  present  dynasty  no  laws  have 
been  made  respecting  the  use  of  liquors  or 
spirits.  1 

A  common  Chinese  saying  has  been 
rendered  into  English  thus : 

"  First  the  man  takes  a  dram, 
Then  the  dram  takes  a  dram. 
Then  the  drams  take  the  man." 

PRESENT   DRIXK   CONDITIONS. 

As  has  already  been  stated,  the  Chinese 
do  not  now  manufactitre  fermented 
liquors,  and  have  not  done  so  in  recent 
times.  Moreover  their  distilled  bever- 
ages are  not  frequently  consumed  to  ex- 
cess, and  it  is  probably  true  that  so  far 
as  the  use  of  alcoholic  beverages  is  con- 
cerned China  is  the  most  temperate  of 
the  great  nations  of  the  world.  "'  In  an 
observation  of  over  20  years  in  China," 
writes  a  former  American  missionary,^ 
"  I  did  not  see  a  Chinaman  intoxicated 
more  than  once  or  twice,  except  where  I 
had  reason  to  know  that  he  was  intoxi- 


'  These  various  items  have  been  taken  from  Dr.  Fabers's 
work  in  Chinese,  entitled  "  Civilization,  Chinese  and 
Christian." 

•J  Rev.  S.  L.  Baldwin,  New  York. 


cated  on  foreign  liquor."  The  most  com- 
mon distilled  beverage  made  by  the 
Chinese  is  a  species  of  arrack,  prepared 
from  glutinous  rice.  The  law  forbids 
the  US3  of  the  ''  sien "  or  ordinary  rice 
for  this  purpose,  as  it  is  the  people's 
main  dependence  for  food.  Wheat,  bar- 
ley, millet  and  Indian  corn  are  also  dis- 
tilled. Next  to  rice  the  "  kao-liang  "  or 
millet  is  most  frequently  itsed  and  makes 
a  strong  liquor,  although  none  of  the 
Chinese  intoxicants  are  as  strong  in  alcohol 
as  those  of  Western  nations.  Thrice-dis- 
tilled liquor  is  called  "  samshu."  Chinese 
arrack  contains  perhaps  two-thirds  as  much 
alcohol  as  American  whiskies.  Among 
the  reasons  assigned  for  the  comparative 
freedom  of  the  people  from  drunkenness 
are:  1.  The  fact  that  their  diet  is  light 
and  simple,  and  does  not  tend  to  awaken 
the  appetite  for  strong  drink  that  goes 
along  with  higher  living;  2.  The  general 
use  of  tea,  which  quenches  thirst  and  to  a 
large  extent  takes  the  place  of  liquor ;  3. 
The  groat  prevalence  of  the  opium  habit, 
taking  the  place  of  the  alcohol  vice  with 
the  victims  of  that  habit.  There  is  noth- 
ing in  China  corresponding  to  the  saloon 
of  Western  countries.  The  ordinary 
place  of  resort  is  the  tea-house,  and  all 
affairs  are  discussed  over  "  the  cup  that 
cheers  but  not  inebriates."  There  is  of 
cotirse  a  certain  amount  of  drinking  at  the 
inns  and  restaurants.  There  are  no  shops 
given  entirely  to  the  sale  and  drinking 
of  liquors.  There  may  be  more  drunk- 
enness, however,  than  is  apparent,  for  the 
very  reason  that  drinking  is  almost 
wholly  confined  to  the  home,  where  its 
results  are  not  easily  observed  by  stran- 
gers. It  is  impossible  to  ascertain  the 
exact  amount  of  liquor  of  native  produc- 
tion consumed  in  China.  In  1888  there 
were  198,623  piculs  of  samshu,  valued  at 
552,442  taels,  exported  from  the  "  open  " 
ports.  (A  picul  is  equal  to  133^  lbs.  and 
a  tael  to  $1.15.)  This,  however,  can  rep- 
resent only  a  small  portion  of  the  total 
manufacture.  Dr.  J.  G.  Kerr,  a  medical 
missionary  at  Canton,  estimates  the  pro- 
portion of  adults — men  and  women — ad- 
dicted to  drinking  at  60  per  cent.  At 
an  average  daily  allowance  of  four  Chi- 
nese ounces  the  expense  for  each  person 
per  annum  wotild  amount  to  2.25  taels,  or 
$2.59,  if  the  cheapest  liquor  is  purchased. 
This  is  certainly  a  very  moderate  esti- 
mate.    There  are  very  few  Chinamen  who 


China.] 


75 


[China. 


do  not  occusionally  drink,  for  social 
usage  requires  it  on  certain  occasions, 
such  as  the  birth  of  a  son,  a  wedding, 
funeral  or  birthday  celebration.  It  is 
safe  to  say  there  are  150,000,000  adults 
in  China.  According  to  the  above  esti- 
mate the  annual  consumption  will  ap- 
proximate 1,350,000,000  gallons,  at  a  cost 
of  more  than  $233,000,000. 

But  a  change  for  the  worse  is  gradu- 
ally being  effected,  and  for  this  change 
the  foreigners,  men  professing  the  Chris- 
tian religion,  are  responsible.  Until 
recently  there  was  no  market  in  China 
for  foreign  liquors.  Those  shipped  to 
her  ports  were  admitted  free  of  duty  be- 
cause consumed  by  foreigners  alone.  Not 
long  since,  however  (1888),  foreign  wine, 
beer  and  spirits  were  put  upon  the  tariff 
list  because,  as  was  asserted,  the  Chinese 
were  already  purchasing  them  in  consid- 
erable quantities.  This  consumption  is 
increasing  rapidly,  especially  or  almost 
wholly  among  the  official  and  moneyed 
classes;  for  at  present  their  use  is  limited 
by  the  high  prices  demanded  for  them.  In 
the  "  Returns  of  Trade  "  for  1888,  publish- 
ed by  the  customs  service,  the  quantities 
of  wines  and  spirits  entered  are  given  for 
only  nine  of  the  29  open  ports.  These 
quantities  had  an  aggregate  value  of  331,- 
936  taels  (S38 1,726.40)':  Dr.  J.  G.  Kerr, 
in  the  article  referred  to  above  (Chinese 
Recorder,  January,  1888),  says : 

"The  adv^ent  of  foreigners  t3  China  brought 
with  it  a  terrible  evil  in  the  use  of  opium,  and 
this  is  wasting  the  lives  and  substance  of  tens 
of  thousands  of  her  ijeople  and  rendering  the 
salvation  of  their  souls  almost  an  impossibility. 
The  future  threatens  an  evil  many  fold  greater 
than  opium,  as  a  concomitant  of  the  iDtroduc- 
tion  of  Western  science  and  education.  The  use 
of  native  liquors  is  limited  because  of  the  char- 
acter given  them  by  the  crude  mode  of  manu- 
facture. The  consumption  of  foreign  liquors 
is  limited  because  of  their  expense,  The 
time  will  no  doubt  soon  come  when  alcoholic 
drinks  will  be  prepared  here  as  they  are  in  the 
West  and  as  cheaply  as  native  spirits  now  are. 
The  probability  is  that  their  use  will  increase 
and  drunkenness  will  become  as  common  as  it 
is  in  so-called  Christian  lands  and  the  evils  fol- 
lowing in  its  train  be  as  great  here  as  they  are 
there." 

That  this  danger  is  not  imaginary  he 
proceeds  to  show  by  quoting  reliable 
statements  as  to  the  effects  already  real- 
ized in  the  neighboring  Empire  of  Japan, 
where  the  conditions  a  few  years  ago  were 
as  they  are  now  in  China.  There  is  no 
regulation  by  the  Chinese  Government  of 


the  traffic  in  intoxicating  liquors  beyond 
the  collection  of  a  local  tax  on  the  pro- 
duction, and  the  import  and  export  dues. 
The  attention  of  the  missionaries  in  some 
places  is  being  directed  to  it  as  an  evil 
that  threatens  soon  to  grow  to  vast  pro- 
portions. For  examjDle,  in  the  city  of 
Shanghai  every  store  kept  by  a  foreigner 
sells  liquor,  of  which  some  is  consumed 
on  the  premises.  The  yearly  revenue 
from  the  tax  on  this  traffic  amounts  to 
3,600  taels  (14,140).  Foreign  wines  and 
spirits  are  very  generally  used  by  the  well- 
to-do  classes  of  Chinese  in  that  city.  In 
the  English  settlement  in  Shanghai  there 
were  58  arrests  of  Chinamen  for  drunk- 
enness during  the  first  ten  months  of 
1889.  Temperance  effort  is  carried  on 
by  some  organizations  and  individuals, 
especially  by  missionaries;  and  a  cordial 
welcome  was  given  to  Mrs.  Mary  Clement 
Leavitt,  who  visited  China  in  1886  in 
behalf  of  the  Woman's  Christian  Tem- 
perance Union. 

OPIUM. 

But  the  drink  evil  in  China,  though 
increasing,  is  overshadowed  by  a  worse 
evil — worse,  at  least,  in  magnitude.  This 
is  the  opium  habit.  No  account  of  the 
alcohol  conditions  in  this  Empire  will  be 
complete  without  presenting  the  most 
important  facts  of  the  prevalence,  alarm- 
ing growth  and  frightful  ravages  of  this 
fearful  vice,  and  indicating  the  responsi- 
bility for  it  and  the  consequences  of  its 
legalization. 

Very  little  was  known  itntil  recently 
conceruing  the  introduction  of  opium  and 
opium  smoking  into  China.  Some  writers 
have  stoutly  maintained  that  the  vice  is  a 
very  ancient  one,  and  others  have  just  as 
stoutly  denied  that  it  was  ever  known  in 
China  until  introduced  by  foreigners  near 
the  close  of  the  lust  century.  For  many 
of  the  more  important  facts  given  below 
regarding  the  history  of  opium  in  China 
we  are  indebted  to  the  researches  of  Dr. 
Edkins,  the  results  of  which  are  set  forth 
in  a  pamphlet  published  by  order  of  the 
Inspector-General  of  Chinese  Customs.^ 

The  poppy  was  introduced  into  China 
by  the  Arabs  in  the  8th  Century,  A.  D., 
and  Chinese  physicians  at  once  learned  to 
make  a  decoction  from  the  seeds  for  medi- 
cal purposes.     In  the  15th  Century  they 

1  Opium;    Historical  Note;   or,  The    Poppy  in  China: 
Shanghai,  Kelley  &  Walsh,  1889. 


China.]                                                  76  [China. 

began  to  prepare  the  juice  substantially  In  1831  and  1834  British  men-of-war  were 
as  it  is  done  to-day,  but  employed  it  in  sent'  to  Canton  to  protect  the  opium  in- 
medicine  only.  About  1620  tobacco  and  terests.  A  crisis  came  in  1839.  The 
tobacco  smoking  were  brought  into  Amoy  Imperial  Commissioner  Lin  wrote  to 
from  the  Philippine  Islands,  and  opium  Queen  Victoria  imploring  her  to  put  an 
was  employed  among  other  things  in  pre-  end  to  the  traffic,  and  committed  to  the 
paring  the  tobacco  for  use.  Probably  in  flames  at  Canton  20,283  chests  of  British 
tliis  insidious  way  the  taste  for  opium  opium,  valued  at  $10,000,000.  This  act 
was  first  cultivated.  After  a  time  opium  hastened  the  rupture  with  England.  There 
instead  of  tobacco  became  the  chief  in-  were  other  causes  for  war,  and  it  is  not 
gredient  of  tiie  mixture,  and  it  was  a  long  likely  that  China  would  ever  have  con- 
while  before  the  tobacco  was  entirely  sented  without  conflict  to  open  her  gates 
omitted.  It  was  about  the  close  of  the  to  the  trader  or  the  missionary;  but  En- 
ITth  Century  that  the  habit  of  opium-  gland's  demand  at  the  close  of  the  war, 
smoking  was  brought  to  Formosa  from  tliat  the  Chinese  Government  should  pay 
Java,  and  from  Formosa  it  found  its  way  an  indemnity  of  $6,000,000  for  the  opium 
to  the  main  land.  The  vice  had  already  that  had  been  destroyed,  fixed  forever 
become  so  prevalent  in  1729  that  the  upon  her  the  reproach  of  espousing  the 
Emperor  issued  an  edict  commanding  cause  of  lawless  smugglers,  and  also  gave 
all  opium  houses  to  be  closed,  and  provid-  strength  to  the  charge  that  China's  re- 
ing  severe  penalties  for  those  engaged  in  jection  of  British  opium  was  one  of  the 
the  trade.  The  drug  was  still  imported  chief  causes  of  the  war.  The  tratfic,  how- 
however,  ostensibly  for  medical  purposes,  ever,  was  not  even  then  legalized.  The 
and  the  habit  of  smoking  it  Avas  slowly  Emperor,  Tao  Kwang,  in  reply  to  Sir 
extending  in  spite  of  the  prohibition.  At  Henry  Pottinger's  demand  for  its  legaliza- 
the  same  time  native  opium  was  being  tion,  said :  "  True,  I  cannot  prevent  the 
produced  in  considerable  quantities  in  the  introduction  of  the  poison;  but  nothing 
Province  of  Yunnan.  will  induce  me  to  raise  a  revenue  from  the 

In  1767  the  importation  amounted  to  vice   and   misery  of  my   people."     This 

about  1,000  chests  annually,  and  the  traf-  prince  was   himself   a  reformed   opium- 

fic  was  wholly  in  the  hands  of  the  Portu-  smoker,  and  had  lost  his  three  eldest  sons 

guese.     When   the  East  India  Company  by  the  vice. 

(British)  took  charge  of  the  trade  in  1781  The  establishment  of  an  English  colony 
the  importation  was  still  about  1,000  at  Hong  Kong  did  not  tend  to  lessen 
chests  a  year.  But  in  1800  the  Govern-  smuggling.  While  Sir  H.  Pottinger  is- 
ment  became  greatly  alarmed  and  an  sued  a  proclamation  declaring  the  im- 
edict  was  issued  forbidding  the  importa-  portation  of  opium  illegal  and  an  order 
tion  of  opium  by  any  person  for  any  pur-  forbidding  all  English  vessels  to  enter 
pose  whatever.  The  severest  penalties  any  but  the  five  treaty  ports  or  to  sail  above 
were  prescribed  for  those  violating  the  Shanghai,  under  $500  penalty  for  each 
law — nothing  less  than  the  confiscation  of  offense,  no  effort  was  made  to  enforce 
the  vessel,  the  destruction  of  the  opium  either,  but,  on  the  contrary,  officers  who 
and  the  caijital  execution  of  the  smug-  attempted  to  execute  the  order  were  given 
glers.  For  a  time  the  East  India  Com-  to  understand  that  their  services  were  not 
pany  suspended  shipments,  but  the  needed.  In  1857  an  opium  smuggler  fly- 
temptations  held  out  by  the  large  profits  ing  the  English  flag  was  fired  on,  and 
caused  a  formal  renewal  of  the  smuggling  this  was  made  a  pretext  for  the  second 
operations  in  1821.  Meanwhile  the  sever-  Opium  War.  Canton  was  bombarded 
ity  of  the  Prohibitory  law  had  in  no  wise  and  England  and  France  co-operated  in 
been  relaxed ;  in  1830  strangling  was  the  a  demonstration  of  strength  which  com- 
penalty  for  selling  the  drug,  and  in  1832  pelled  the  Emperor  to  sign  the  treaty  of 
an  offender  was  executed  by  strangling  at  1860  (negotiated  by  Lord  Elgin),  whereby 
Macao,  in  the  presence  of  a  crowd  of  the  importation  of  opium  was  legalized ; 
foreigners.  and  China  paid  an  indemnity  of  $10,800,- 

The  British  Government  of  India  be-  000  to  England  and  $6,000,000  to  France. 

came  thoroughly  committed  to  the  policy  Since  1860  tlie   amount  of   opium  im- 

of  encouraging  the  illicit  business  and  de-  ported  has   increased    alarmingly.     The 

riving  from  it  as  much  revenue  as  possible,  following  figures  show  the  development 


China.] 


t  I 


[China. 


of  the  import  traffic  under  England's 
powerful  protection:  In  ITDO,  4,054 
chests  were  imported ;  in  1799,  5,000 ;  in 
182(),  9,969;  in  1830,  16,800.  In  1834 
the  trade  passed  out  of  the  hands  of  the 
East  India  Company  into  those  of  Brit- 
ish officials,  and  in  1836  the  number  of 
chests  had  increased  to  34,000.  After 
that  quantities  w^ere  indicated  by  piculs 
(of  133^  lbs.  each)  instead  of  by  chests. 
In  1850  the  imports  aggregated  52,925 
piculs,  in  1880  75,308  piculs,  and  in  1887 
96,746  piculs. 

Foreign  opium  having  been  admitted, 
there  was  no  longer  any  reason  why  the 
natives  should  not  be  permitted  to  pro- 
duce the  article. 

The  quantity  of  opium  now  made  in 
China  is  already  two  or  three  times  as 
much  as  that  impo~^ted,  and  the  home 
product  is  increasing  each  year.  There 
are  still  provinces  where  opium  planting 
is  forbidden,  but  the  prohibition  is  not 
enforced.  There  is  probably  not  a  single 
province  where  it  is  not  grown.  Mr. 
Donald  Spence,  British  Consul  at  Chung- 
king, after  very  careful  inquiries,  re- 
ported in  1881  that  the  annual  jDroduction 
of  the  four  south-western  provinces 
amounted  to  224,000  piculs.  In  the 
same  year  the  customs  returns  reported 
12,700  piculs  in  five  other  provinces. 
From  special  reports  gathered  by  the  cus- 
toms service  in  1887  we  learn  that  opium 
is  grown  in  16  of  the  18  provinces  of 
China  proper,  besides  the  principalities 
of  Monkden  and  Manchuria.  A  low  es- 
timate, based  upon  these  figures,  would 
make  the  total  annual  production  about 
254,000  piculs — two  and  one-half  times 
the  amount  imported.  A  fair  estimate 
would  probably  increase  the  number  to 
300,000. 

Opinions  differ  very  widely  as  to  the 
number  of  smokers,  some  putting  it  as 
low  as  two  millions  and  rthers  as  high  as 
eighty  millions.  Inspector-General  Hart 
in  1881,  by  a  calculation  based  upon  the 
returns  of  the  customs  service,  concluded 
there  were  not  more  than  two  millions — 
one  million  smokers  of  foreign  opium 
and  the  same  number  of  the  native  ar- 
ticle. His  estimate  of  the  native  produc- 
tion, however,  was  far  too  small,  as  shown 
by  Mr.  Spence's  report,  published  the 
following  year.  With  the  correction,  Mr. 
Hart's  method  of  calculation  would  give 
not  less  than  3,250,000  persons  addicted 


to  the  habit  in  1881.  In  his  calculation 
he  assumed  that  100  catties  of  raw  opium 
would  produce  70  of  the  prepared  drug, 
and  that  an  average  smoker  consumes 
three  mace  per  day.  (A  mace  is  one- 
tenth  of  a  Chinese  ounce,  Avhich  equals 
an  ounce  and  one-third  avoirdupois.) 
Dr.  S.  Wells  Williams  regarded  two 
mace  per  day  a  large  amount,  and  it  is 
still  so  considered  in  some  localities.  Mr. 
Hart's  estimate  is  doubtless  correct  for 
the  open  ports,  but  it  is  probably  too  high 
an  average  for  the  whole  Empire.  Upon 
this  point  he  remarks  that  if  the  average 
daily  consumption  be  reduced  you  in- 
crease the  number  of  smokers  but  lessen 
the  hurtfulness  of  the  practice.  But 
even  two  mace  per  day  is  enough  to  ruin 
a  man  and  his  family  in  every  respect. 
Kaw  opium  doubtless  produces  on  an 
average  70  per  cent,  of  pure  prepared 
opium,  but  it  is  rarely  or  never  smoked 
in  this  condition,  being  almost  always 
adulterated  to  a  certain  extent — in  some 
places  with  sesamum  seed,  in  others  with 
the  ashes  of  former  smokings.  Some 
persons  prefer  the  ashes  to  the  original 
drug.  This  is  notably  true  in  Monkden, 
where  the  ashes  command  as  high  a  price 
as  the  opium.  One  ounce  of  the  ashes 
added  to  one  ounce  of  the  raw  opium  will 
produce  an  ounce  and  four-tenths  of  the 
prepared  mixture,  so  that  it  is  probably 
safe  to  say  that  there  are  as  many  ounces 
of  the  prepared  article  smoked  as  there 
are  ounces  of  the  raw  drug.  Estimating 
the  native  production  at  300,000  piculs 
annually  and  the  foreign  importation  at 
100,000  piculs,  allowing  each  smoker  3 
mace  per  day,  we  reach  the  conclusion 
that  there  are  about  5,845,333  smokers. 
This,  however,  represents  but  a  small  pro- 
portion of  those  who  suffer  from  the 
"habit. 

Its  evil  results  are  numerous  and  far- 
reaching.  One  can  easily  tell  an  opium 
smoker  at  sight  by  his  thin,  sallow  face, 
sunken  eyes  and  general  air  of  weakness 
and  dullness.  The  victims  find  it  impos- 
sible without  medical  help  to  break  away 
from  it.  If  a  confirmed  smoker  from  any 
cause  is  deprived  of  his  opium,  or  if  he 
attempts  without  assistance  to  give  up 
the  habit,  he  will  suffer  indescribable 
agony;  tears  flow  from  the  eyes,  there  is 
dizziness  in  the  head  and  a  burning  in 
the  throat,  his  extremities  become  cold 
and  his  whole  body  is  racked  with  pain. 


China.]                                                  78  [China. 

A  large  number  of  persons  visit  the  mis-  opium   is   391   taels;  duty  paid,   422. GO 

sionary  hospitals  every  year  to  be  cured  taels;       after      boiling,     492.20       taels. 

of  the  vice.     Many  come,  however,  not  The    prices    of    the    native     drug   vary 

because  they  hate  tlie  habit,  but  because  considerably    according   to   locality,  the 

they   have   exhausted  their  means  or  in  quality  of  the  article  and  the  amount  of 

order   that   they   may   reduce  the  daily  taxes  paid.     The  average  price  in  1887  of 

dose.     Probably  one-half  or  three-fifths  of  crude  opium  was  277  taels  per  picul,  and 

those  cured  renew  the  practice.     The  cost  of    prepared  opium   357   taels.     Such  a 

of  the  drug,  six  cents  per  mace,  soon  con-  traffic  cannot  but  do  great  injury  to  legit- 

sumes  the  means  of  all  but  the  rich,  for  imate  trade,  and  many  merchants  have 

outside   of   foreign   settlements   laborers  complained  of  it  on  this  ground.     The 

receive   but   six   to   ten   ce^ts    per    day  growing  of  native  opium  is  a  source  of  in- 

and  mechanics  from  11  to  15  cents.     The  Jury  also  because  the  best  soil  is  used  in 

habit   consumes   two   or   three    hours   a  its  production,  soil  which  otherwise  w^ould 

day,  and  soon  unfits  a  man  for  any  work,  be    used  in  growing   breadstuffs.     Thus 

As  a  result  his  family  is  reduced  to  want,  the   quantity  of  food  is  lessened  and  its 

and  in  not  a  few  cases  wife  and  daughters  price  increased,  with  very  serious  results 

are   sold  into   slavery  to   lead   lives    of  on  certain  occasions.     The  use  of  opium 

shame,  the  proceeds  of  the  sale  going  to  is  said  also  to  have  a  prejudicial  influence 

fill  the  pipe  of  the  husband  and  father,  on   the  increase  of  population.     In  the 

Many  every  year  go  to  swell  the  ranks  of  report  of  the  Missionary  Conference  held 

professional  beggars.     Opium  is  preferred  at  Shanghai  in  1877  it  is  stated  that  Dr. 

to  food,  and  if  the  victim  is  not  rescued  Gait  showed  from  the  records  of  the  opium 

he   soon   destroys   himself.     The  use  of  patients  received  into  his  hospital  that  to 

opium  deadens  the  moral  sense   too,  so  154  married  patients  of  the  average  age 

that   the   smoker  becomes  wholly  unre-  of  33  years,  during  an  average  period  of 

liable,  especially  where  the  satisfaction  of  7.9  years,  only  146  children  were  born, 

his  appetite   is  concerned.     He  will  lie,  Practically   nothing  is  done  to-day  to 

steal  and  resort  to  any  means  to  fill  his  suppress  the  vice.     It  pervades  all  classes, 

pipe.     The  opium  den  is  also  a  common  Opium  is  heavily  taxed,  but  this  does  not 

resort  of  harlots  and  gamblers,  so  that  an  prevent   consumption.     The  import  tax 

opium  smoker  soon  becomes  addicted  to  on  the  foreign  article  is  30  taels  per  picul. 

other  vices.     In  the  English  and  French  The  native  opium  is  variously  taxed  ac- 

quarters   at    Shanghai   are    numbers   of  cording  to  locality,  amounting  in  some 

large     establishments,    handsomely    fur-  places  to  18  taels,  in  others  to  103  taels 

nislied,  Avhich  are  nightly  frequented  by  per  picul.     In   Hankow  an   attempt  was 

thousands  of  young  men,  and  where  har-  made  to  levy  a  tax  in  the  form   of  a  li- 

lots  are  permitted,  unrestrained,  to  ply  cense  uj^on  the  divans  of  that  city,  but  it 

their  shameless  vocation.     In  1888  there  failed.     The   Government   since   its  dis- 

were  900  opium  houses  in   the   foreign  couraging  experiences  before  the  English 

quarter  of  Shanghai,  as  against  900  in  wars  has  made  no  sustained  effort  to  reg- 

1887.  Each  of  the  establishments  pays  a  ulate  or  suppress  the  evil.  Chinamen 
tax  on  every  pipe,  and  the  Inspector  may  say  they  are  not  free  to  deal  with  opium 
count  the  pipes  as  frequently  as  he  chooses,  as  they  like.  Were  England  to  withdraw 
From  the  9(50  houses  a  revenue  of  29,359  from  the  market  and  lessen  the  produc- 
taels  (|!33,762.85)  was  collected  in  1888.  tion  in  her  dominions,  the  Chinese  might 
In  Nankin  (population  about  500,000),  a  be  encouraged  to  another  effort.  They 
representative  Chinese  city,  where  there  have  shown  themselves  not  incapable  of 
are  no  foreigners  except  the  missionaries,  the  most  energetic  measures.  There  are 
there   were   about  8,400  opium   dens  in  Chinese  statesmen  to-day  just  as  earnest 

1888.  as  the  famous   Commissioner   Lin    and 
Besides  the  injury  done  to  the  victim  far  more  intelligent.     In  1877  the  Vice- 

and  his  family,  there  is  the  loss  to  the  roy  at  Nankin  closed   every  den  in  the 

State  of  millions  of  taels  annually  which  city.     Unfortunately  he  died  soon  after 

might  be  expended  for  useful  articles  of  and   his   successor   allowed   the    vice  to 

commerce.     Since  1781  India  has  drawn  flourish  unmolested, 

off  from  China  no  lessthan  $1,300,000,000.  The   influence   of  such   a   trade    and 

The  average  price  of  a  picul  of  foreign  habit  upon  the    missionary    cause    can 


China.] 


79 


[Chloral,  Chlorodyne,  &c. 


easily  be  conceived.  There  is  not  only 
the  barrier  erected  by  the  vice  itself, 
which  shuts  the  heart  against  all  the 
appeals  of  the  gospel,  bi;t  the  trade 
introduced  and  fostered  by  a  so-called 
Christian  Government  has  filled  the 
natives  with  a  violent  hatred  of  every- 
thing foreign.  To  the  heathen  there  is 
but  little  difference  between  the  English 
trader  and  the  English  n»issionary.  though 
year  by  year  that  difference  is  coming  to 
be  more  clearly  understood.  The  preacher 
of  the  gospel  is  almost  daily  interrupted 
in  his  discourse  by  the  question :  "  Where 
does  opium  come  from  ? "  and  to  be 
taunted  with  the  reproach  that  his  people 
have  brought  this  great  curse  on  the  land. 
No  doubt  this  trade  is  responsible  in  a 
good  degree  for  the  slow  progress  of 
Christianity  in  China  as  compared  with 
its  rapid  advance  in  the  neighboring  Em- 
pire of  Japan. 

No  Chinaman,  not  even  the  smoker, 
will  justify  the  habit.  All  admit  it  to  be 
wholly  evil.  Only  Englishmen  interested 
in  the  revenue  pretend  to  say  that  it  is 
not  injurious.  But  8ir  Thomas  Wade, 
one  of  England's  most  distinguished  rep- 
resentatives in  China,  declared  :  "  To 
me  it  is  vain  to  think  otherwise  of  the 
use  of  opium  in  China  than  as  a  habit 
many  times  more  pernicious,  nationally 
speaking,  than  the  gin  and  whiskey 
drinking  we  deplore  at  home." 

THE    UNITED    STATES   AND   OPIUM. 

The  history  of  the  relations  of  the 
United  States  Government  with  the  Chi- 
nese Empire  shows  a  gratifying  change 
of  attitude  upon  the  opium  question. 
The  "  Convention  for  the  Regulation  of 
Trade "  between  the  two  countries,  con- 
cluded Nov.  8,  1858,  provided  that  the 
tariff  on  opium  imported  into  Chinese 
ports  by  citizens  of  the  United  States 
should  be  30  taels  per  100  catties.  ^  But 
the  treaty  of  Dec.  17,  1880,  proclaimed 
Oct.  5,  1881  (the  United  States  Commis- 
sioners being  James  B.  Angell  of  Michi- 
gan, John  F.  Swift  of  California  and 
William  Henry  Trescot  of  South  Carolina, 
and  the  Chinese  Commissioners  being 
Pao  Chiin  and  Li  Hungtsao),  provides  as 
follows  in  Article  3 : 

"  The  Governments  of  China    and    of    the 


1  Among  the  duty-free  goods  were  tobacco,  cigars,  wine, 
beer  and  spirits. 


United  States  mutually  agree  and  undertake 
that  Chinese  subjects  shall  not  be  permittfd  to 
import  opium  into  any  of  the  ports  of  the  United 
States;  and  citizens  of  the  United  States  shall 
not  be  permitted  to  import  opium  into  any  of 
the  open  ports  of  China,  to  transpoit  it  from 
one  open  port  to  any  ether  open  port,  or  to  buy 
and  sell  opium  in  any  of  the  open  ports  of 
China.  This  absolute  prohibition,  which  extends 
to  vessels  owned  by  the  citizens  or  subjects  of 
either  power,  to  foreign  vessels  employed  by 
them,  or  to  vessels  owned  by  the  citizens  or  sub- 
jects of  either  power  and  employed  by  other 
persons  for  the  transportation  of  opium,  shall  be 
enforced  by  appropriate  legislation  on  the  part 
of  China  and  the  United  State-i;  and  the  bene- 
fits of  the  Favored-Nation  clause  in  existing 
treaties  shall  not  be  claimed  by  the  citizens  or 
subjects  of  either  power  as  against  the  provisions 
of  this  article." 

Chloral,  Chlorodyne,  Chloro- 
form, Cocaine  and  Ether. — These 
preparations  are  among  the  most  popu- 
lar of  medicinal  agents  for  inducing  sleep 
or  temporarily  annihilating  pain.  The 
bounds  of  their  legitimate  use,  however, 
are  overstepped  by  many,  and  they  be- 
come inebriants  of  great  fascination 
and  tyrannous  strength.  Indeed,  alcohol 
is  a  chief  constituent  of  each,  excepting 
cocaine.  Chloral  is  made  by  acting  on 
absolute  alcohol  with  dry  chlorine ;  chloro- 
dyne is  a  mixture  of  chloroform  with 
morphia,  Indian  hemp,  prussic  acid, 
peppermint,  etc. ;  chloroform  is  produced 
Ijy  distilling  alcohol  with  chloride  of 
lime;  ether  is  the  product  of  alcohol  and 
sulphuric  acid,  and  cocaine  is  prepared 
from  the  coca  leaf,  which  in  its  native 
state  is  a  powerful  and  ruinous  stimu- 
lant, chewed  by  the  inhabitants  of  the 
countries  where  the  plant  grows.  ^ 

All  of  them  excepting  ether  are  of  com- 
paratively recent  discovery,  and  they  have 

2  Both  Poppig  and  Von  Tschudi  give  a  doleful  account 
of  the  intemperate  use  of  coca  by  the  inveterate  coquero, 
as  he  is  called — his  bad  health,  pale  lips  and  gums,  green- 
ish and  stumpy  teeth,  and  an  ugly  blaclc  mark  at  the 
angles  of  his  "mouth,  his  unsteady  gait,  yellow  skin, 
dim  and  sunken  eyes  encircled  by  a  purple  ring,  his  quiv- 
ering lips  and  his  general  apathy  all  bear  evidence  of 
the  baneful  effects  of  the  coca  juice  when  taken  in  excess. 
he  prefers  solitude,  and  when  a  slave  to  his  cravings  he 
will  often  take  himself  for  days  together  to  the  silence  of 
the  woods  to  indulge  unrestrained  the  use  of  the  leaf. 
The  habit  must  be  very  seducing,  as,  though  long  stigma- 
tized and  very  generally  considered  as  a  degrading, 
purely  Indian  vice,  many  white  Peruvians  at  Lima  and 
elsewhere  retire  daily  at  stated  times  to  chew  coca.  Even 
Europeans,  Von  Tschudi  says,  have  fallen  into  the  habit. 
Both  he  and  Poppig  mention  instances  of  white  coqueros 
of  good  Peruvian  families  who  were  addicted  to  the  vice. 
One  is  described  by  Poppig  who  became  averse  to  any 
exertion;  city  life  and  its  restraints  were  hateful  to  him; 
he  lived  in  a  miserable  hut.  Once  a  month,  at  least, 
when  irresistibly  seized  with  the  passion,  he  would  disap- 
pear into  the  forest  and  be  lost  for  many  days,  after 
which  he  would  emerge  sick,  powerless  and  altered. — 
Coca  and  Cocaine^tty  William  Martindale  (London,  1886), 
pp.  12,  13. 


Chloral,  Chlcrodyne,  &c.] 


80 


[Church  of  God. 


not  been  generally  employed  in  medical 
13ractice   until  within  the   last  half  cen- 
tury; but  physicians  testify  that  they  are 
already  claiming  multitudes  of   victims. 
All  are  subtle  poisons,   speedily  produc- 
ing death  when  taken   in  undue  quanti- 
ties.     They    are    more   dangerous   than 
alcoholic  liquors,   in   that  constant  care 
must  be  exercised   to   avoid   fatal  doses. 
As  intoxicants  they    are  not   consumed 
convivially  like  liquors,  but  in  secret  and 
alone ;  for  they  do  not  produce  exhilara- 
tion but  lethargy  and  insensibility.     The 
victim,   while   under   their   influence,  is 
therefore  not  violent,  murderous  or  oth- 
erwise    physically     demonstrative;     his 
symptoms   rather  resemble  those  of  the 
opium-eater.      The  effects  are  as  disas- 
trous as  those  produced  by  opium  indul- 
gence— an  insatiable  appetite,  demanding 
larger   and   larger   quantities   and  occa- 
sioning an  uncontrollable  determination 
to  procure   the  drug  at   any  expense  of 
money,  health  or  honor;  gradual  loss  of 
will,  moral  sense   and  self  restraint,  and 
ultimately  the   most   serious  functional 
disorders   and   distresses.     Dr.    Norman 
Kerr  tells  of  "  a  married   lady,  the  wife 
of  a  professional   man,"   who   "has  cost 
her  husband  £220  for  chlorodyne  during 
the  past    six    years,  although  she  daily 
drank  only  one-fourth   of   the   quantity 
taken    by    another    case  in   which  four 
ounces   were  used   every  day.''^     These 
seductive   poisons   are  probably  not   yet 
taken  very  extensively   among  the  com- 
mon people.   Dr. Kerr,  speaking  of  chloral, 
says :  "  Literary  men,  barristers,  clergymen 
and  medical  men,  with  some  highly  sensi- 
tive and  nervous  ladies,  have  been  the  sub- 
jects of  this   form  of   inebriety.     I  have 
known  no  mechanic  who  has  become  ad- 
dicted to   chloral,   and   only  one  or  two 
individuals  engaged  in  trade  or  mercan- 
tile  pursuits."'-     The  appetite  for  these 
different  drugs  results,   in    mo^t    cases, 
from   innocent    use,  for  the  purpose  of 
wooing  sleep  or  deadening  pain ;  after  a 
few   trials   a  morbid   craving  is  excited, 
then    the    unfortunate    habit    is    fixed. 
Sometimes  victims   of   opium    resort  to 
chloral,   chloroform,   ether  or  cocaine  in 
the  hope  of  conquering  their  tyrant,  only 
to  find   themselves   slaves  to   an  equally 
remorseless   foe    whose  work  of  destruc- 


1  Inebriety    (London,   1888),  by    Norman   Kerr,    M.D., 
F.L.S.,  p.  103. 
a  Ibid,  pp.  101-2. 


tion  is  performed  with  greater  rapidity. 
"  Chloroform,"  says  Dr.  Kerr,  "  is  speed- 
ier in  operation  than  any  of  the  other 
forms  of  inebriety  except  ether.  The 
nervous  depression,  the  sickness,  the 
perverted  nutrition  and  the  continual 
lansfuor  usher  in  an  infirm  and  demoral- 
ized  condition  of  body  and  brain,  which 
makes  of  the  victim  a  complete  wreck. 
Unless  the  mania  be  resisted  and  the 
disease  cured,  the  inevitable  consumma- 
tion by  death  approaches  with  startling 
swiftness.  Interspersed  with  the  most 
transient  visions  of  delight,  the  life  of  the 
chloroform  inebriate  is  but  a  protracted 
misery.  The  visions  in  the  early  stage 
of  the  diseased  manifestations  are  most 
agreeable,  but  later  on  they  become 
weird  and  horrid.  ...  I  have  gen- 
erally found  the  chloroform  habit  asso- 
ciated with  alcohol.  Only  in  one  instance, 
a  medical  man,  have  I  seen  an  abstainer 
a  chloroform  liahihie.  He  was,  I  am 
happy  to  sa}^  completely  cured."  ^ 

Christian  Church  — The  American 
Christian  Convention,  at  its  quadrennial 
session  held  in  New  Bedford,  Mass.,  Oct. 
11,  1886,  made  the  following  deliverance: 

"Inasmuch  as  the  subject  of  the  limitation 
and  ultimate  extinction  of  the  commerce  in  in- 
toxicating drinks  is  the  pre  eminent  moral 
question  of  to-day,  and  growing  in  emphasis 
with  each  added  day;  therefore 

"Resolved,  That  this  Convention  do  an- 
nounce itself  as  the  patron  and  aider  of  all 
activities  and  associations  that  point  clearly, 
definitely  and  wisely  to  a  direct  and  immedi- 
ate erasure  of  permissions  or  sanctions  of  soci- 
ety or  law  upon  the  iniquitous  traffic' 

Church  A  ction. — The  representative 
deliverances  of  American  churches  on 
temperance  and  Prohibition  are  given 
separately  under  the  different  denomina- 
tional names. 

Church  of  God.-  The  General  Elder- 
ship -  the  highest  body  in  this  denomina- 
tion—held a  triennial  meeting  at  West 
Newton,  Pa.,  May,  1887.  The  following 
is  taken  from  the  report  of  the  Commit- 
tee on  Temperance,  which  was  adopted  by 
the  Eldership : 

"  Statistics  develop  the  fact  that,  as  a  nation, 
we  annually  expend  in  Home  and  Fore-gn  Mis- 
sions the  sum  of  $2,500,000,  for  tobacco  the  sum 
of  $600,000,000,  and  for  intoxicating  liquors  the 
sum  of  1900,000,000  These  expenditures  for 
liquor  and  tobacco  strike  at  the  influence  of  the 

s  Ibid,  pp.  105-6. 


Church  Temperance  Society.] 


81 


[Civil  Damage  Acts. 


church,  the  home,  and  the  nation.  Since  the 
last  meeting  of  this  body  a  number  of  8tates 
have  submitted,  or  are  about  to  submit,  the 
(juestionof  Prohibitiou;  and  so  far  as  the  ques- 
tion lias  been  tested  by  the  expressed  voice  of 
the  people,  the  sentiment  of  Prohibition  is  fast 
iiaiuing  ground.  All  kinds  of  license  or  tax, 
favoring  ^he  liquor  traffic,  whether  higii  or  low, 
are  wrong  in  principle  and  demand  ti>e  opposi- 
tion of  the  church  and  of  good  men  and  women 
everywhere.  We  not  only  re-affirm  the  senti- 
ments heretofore  expressed,  but  as  the  cause  of 
Prohibition  advances  we  will  keep  pace  with 
the  aggressive  movement  of  the  temperance 
cause  until  the  several  States  and  the  National 
Government  shall  by  Constitutional  Amend- 
ment or  statutory  law  prohibit  the  importation, 
manufacture  and  sale  of  all  intoxicating  liquors, 
including  ale,  wine  and  beer  as  a  beverage,  and 
to  that  end  we  will  labor  and  in  every  legiti- 
mate way  use  our  influence." 

Church  Temperance    Society. — 

This  is  the  shorter  name  of  tiie  "  Tem- 
pertince  Society  of  the  Protestant  Epis- 
copal Church  of  the  United  States  of 
America."  It  was  organized  in  1881.  It 
is  under  the  general  control  of  an  E.xecu- 
tive  Board  of  30  members,  and  of  the  GO 
l^ishops  of  the  Church  who  act  as  Vice- 
Presidents.  The  object  is  threefold :  (1) 
Promotion  of  temperance;  (2)  Rescue  of 
the  intemperate;  (3)  Kemoval  of  the 
causes  of  intemperance.  Its  basis  is  thus 
defined : 

"  Recognizing  temperance  as  the  law  of  the 
gospel,  and  total  abstinence  as  a  rule  of  conduct 
essential  in  certain  cases  and  highly  desirable  in 
others,  and  fully  and  freely  according  to  every 
man  the  right  to  decide,  in  the  exercise  of  his 
Christian  libertj%  whether  or  not  he  will  adopt 
said  rule,  this  Society  lays  down  as  the  basis  on 
which  it  rests  and  from  which  its  work  shall  be 
conducted,  union  and  co-operation  on  perfectly 
equal  terms  for  the  promotion  of  temperance 
between  those  who  use  temperately  and  those 
who  abstain  entirely  from  intoxicating  drinks 
as  beverages." 

Tlie  country  is  divided  into  four  general 
departments:  (1)  Central,  including  New 
York,  New  Jersey  and  Connecticut,  with 
headquarters  at  IG  4th  aveinie.  New  York 
City.  (2)  New  England,  including  Maine, 
New  Kauipshire,  Vermont,  Massachusetts 
and  Rhode  Island,  with  Rev.  S.  H.  Hil- 
liurd,  Boston,  as  the  Department  Secre- 
tary. (3)  Pennsylvania,  including  Penn- 
sylvania, Delaware  and  Maryland,  with 
Rt.  Rev.  Bishop  Coleman,  Wilmington. 
Del.,  as  Department  Secretary.  (4)  Ohio, 
including  Ohio,  Michigan  and  "Indiana, 
with  Ref.  E.  R.  Atwill,  D.D.,  Toledo.  0., 
as  Department  Secretary 


For  remedial  agencies  the  Society 
names  the  following:  (1)  The  gospel. 
(2)  Coffee-houses  as  counteractives  to 
saloons.  (3)  Improved  dwellings  for  the 
poor.  (4)  Healtliy  literature.  To  help 
supply  the  last-named  want,  it  pub- 
lishes a  monthly  paper  called  Temper- 
ancp  (New  York).  Its  policy  is  that  of 
restriction  rather  than  Prohibition.  It 
aims  at  (1)  Prohibition  of  sale  on  Sunday. 
(2)  Prohibition  of  sale  to  minors.  (3) 
Prohibition  of  sale  to  intoxicated  persons. 
(4)  High  License  or  tax  of  11,000  on  every 
saloon!  (5)  Only  one  saloon  to  each  500 
people.     (G)  Local  Option. 

No  pledge  is  administered  to  a  child 
-without  the  written  consent  of  his  parents. 
No  alternative  pledge  can  be  taken  until 
the  person  subscribing  to  it  is  21  years  of 
age.  No  life-pledge  is  given  to  any.  The 
conditions  of  membership  are,  assent  to 
the  constitution  and  the  payment  of  11  a 
year.  Outgrowths  of  the  Society  are  ju- 
venile organizations  called  the  Knights 
of  Temperance  and  Young  Crusaders. 
The  Chairman  of  the  Church  Temperance 
Society  is  Rev.  AY.  R.  Huntington,  D.D., 
Rector  of  Grace  Church,  New  York. 

Robert  Graham, 
(Secretary  Church  Temperance  Society.) 

Cider. — See  Vinous  Liquors. 

Cigarettes.— See  Tobacco. 

Civil  Damage  Acts.— The  New 
York  Civil  Damage  act  is  representative 
of  all  measures  of  similar  character.  It 
provides : 

"  Every  husband,  wife  child,  parent,  guard- 
ian, employer  or  other  person  who  shill  be  in- 
jured in  i^erson  or  property  or  means  of  sup- 
port by  any  intoxicated  person,  or  in  conse- 
quence of  the  intoxication,  habitual  or  other- 
wise, of  any  person,  shall  have  a  right  of  action 
in  his  or  her  name,  against  any  person  or  persons 
who  shall,  by  selling  or  giving  away  intoxica- 
ting liquors,  cause  the  intoxication,  in  whole  or 
in  part,  of  such  person  or  persons  ;  and  any  per- 
son or  persons  owning  or  renting  or  permitting 
the  occupation  of  any  building  or  premises,  and 
having  knowledge  that  intoxicating  liquors  are 
to  be  sold  tbeieiu,  shall  be  liable,  severally  or 
jointly,  with  the  person  or  persons  selling  or  giv- 
ing intoxicating  liquors  as  aforesaid,  for  all 
damages  su.stained  and  for  exemplary  damages; 
and  all  damages  recovered  by  a  minor  under 
this  act  shall  be  paid  either  to.such  minor  or  to 
his  or  her  parent,  guardian  or  next  friend,  as 
the  Court  shall  direct;  and  the  unlawful  sale  or 
giving  away  of  intoxicating  liquors  shall  work 
a  forfeiture  of  all  rights  of  the  lessee  or  tenant 
under  any  lease  or  contract  of  rent  upon  the 
premises." 


Claret.] 


82 


[Climatic  Influences. 


For  information  of  the  extent  to  which 
the  Civil  Damage  principle  is  recognized 
in  the  statutes  of  the  various  States  and 
Territories,  see  Legislation. 

Claret. — See  Vinous  Liquors, 

Clark,  Billy  James. — Born  in 
Northampton,  Mass.,  Jan.  4,  1778,  and 
died  in  Glens  Falls,  N.  Y.,  March  20, 1867. 
He  was  educated  at  Northampton  Acad- 
emy, studied  medicine  with  Dr.  Hicker  of 
Easton,  N.  Y.,  and  began  its  practice 
soon  after  in  Moreau,  Saratoga  County, 
N.  Y.  In  1821  he  was  a  member  of  the 
New  York  Legislature,  and  in  1848  a 
Presidential  Elector.  He  was  the  origi- 
nator and  organizer  of  what  is  known  as 
the  first  temperance  society  in  history. 
Having  read  Dr.  Benjamin  Rush's  famous 
essay  on  the  "  Effects  of  Ardent  Spirits 
upon  the  Human  Mind  and  Body,"  Dr. 
Clark,  one  evening  in  March,  1808,  called 
to  see  his  friend  in  Moreau,  Rev.  Libbeus 
Armstrong,  and  startled  him  with  the 
declaration :  "  We  shall  all  become  a  com- 
munity of  drunkards  in  this  town  unless 
somethiuEf  is  done  to  arrest  the  progress 
of  intemperance."  Mr.  Clark  proposed 
the  formation  of  a  temperance  society, 
and  with  the  co-operation  of  Rev.  Mr. 
Armstrong  drafted  a  constitution  for 
"  The  Union  Temperance  Society  of  Mo- 
reau and  Northumberland."  This  society 
was  organized  April  30,  1808,  43  men 
signing  the  roll.  They  held  regular 
quarterly  and  annual  meetings,  and  kept 
up  the  organization  for  14  years.  The 
constitution  provided,  among  other 
things,  that  "  no  member  shall  drink  rum, 
gin.  whiskey,  wine  or  any  distilled  spirits, 
or  compositions  of  the  same  or  any  of 
them,  except  by  advice  of  a  physician,  or 
in  case  of  actual  disease,  also  excepting  at 
public  dinners,  under  the  penalty  of  25 
cents,  provided  that  this  article  shall  not 
infringe  on  any  religions  rite  ;  "  that  "  no 
member  shall  be  intoxicated  under  penalty 
of  50  cents,"  and  that  "■*  no  member  shall 
offer  any  of  the  above  liqnors^to  any  per- 
son to  drink  thereof  under  tlie  penalty  of 
25  cents  for  each  offense." 

Climatic  Influences. — Wind  and 
weather  are  two  scapegoats  that  have  to 
bear  the  blame  of  countless  sins  against 
the  health  laws  of  nature.  The  conse- 
quences of   indoor  life, in  , an, atmosphere 


fretting  our  lungs  with  tobacco  fumes  and 
all  sorts  of  vile  gases  are  ascribed  to  the 
influence  of  the  fell  March  wind.  Fast 
young  men  suspect  a  "  cold  "  as  the  cause 
of  their  nervous  exhaustion.  Gluttons 
attribute  their  gastric  chills  to  a  draught 
of  cool  niglit  air,  or  a  "  sudden  change  in 
the  weather."  But  the  strangest  of  all 
climatic  delusions  is,  after  all,  the  theory 
which  explains  tlie  intemperance  of 
northern  nations  as  a  necessary  conse- 
quence of  a  low  temperature.  "  Cold 
weather,"  our  barroom  physiologists  in- 
form us,  "  naturally  prompts  us  to  resort 
to  ardent  beverages,  just  as  we  resort  to 
chimney -fires  and  warm  clothing."  "  Fire- 
water" (Simnish,  (/(/uardienfe)  ami  many 
similar  terms  have,  indeed,  become  inter- 
national synonyms  of  alcoholic  beverages, 
and  tosrether  with  the  caustic  taste  of 
such  liquors  have  led  to  the  po})ular  in- 
ference that  alcohol  is  a  chemical  fuel,  a 
liquid  heat-producer,  and  under  certain 
conditions  a  valuable  substitute  for  calo- 
rific food  and  warm  clothing.  The  lessons 
of  instinct,  however,  might  help  even  non- 
scientific  observers  to  suspect  the  correct- 
ness of  that  conclusion.  We  may  be  very 
sure  that  among  the  countless  millions  of 
modern  topers  not  one  ever  be(j(ni  to  pre- 
fer alcohol  to  more  wholesome  beverages 
from  a  desire  to  counteract  the  influence 
of  a  low  temperature. 

A  ragged  child,  locked  up  in  a  cold 
room  warmed  at  one  end  by  a  feeble  fire, 
and  furnished  with  a  few  thin  blankets  and 
a  large  variety  of  ardent  liquors,  would  at 
once  make  for  the  fire-place,  and  after  ex- 
hausting the  supply  of  fuel  would  use  the 
blankets  to  supplement  its  scant  dress; 
but  after  tasting  the  alcoholic  samples 
would  at  once  reject  them  as  useless  for 
any  present  purposes,  unless  ex})eriments 
should  suggest  the  plan  of  flinging  them 
in  the 'fire.  In  that  way  alcohol  might  be 
utilized  as  a  fuel,  but  as  a  calorific  bev- 
erage it  is  as  unavailable  as  coal-oil.  Up 
in  Manitoba,  where  the  mercury  sinks  to 
55°  below  zero,  and  where  half-frozen 
wolves  would  not  hesitate  to  devour  a  pan- 
ful of  biscuits  or  lick  up  a  plateful  of 
milk  and  sugar,  neither  hunger  nor  frost 
would  tempt  them  to  touch  a  pailful  of 
])randy,  though  it  might  prove  the  only 
unfrozen  fluid  for  miles  around.  The 
reason  is  that  instinct,  througii  the  sense 
of  taste,  would  inform  them  that  fat, 
starch  and  sugar  are  heat-producers  aiul 


Climatic  Influences  ] 


83 


[Coffee-Houses. 


aliments,  but  tliut  for  the  organic  pur- 
poses of  the  animal  system  alcohol  is  as 
useless  as  spirits  of  turpentine.  Begin- 
ners, indeed,  are  apt  to  feel  chilly  after  a 
more  than  usually  large  dose  of  brandy, 
though  years  afterwards,  when  the  per- 
version of  instinct  has  begot  a  progressive 
poison  habit,  alcohol  seems  to  answer  the 
purposes  of  an  organic  fuel  by  initiating 
the  stimulant  fever  which  to  the  victim  of 
the  besetting  vice  has  become  a  periodic 
necessity;  but  for  all  actual  benefit  to  his 
system  the  stimulant  dupe  might  as  well 
have  tried  to  excite  that  fever  by  dosing 
himself  with  suljjhate  of  quinine.  Sci- 
ence fully  explains  those  facts. 

The  experiments  of  Prof.  Rentz  and 
Dr.  Hammond  have  proved  that  under 
the  influence  of  alcohol  and  similar  nar- 
cotic poisons  the  elimination  of  carbonic 
acid  is  diminished,  the  supply  of  animal 
heat  being  thus  decreased  in  proportion 
to  the  alcoholic  dose.  For  calorific  pur- 
poses, alcohol  is  not  only  inferior  to  fat, 
starch  and  sugar,  but  even  to  common 
spring-water  which  offers  its  elements  of 
hydrogen  ii  a  far  more  available  form, 
while  brandy  merely  counterfeits  a  mo- 
mentary feeling  of  warmth  (the  effect  of 
a  scorching  irritant)  but  in  its  net  result 
does  not  assist  but  directly  hinders  the  or- 
ganic process  by  which  the  body  main- 
tains its  normal  temperature.  "Are  ar- 
dent spirits  necessary  ? "  asks  Captain 
Edward  Perry,  after  a  12  years'  experi- 
ence in  the  coldest  climate  ever  braved  by 
Arctic  explorers.  "  I  say  decidedly,  no.  It 
is  said  they  keep  the  cold  out.  I  say  they 
do  not.     They  let  the  cold  in." 

The  idea  that  alcohol  counteracts  the 
malarial  tendency  of  a  sultry  climate  is  an 
equally  baneful  delusion.  Every  "  bitters  "- 
cursed  city  of  our  Southern  gulf-coast 
should  publish  the  memorandum  of  the 
Rev.  James  Gregson,  a  British  missionary 
who  passed  many  years  in  the  lowland 
regions  of  Southern  Hindustan.  "  I  can 
appeal  to  returns,"  he  says,  "  which  have 
not  been  collected  by  rabid  bigots  but 
signed  by  medical  officers,  and  which  tell 
you  wliat  I  l)elieve  to  be  the  honest  truth, 
that  India's  bottle  has  buried  more  than 
India's  sun.  I'he  man  who  goes  to  Bengal 
with  the  notion  that  he  need  not  relinquish 
his  liquor,  will  be  in  danger  of  having  to 
relinquish  his  life.  Nearly  all  those  cases 
of  so-called  heart-apoplexy  would  more 
properly  be  called  bottle-apoplexy.'* 


The  abstinent  Arabs  have  preserved 
their  physical  vigor  in  the  burning  desert 
of  their  native  peninsula.  How  is  it  that 
a  far  more  bracing  climate  has  failed  to 
prevent  the  degeneration  of  the  alcohol- 
ized Spaniards  and  Italians  ?  Shall  we 
adopt  the  view  of  a  German  ethnologist 
who  ascribes  that  enervation  to  the  lux- 
uries and  vices  of  tlie  Roman  Empire? 
In  Rome  itself  that  explanation  might 
perhaps  hold  good;  but  what  about  the 
outlying  provinces  which,  long  after  the 
fall  of  Rome,  were  conquered  by  hardy 
tribes  of  Northland  warriors  ?  What 
about  Sicily,  for  instance,  where  not 
drunken  Romans  but  abstemious  Sara- 
cens were  expelled  by  a  legion  of  iron- 
fisted  Normans,  who,  towards  the  end  of 
the  11th  Century,  followed  Robert  Guis- 
card  across  the  strait  of  Messina  ?  It  so 
happens  that  the  descendants  of  those 
mail-clad  giants  can  still  be  traced  by 
their  Norman-French  names;  and  it  like- 
wise so  happens  that  an  abundance  of 
"good  cheap  country  wine  "has  turned 
them  into  the  puniest  and  sickliest  bipeds 
of  the  Mediterranean  coastlands. 

Felix  L.  Oswald. 

Coffee-Houses. — Coffee-houses  as  ri- 
vals of  liquor-taverns  have  been  favored 
almost  from  the  beginning  of  the  active 
temperance  agitation.  As  early  as  1830 
and  1831  there  was  a  coffee-house  move- 
ment in  Scotland,  under  the  auspices  of 
temperance  societies,  resulting  in  the  suc- 
cessful operation  of  such  establishments 
in  nearly  all  the  principal  towns  and 
cities,  but  many  of  tliem  at  that  time  sold 
the  lighter  alcoholic  beverages  as  well  as 
tea  and  coffee.  It  was  in  protest  against 
this  practice  that  the  Dunfermline  Society, 
Sept.  21,  1830,  formed  itself  into  the 
"  Dunfermline  Association  for  the  pro- 
motion of  temperance  by  the  relinquish- 
ment of  all  intoxicating  liquors,"  and 
passed  a  resolution  agreeing  "  to  give  no 
encouragement  or  support  to  any  coffee- 
house established  or  receiving  counte- 
nance from  any  temperance  society,  for 
the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors."^  In 
1844  2  "  the  coffee-houses  of  Glasgow,  con- 
ducted on  strict  temperance  principles, 
and  provided  with  news-rooms,  etc.,  were 
in  some  respects  much  superior  to  the 

•  Dawson  Burns's  "  Temperance  History,"  vol.  1,  p.  48. 
«  Ibid,  p.  348. 


Collier,  William.] 


84 


[Commercial  Temp.  League. 


coffee-taverns  and  palaces  of  the  present 
day."     But   it   is  more  recently,  and  in 
England  especially,  that  the  coffee-house 
has  become  a  prominent  feature  of  the 
temj)erance   movement.     Liverpool,  Bir- 
mingham, Bradford  and  other  large  cities 
in  England  are  plentifully  supplied  with 
these  places,  while  in  London,  where  the 
development   has    been    slower,   a  large 
number    of     establishments    have    been 
opened   by    the    Lockhart   Coffee-House 
Company,  with  the  prospect  of  a  rapid 
increase    in   the    number.     Two   weekly 
newspapers  in    London,  the  Temperance 
Caterer  and  the  Refreshment  JVeios   (the 
latter  the  organ  of  the  Coffee-Tavern  Pro- 
tection Society),  are  especially  devoted  to 
the  coffee-house  movement  and  its  inter- 
ests.   In  1873,  Rev.  Charles  Garrett  con- 
ceived the  idea  of  a  coffee-saloon  in  Liver- 
])Ool,  which  should  combine  every  attrac- 
tion of  the  liquor-saloon  except  the  bar,  and 
a  company  was  formed,  and  such  a  place, 
with  reading-room  attached,  was  opened 
near  the  docks.  Eef  reshments  were  served 
at  the  cheapest  rates.     The  enterprise  was 
so  successful  that  there  are  at  present  in 
Liverpool  more  than  GO  of  these  cocoa- 
rooms,  as  they  are  called,  while  the  British 
Workman's     Cocoa-House    Company    of 
JTjiverpool,  Avhich  has  them  in  charge,  has 
in   no   year  paid  less  than  10  per  cent, 
dividends.    Coffee-houses  were  established 
in  Bradford  after  their  success  was  mani- 
fest in  Liverpool,  and  the  Bradford  Coffee- 
House  Company  has  opened  20  places  in 
that  city  and  its  suburbs.     Birmingham 
also  is  plentifully   supplied  with  coffee- 
houses, or  coffee-house  hotels,  and  they  are 
successful  from  a  business  point  of  view,  as 
well  as  influential  in  moulding  temperance 
sentiment.     The   coffee-house  movement 
has  extended  into  Canada  and  Australia, 
but  has  made  little  progress  'n  the  United 
States.     Probably  the  nearest  approaches 
to  the  English  coffee-house  to  be  found  in 
this  country  are  the  temperance  restau- 
rants established  in  various  cities  by  enter- 
prising  or  philanthropic   persons,  those 
opened  and  very  successfully  managed  by 
.Joshua   L.    Baily  in  Philadelphia   being 
especially  worthy  of  mention. 

Collier,  William. — Born  in  Scit- 
uate,  Mass.,  Oct.  11,  1771,  and  died  in 
Boston,  Mass.,  March  29,  1843.  He 
learned  the  carpenter's  trade,  and  after- 
wards decided  to  fit  himself  for  the  min- 


istry. Ho  graduated  from  Brown  Uni- 
versity in  17'.)7,  and  two  years  later  was 
ordained  as  a  clergyman.  In  1 800  he  be- 
came a  pastor  in  New  York  City,  where 
ho  remained  four  years.  He  had  charge 
of  a  church  in  ('harlestown,  Mass.,  from 
1804  until  1820,  and  then  engaged  in 
mission  work  in  Boston.  He  was  a 
pioneer  in  the  temperance  movement  and 
projected  and  published  tha  first  temper- 
ance newspaper  in  history — the  National 
Pliilanthropist,  started  in  Boston  in 
March,  182G,  Originally  a  monthly,  it 
was  issued  weekly  after  the  first  three 
months  and  until  it  was  discontinued  two 
years  later.  This  paper  bore  the  follow- 
ing significant  mottoes:  "Temperate 
drinking  is  the  downhill  road  to  intem- 
perance ; "  "  Distilled  spirits  ought  to  be 
banished  from  the  land,  and  what  ought 
to  be  done,  can  be  done."  In  1827  Mr. 
Collier  became  the  editor  of  the  Baptid 
Preacher.  He  also  compiled  a  hymn- 
book,  and  edited  various  works  for  publi- 
cation. 

Colorado.— See  Index. 

Commercial   Temper ance 

League. — I  had  read  the  delightful 
work  of  Rev.  E.  E.  Hale,  entitled  "  Ten 
Times  One  is  Ten,"  and  had  written  a 
letter  to  the  author,  in  which  I  boastingly 
claimed  to  be  a  decided  temperance  man. 
His  reply  contained  the  following  sen- 
tence: "No  man  is  sure  he  is  temperate 
himself  until  he  tries  to  make  other  peo- 
ple so."  That  searching  sentence  led 
me  to  conclude  that  my  temjDerance 
principles  should  be  heavily  discounted, 
and  I  resolved  to  make  an  advance.  I 
arranged  a  meeting  with  Dr.  Hale  and  a 
few  invited  friends  on  a  certain  day  in 
188G,  in  C.  W.  Anderson's  insurance  of- 
fice, 185  Broadway,  New  York.  Then 
and  there  ten  of  us  organized  a  "  Ten 
Times  One  is  Ten  "  Club  for  temperance 
work.  The  widespread  organization  that 
has  sprung  from  this  beginning  is  appro- 
priately called  the  Commercial  Temper- 
ance League. 

The  object  of  the  League  is  revealed 
in  its  mottoes  and  pledges.  The  mottoes 
are  the  same  as  those  adopted  by  the 
King's  Daughters: 

"  Look  up  and  not  down." 
"  Look  forward  and  not  back." 
"  Look  out  and  not  in." 
"Lend  a  hand." 


Commission  of  Inquiry.] 


85 


[Common  La^v. 


Its  pledge  is  two-fold :  (1)  To  drink  no 
intoxicating  liquor  as  a  beverage.  (2) 
To  try  and  get  ten  others  to  join  the 
League.  We  consider  that  a  compliance 
with  the  first  pledge  simply  gives  the 
person  a  start,  while  adherence  to  the 
second  means  an  aggressive  movement 
towards  the  saloon's  destruction. 

The  membership  cannot  be  definitely 
stated.  It  was  over  4,000  prior  to  Jan. 
1,  1890.  As  a  large  proportion  of  its 
members  are  commercial  travelers,  it  is 
difficult  to  keep  track  of  their  move- 
ments. Upon  the  basis  of  4,000  mem- 
bers, if  each  one  should  keep  both 
pledges,  the  number  would  very  soon 
swell  to  40,000.  But  traveling  men  are 
exposed  to  special  temptations,  and  too 
many  fall  by  the  wayside. 

As  to  methods,  the  League  depends 
largely  upon  personal  solicitation,  al- 
ways, however,  insisting  upon  two  things 
— abstinence  and  work.  All  kinds  of 
temperance  activity  are  encouraged, 
whether  on  the  score  of  health  or  economy, 
philanthropy  or  morality,  religion  or 
politics.  Some  of  the  members  do  plat- 
form work,  others  furnish  money  for  the 
distribution  of  literature,  and  all  are  ex- 
pected to  be  supplied  with  our  pledge- 
cards  for  use  at  any  time  or  place.  Clubs 
have  been  organized  in  many  of  the 
leading  cities.  Merchants,  clerks,  com- 
mercial travelers,  manufacturers,  lawyers 
and  ministers  have  identified  themselves 
with  the  movement.  A  large  number 
have  taken  the  double  pledge,  and  been 
redeemed  from  the  drink  slavery,  and 
sleepy  church-members  have  been  awak- 
ened to  see  that  they  cannot  be  consistent 
Christians  unless  they  "lend  a  hand" 
toward  the  obliteration  of  the  alcohol 
curse.  S.  A.  Haines, 

President  Commercial  Temperance 
League. 

Commission    of     Inquiry.  —  See 

United  States  Goyerxmext  and  the 
Liquor  Traffic. 

Common  Law. — This  term  as  used 
in  the  United  States  embraces  both  the 
common  law  of  England  strictly  so-called 
and  the  acts  of  theBritisli  Parliament  of  a 
general  nature  and  not  inapplicable  here, 
passed  before  the  earliest  English  immi- 
grants, who  remained  permanently  here, 
left  their  native  land  on  the  19th  of  De- 


cember, 1606,  in  the  4th  year  of  James  I. 
(Bishop's  1st  Book  of  the  Lasv,  Sections  50 
to  57.)  The  common  law  of  England  blend- 
ed together  the  usages  and  customs  of  the 
nations  and  clans  that  successively  con- 
quered and  inhabited  the  island  of  Great 
Britain,  or  parts  of  it.  (3  Wait's  A.  &  D., 
278.)  The  earliest  decisions  made  by  the 
Courts  of  England  simply  reflected  the 
state  of  civilization  and  enlightenment 
then  existing  there.  These  decisions  be- 
came "  precedents  "  or  *'  authority  "  for 
subsequent  decisions  upon  the  principles 
involved,  and  under  the  rule  known  as 
,stare  decisis  the  Courts  of  modern  times 
have  followed  these  early  decisions,  even 
in  cases  where  they  were  contrary  to 
their  own  notions  of  right  and  justice, 
rather  than  introduce  the  element  of  un- 
certainty in  the  law  by  overruling  them 
and  establishing  a  rule  in  accord  with 
the  advance  made  in  civilization.  Hence  it 
has  become  necessary  with  every  advance 
made  by  society  in  civilization  and  en- 
lightenment to  change  by  statutory  en- 
actment some  old  rule  of  the  common 
law.  This  is  well  illustrated  by  the  legis- 
lation of  modern  times  on  the  rio-hts  and 
disabilities  of  married  women.  The  old 
common  law  status  of  married  women  has 
been  completely  revolutionized  by  this 
legislation. 

The  selling  of  intoxicating  liquors  was 
looked  upon  as  a  lawful  means  of  liveli- 
hood by  the  English  people  centuries  ago 
when  the  question  first  came  before  the 
English  Courts,  and  hence  unless  the 
place  where  the  intoxicating  liquors  were 
sold  was  conducted  in  a  disorderly  man- 
ner no  offence  was  adjudged  to  have  been 
committed  (Bishop  on  Crim.  Law,  Vol.  I, 
Sec.  1113;  2  Kent  Com.,  12th  ed.,  p.  597 
in  note;  Cooley  on  Torts,  2d  ed.,  side- 
page  605,  top  p.  718;  4  Comyns  Digest, 
p.  822;  Faulkner's  Case,  1  Saunders's 
Rej).,  249;  Stevens  V.  Watson,  1  Salkeld's 
Rep.,  p.  45 ;  King  v.  Marriot,  4  Modern 
Rep.,  144;  Rex  v.  Inyes,  2  Showers's  Rep., 
468.)  In  the  case  of  Commonwealth  v. 
McDonough  (13  Allen  [Mass.]  Rep.,  581), 
decided  in  1866,  a  Boston  saloon-keeper 
was  indicted  "  for  the  illegal  sale  and  il- 
legal keeping  for  sale  of  intoxicating 
liquors  to  the  great  injury  and  common 
nuisance  of  the  citizens  of  the  Common- 
wealth." After  the  indictment  the  stat- 
ute was  repealed  under  which  the  indict- 
ment  had    been    obtained,  and   so    the 


Common  Law.] 


86 


[Communion  Wine. 


prosecution  endeavored  to  secure  a  con- 
viction on  the  ground  that  the  keeping 
of  a  saloon  was  contrary  to  the  common 
law.  The  case  was  carried  up  to  the 
highest  Court  in  the  State  and  ably- 
argued.  In  deciding  the  case  the  Su- 
preme Court  said : 

"It  is  further  contended  that  the  offence  set 
forth  in  the  complaint  was  a  nuisance  at  com- 
mon law,  and  may  be  punished  as  such,  if  it  is 
held  that  the  statute  penalty  is  repealed.  No 
authority  is  cited  in  favor  of  this  position,  and 
those  which  we  have  examined  are  opposed  to 
it.  In  1  Bishop  Crim.  Law.  Sec.  1,047,  it  is  said 
that,  aside  from  statutory  provisions,  a  crime  is 
not  committed  by  selling-  intoxicating  liquors. 
Merchants  have  always  dealt  in  wines  and  other 
liquors  in  large  quantities,  without  being  sub- 
ject to  prosecution  at  common  law.  Inn-keep- 
ing was  a  lawful  trade,  open  to  every  subject 
without  license  at  common  law.  If  he  should 
corrupt  wines  or  victuals  an  action  lay  against 
him.  He  might  recover  the  price  of  wines  sold 
by  him  by  action  of  debt.  (Bac.  Ab.  Inns  8 
Co.,  147.)  So  it  was  lawful  to  keep  an  alelioi:se. 
(1  Russell  on  Crimes,  298  in  note  [3d  ed  ].)  In 
the  argument  for  the  Commonwealth,  such 
places  as  the  defendant  is  charged  with  keeping 
are  classed  with  brothels  and  gaming-houses, 
and  it  is  argued  that  they  are  all  equally  nuis- 
ances. But  it  was  not  so  at  common  law.  Broth- 
els and  gaming-houses  were  held  to  be  nuisan- 
ces under  all  circumstances,  but  ale-houses  were 
not,  unless  they  became  disorderly,  and  in  such 
cases  they  were  held  to  be  nuisances  on  account 
of  the  disorderly  conduct  in  them,  whether  the 
keeper  were  licensed  or  not.  As  it  is  not  alleged 
that  the  defendant  kept  a  disorderly  house,  he 
cannot  be  held  guilty  of  an  offence  at  common 
law." 

License  laws  were  first  enacted  in  1552 
by  the  British  Parliament  in  the  fifth  and 
sixth  years  of  Edward  VI.  (1  Russell  on 
Crimes,  2d  ed.,  p.  298,  note.)  License 
laws  continued  to  exist  in  England  at  the 
time  our  ancestors  departed  for  America 
in  160G,  but  the  provisions  for  granting  a 
license  were  so  locally  inapplicable  to  the 
American  colonies  that  they  have  never 
been  held  to  be  in  force  here  by  any 
Court  in  any  reported  case. 

From  the  foregoing  it  will  be  seen  that 
the  common  law  of  the  United  States  on 
the  subject  of  liquor-selling  simply  reflects 
the  views  entertained  on  tlie  subject  by  a 
half-civilized  people  ages  ago,  and  that 
the  views  of  the  enlightened  people  of 
the  United  States  on  the  subject  can  be 
found  only  in  Constitittional  and  statu- 
tory law.  As  great  changes  have  taken 
place  in  public  opinion  with  the  advance 
of  civilization  in  relation  to  slavery,  po- 
lygamy, lotteries   and  other  tilings   now 


universally  regarded   as   evils   but    once 
considered   lawful  and  right,  so  it  is  not 
surprising  that  public  sentiment  has  also 
changed  in  reference  to  liquor-selling. 
Samuel  W.  Packard. 

Communion  Wine.^ — The  import- 
ance of  the  inquiry  whether  Jesus  aj^point- 
ed  intoxicating  or  unfermented  wine  for 
the  communion  service  has  interested 
in  every  age  of  the  Christian  Church 
able  leaders  who  have  regarded  it  a  test 
question  as  to  the  purity  of  Christian 
morality.  While  all  the  leading  writers 
of  the  first  five  Christian  centuries  recoff- 
nized  that  the  wines  made,  drank  and 
used  at  the  Passover  and  Last  Supper  by 
Christ  were  the  fresh  "  fruit  "  of  the  vine, 
the  difficulty  of  obtaining  such  wines  in 
Africa  and  Northern  Europe  led  no  less 
than  twenty  fathers  of  the  first  five 
centuries,  and,  later,  men  like  Photius  of 
the  Greek  Church  in  the  9th  Century, 
Aquinas  of  the  Roman  Chtirch  in  the 
13th  Century,  and  Bingham  of  the  English 
Church  early  in  the  18th  Century  to  an 
exhaustive  study  of  methods  of  prepar- 
ing unintoxicating  wines,  and  to  review 
the  discussions  and  decisions  of  suc- 
cessive Christian  Councils  on  comnntn- 
ion  wine  as  all-important  in  Christian 
morals  Its  growing  moral  bearings, 
recognized  in  all  branches  of  the 
Christian  Church,  has  led  on  to  the 
exhaustive  research  which  now  permits 
demonstrative  conclusions.  As  the 
prior  qitestion  whether  Nazarites  were 
to  be  excluded  from  the  Passover  or 
to  be  required  to  violate  their  pledge  of 
abstinence  is  settled  by  the  connected 
records  of  Numbers,  6th  to  18th  chap- 
ters, so  Luke's  connection,  as  a  Greek 
physician  acquainted  with  wines,  of 
John's  abstinence  (1 :15),of  popular  com- 
menc  on  it  (7 :  33,  34)  and  the  "  fruit  of 
the  vine  "  used  at  both  the  Passover  and 
communion  observance  (22 :  18,  comp. 
Matt.  26:  29,  and  Mark  14:  25),  is  a  nec- 
essary guide  to  an  exhaustive  and  there- 
fore conclusive  decision  as  to  the  wine 
appointed  for  the  Lord's  Supper.  With 
this  prior  consideration  in  view,  the  suc- 
cessive steps  in  research  are  the  follow- 
ing :  (1)  Christ  as  a  "  conforming  Jew  " 
must,  as  to  the  wine  of  the  Passover, 
have  strictly  followed  the  Mosaic  statute 
and  the  historic  precedent  which  from 
the  days  of  Moses  to  the  present  time  has 


Communion  Wine.] 


87 


[Communion  Wine. 


ruled  the  character  of  wine  used  in  He- 
brew rites.  (See  Passovp:r  Wine.)  (2)  The 
word  *•  wine ''  is  not  used  in  the  account 
of  the  Supper  given  by  three  evangelists; 
but  the  term  "fruit  of  the  vine"  is  ap- 
plied bv  Luke  to  the  cup  of  the  Passover 
(•,'•3 :  18),  and  by  Matthew  (26:29)  and 
Mark  (14:25)  to  the  same  cup  used  at 
the  Communion.  (3)  At  no  age,  in  no 
land  and  among  no  people,  as  among  the 
liomans  under  their  Republic,  especially 
for  two  centuries  before  Christ,  was  the 
method  of  preserving  wines  free  from  in- 
toxicating ferment  so  studied  and  prac- 
ticed; while  no  class  of  men  were  so  true 
to  moral  virtue  as  were  the  Roman  Cen- 
turions mentioned  in  the  lives  of  Christ 
and  of  his  Apostles;  a  fact  noted  by 
Matthew  as  a  reproof  to  his  countrymen 
(8:10;  27 :  54),  and  especially  repeated  by 
Luke,  who  wrote  for  cultured  Greeks 
(7:2,4,  5,9;  23:47;  Acts  10:1,  2,  7,  34, 
35 ;  2 1 :32 ;  22  :25,  26 ;  23 :27 ;  27  :  1,  3,  43 ; 
28: 16).  (4)  The  fact  that  from  the  time 
of  his  making  '•  fresh  wine,"  Greek  "  ka- 
lon  "  (John  2 :  10)  for  a  wedding,  to  his  re- 
jection of  wine  on  the  cross,  Jesus  drank 
only  the  unintoxicating  fresh  product  of 
the  grape,  confirms  not  only  the  former 
facts  stated,  but  the  added  fact  that  the 
Avine  of  Christ's  Supper  was  the  fresh 
product  of  the  grape.  (5)  The  allusions 
of  Paul,  tlie  first  to  give  a  written  account 
of  the  Lord's  Supper  (1.  Cor.  11:  20-26), 
have  by  the  ablest  Christian  scholars, 
from  the  2d  to  the  19th  Centuries,  been 
declared  to  have  been  conformed  to 
Christ's  example,  for  these  reasons:  First, 
Corinth  furnished  then,  and  the  Greek 
Isles  now  export,  preserved  unfermented 
wine ;  Second,  The  term  "  wine  '"'  is  not 
used  by  Paul,  as  it  was  not  by  Christ; 
Third,  The  beverage  in  "the  cup"  is 
supposed  to  be  familiar.  The  Greek  verb 
"  methuo,''  found  seven  times  (Matt. 
24:49;  John  2:10;  Acts  2:15;  1  Cor. 
11:21;  1  Thess.  5:7;  Rev.  17:2,  6), 
means  "surfeit,"  not  drunken,  as  does 
the  noun  "methusma"  in  the  Greek 
translation  of  Hos.  4:11;  the  contrast  in 
I  Cor.  11:21  being  with  "hungry,"  and 
clearly  relatnig  to  food,  not  to  articles  of 
drink. 

The  facts  as  to  the  New  Testament 
record  relating  to  "communion  wine" 
are  confirmed  in  each  age  succeeding 
the  day  of  Christ  and  his  Apostles.  Cle- 
ment in  Egypt  in  the  2d  Century  alludes 


to  the  Christian  "  Enkratites  "  or  total 
abstainers;  who,  living  in  lower  Egypt, 
had  no  vines;  and  who,  citing  the  fact 
that  in  1  Cor.  11  Paul  does  not  mention 
wine  bat  only  "  the  cup,"  used  water  at 
the  Lord's  Supper.  He  mentions  Greek 
sects  as  the  Pythagorians,  who  drank  no 
wine,  but  cites  David's  pure  beverages, 
the  fresh  product  of  the  grape;  he  de- 
clares that  the  cup  of  the  Lord's  Supper 
is  the  "  blood  of  the  grape-cluster,"  and, 
stating  that  the  wine  Christ  made  at  the 
wedding  was  the  same,  he  repeats  Christ's 
words  thus:  "This  is  my  blood,  the 
blood  of  the  vine,"  as  alluding  to  John 
15 :  1,  in  the  figures  "  I  am  the  vine,  and 
ye  are  the  branches."  Origen,  in  the 
opening  of  the  3d  Century,  alludes  to 
three  kinds  of  wine:  the  ordinary  in- 
toxicating wine,  the  wine  diluted  Avith 
water,  and  the  "  sweet  nectar  "  of  Homer 
and  of  the  Greeks,  which  he  declares  is 
Christ's  appointment.  Cyj^rian,  at  Car- 
thage in  Northern  Africa,  in  the  middle 
of  the  3d  Century,  cites  Melchisedech, 
quoted  by  Christ  and  Paul  as  well  as 
David  (Psa.  110: 1,4;  Matt.  22:  44;  Heb. 
5:6;  6:20;  7:  17,  21)  as  prefiguring  his 
sacrifice,  and  so  his  memorial  Supper 
(Gen.  14:18);  and,  quoting  Gen.  49: 11, 
he  asks,  "  When  here  the  blood  of  the 
grape  is  mentioned,  what  else  than  the 
wine  of  the  cup  of  the  Lord's  blood  is 
set  forth  ?"  He  cites  David's  beverage 
of  fresh  grape  juice  in  his  shepherd  life 
(Psa.  23 :  5),  and  the  wine  made  fresh  and 
declared  "the  best"  {optimum  in  Latin) 
as  that  used  at  the  Supper.  Zeno,  at 
Verona  in  Northern  Italy,  in  the  3d  Cen- 
tury, states  that  the  cup  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  was  fresh  "  grape-juice "  {nius- 
tum) ;  he  declares  that  it  was  the  simple 
beverage  of  Melchisedech,  Abraham,  Jo- 
seph and  Jesus  in  Palestine,  and  also 
like  the  Grecian  "  gleukos  "  referred  to 
Acts  2 :  13.  Chrysostom,  court-preacher 
at  Constantinople  at  the  close  of  the  4th 
Century,  condemning  the  custom  of  wine; 
drinking,  meets  the  objection  that  it  was 
appointed  for  the  Lord's  Supper;  and  de- 
clares that  Christ,  foreseeing  this  ^perver- 
sion, was  careful  in  selecting  the  terms, 
"I  will  drink  no  more  of  the  fruit  of 
this,  the  vine."  Jerome,  who  spent  30 
years  in  Palestine  at  the  close  of  the  4th 
and  the  opening  of  the  5th  Century,  that 
he  might  see,  in  the  land  where  Jesus 
lived,  and  verify  every  fact  in  his  history. 


Communion  Wine.] 


88 


[Compensation. 


says  of  the  wine  of  the  Supper,  citing 
Christ's  words  '*  The  fruit  of  the  vine," 
that  it  was  fresh  from  the  noble  vine 
(Gen.  49 :  11),  and  like  the  "  tirosh  "  of 
Hos.  2 : 8,  9,  22.  Augustine,  going  from 
Rome  as  a  gospel  herald  to  Carthage 
early  in  the  5th  Century,  meeting  the  dif- 
ficulty of  providing  fresh  wine  for  the 
Lord's  Supper  and  the  perversion  made 
of  Christ's  appointment,  alludes  to  Vir- 
gil's mention  in  his  Georgics  of  the  sim- 
ple country  provision  of  "milk,  honey 
and  must."  He  cites  the  "tirosh" 
blessed  by  Isaac,  as  Christ's  beverage ;  and 
he  declares  that  the  cup  of  the  Lord's 
table  is  what  a  little  child  may  drink. 

In  successive  ages  since  these  early 
Christian  leaders  saw  how  vital  the  ques- 
tion whether  Jesus  was  behind  the  Greek 
and  Roman  patriots  of  his  day  in  guard- 
ing his  followers  from  perversion  of  his 
example  and  appointment,  profound  and 
conscientious  scholars  in  every  branch  of 
the  Christian  Church,  in  lands  where  the 
vine  and  its  richest  fruits  were  not,  as  in 
Palestine,  native  to  the  clime,  have 
reviewed  all  this  testimony.  Thus,  Pho- 
tius,  a  leader  in  the  separation  between 
the  Greek  and  Roman  (Jhurches  in  the 
middle  of  the  9th  Century,  in  main- 
taining the  custom  of  the  Eastern 
Church,  which  administers  the  cup  even 
to  children,  comments  as  a  native  Greek 
on  Christ's  words  as  to  "new  wine  "  and 
"the fruit  of  the  vine"  as  taught  in  all 
former  and  subsequent  ages.  Aquinas, 
born  in  Italy  but  spending  his  early  life 
in  France  and  Western  Germany,  is 
called  to  remonstrate  against  the  wine 
sometimes  'used;  and  retraces  at  great 
length  the  Old  and  New  Testament  his- 
tory, showing  that  Christ  used  in  his 
Supper  fresh  "  wine  of  the  vine;"  urging 
that  "'  True  wine  can  be  carried  to  those 
countries  where  there  are  no  wines,  as 
much  as  is  sufficient  for  the  sacrament," 
and  stating  that  where  grajjes  of  inferior 
quality  grow,  as  on  the  Rhine,  "  This 
sacrament  can  be  observed  with  must," 
since  "  must  has  already  the  character  of 
wine." 

In  the  differences  that  arose  between 
the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  and  the 
various  dissenting  churches  in  the  close 
of  the  17th  and  the  opening  of  the  18th 
(Centuries,  a  thorough  and  exhaustive 
review  of  former  authorities  was  made  by 
Poole,  as  a  scholarly  and  uncontroversial 


dissenter,  and  by  Bingham  of  the  Estab- 
lished Church  of  England ;  both  reaching 
like  conclusions.  The  earnest  spirit  of 
Whitefield  and  Wesley  reviewed  a  little 
later  the  call  for  a  return  to  a  pure,  un- 
intoxicating  wine  for  the  Lord's  SupjDer ; 
and  in  the  early  jjart  of  the  19th  Century 
Adam  Clarke  wrought  conclusions  of 
former  scholars  into  his  commentary. 
At  the  era  of  its  publication,  many  con- 
scientious Christian  leaders,  who  from 
the  era  of  Whitefield's  first  visit  had 
longed  and  labored  in  New  England  for 
a  return  to  Christ's  pure  appointment, 
found  in  Moses  Stuart  an  intelligent  ad- 
vocate, though  his  declining  age  forbade 
exhaustive  research.  In  1829,  John  N. 
Barbour  of  Boston  imjDorted  fiom  the 
Grecian  Isles,  in  bottles,  pure  wines, 
which  when  analyzed  by  the  eminent 
Dr.  John  A.  Warren  were  found  free  from 
alcohol.  The  progress  of  the  popular 
demand  by  reformed  inebriates,  like 
Gough,  and  by  students  like  Lees  of 
England  and  Nott  and  others  in  the 
United  States,  has  steadily  confirmed 
the  truth  taught  bv  Christ,  and  has  pro- 
moted the  "  grace  "  which  his  example 
and  his  appointment  have  inspired.  The 
special  confirmation  which  the  monu- 
ments of  Egypt  have  given  as  to  the  early 
method  of  preparing  and  preserving  un- 
ferraented  wine,  and  the  reopening  of 
Palestine  for  the  rej^etition  of  the  stud- 
ies of  Jerome,  and,  yet  more,  the  revival 
in  Italy  and  Spain,  as  well  as  in  Califor- 
nia, of  ancient  methods,  has  facilitated 
the  return  to  tlie  use  of  unfermented 
wine  at  the  Lord's  Supper  specially 
sought  in  Great  Britain  and  America  by 
reformed  inebriates.       G.  W.  Sa'mson. 

Compensation. — One  of  the  most 
perplexing  questions  arising  after  the 
Prohibition  movement  was  fairly  inaugu- 
rated was.  Should  liquor-manufacturers 
and  sellers  be  reimbursed  for  their  losses 
when  their  traffic  is  forbidden  and  their 
business  establishments  are  closed?  In 
the  United  States  it  was  not  until  forty 
years  of  Prohibitory  legislation  had 
elapsed  tliat  the  question  was  definitely 
disposed  of  by  the  Court  of  last  resort. 
Meanwhile  decisions  for  and  against  tlio 
principle  of  compensation  were  made  by 
minor  Courts;  but  by  common  consent 
the  question  was  held  in  abeyance  every- 
where  in   the   country    throughout  this 


Ck>inpensation.] 


89 


[Compensation. 


period.  Although  it  was  much  discussed 
by  individual  writers — and  even  some 
Prohibitionists  maintained  the  afhrniative 
view'^ — it  is  a  remarkable  fact  that  no  de- 
finite political  following  or  championship 
of  an  im2:)ortant  nature  was  ever  com- 
manded by  the  advocates  of  compensation 
in  the  United  States.  While  the  liquor- 
sellers  readily  secured  partisan  support 
for  their  offensive  and  defensive  schemes 
in  relation  to  every  other  phase  of  policy, 
they  could  not  persuade  political  leaders 
to  make  a  popular  issue  of  the  one  pro- 
gramme whose  accejjtance  was  essential 
to  the  welfare  of  the  traffic.  These  lead- 
ers were  freq.uently  prepared  to  stand 
or  fall  in  opposing  Prohibition  or  Local 
Option,  or  in  urging  even  the  most  scan- 
dalous of  license  bills.  They  were  pre- 
pared to  become  responsible  for  elaborate 
and  unscrupulous-  plans  to  defeat  ad- 
vanced legislation  and  protect  the  licensed 
dealers.  But  in  spite  of  the  powerful  and 
persevering  resistance  of  political  parties, 
Prohibitory  systems  were  adopted,  costly 
manufacturers'  plants  became  all  but 
worthless,  liquors  were  seized  and  de- 
stroyed and  wholesalers  and  retailers  suf- 
fered very  heavy  pecuniary  losses;  while 
even  the  most  faithful  political  friends  of 
the  traffic  made  no  formal  eiiort  of  im- 
portance to  award  damages. 

UNPOPULARITY   OF   COMPENSATION". 

This  disinclination  to  take  partisan 
ground  in  favor  of  indemnifying  dis- 
possessed license-holders  was  occasioned 
by  the  strong  repugnance  to  compensation 
prevailing  among  the  people.  A  compen- 
sation clause  attached  to  any  Prohibitory, 
Local  'Option  or  restrictive  license  act 
would  have  been  the  most  effectual  pro- 
vision that  could  have  been  devised  for 
preventing  popular  consent  to  the  anti- 
license  policy ;  but  it  was  unavailable  be- 
cause the  device  was  exceedingly  dis- 
tasteful to  the  general  public.  When  the 
Pennsylvania  Legislature,  in  January, 
1887,  was  preparing  to  submit  to  the  peo- 
ple the  question  of  adding  a  Prohibitory 
Amendment  to  the  State  Constitution,  the 
caucus  of  the  dominant  party  (Jan.  4) 
voted  to  submit  for  popular  decision  at 
the  same  time  a  clause  providing  "That 
compensation  shall  be  made  out  of  the 
public  treasury  to  all  owners  or  lessees  of 
real  estate  lawfully  occupied  or  used  con- 

>  Notably  the  late  W.  H.  U.  Bartiam. 


tinually  from  April  1, 1887,  until  the  final 
adoption  of  this  Amendment,  for  the 
manufacture  and  sale  of  intoxicating 
liquors  as  a  beverage  so  far  as  the  said 
real  estate  shall  be  injured  by  the  adop- 
tion of  the  foregoing  Prohibition  Amend- 
ment; and  the  General  Assembly  shall 
provide  by  law  for  a  true  and  just  valua- 
tion and  the  payment  of  losses  so  sus- 
tained." The  Pennsylvania  act  of  sub- 
mission was  framed  and  carried  through 
the  Legislature  by  very  shrewd  j^artisan 
leaders,  who  subsequently  showed  that 
they  were  ready  to  use  any  expedient 
means  for  protecting  the  traffic ;  but  they 
quickly  withdrew  their  compensation 
proviso.  The  caucus  eliminated  it  from 
the  act  of  submission  on  Jan.  24.  Again, 
in  Nebraska  (February,  1887)  and  in  Il- 
linois (March,  1887)  it  was  proposed  by 
legislative  leaders  to  submit  Prohibitory 
Amendments  conditioned  on  compensa- 
tion, but  these  schemes  came  to  nothing. 
Lideed,  actual  compensation  has  never 
been  granted  as  an  incident  of  Prohibi- 
tory laws  in  the  United  States,-  and  the 
sense  of  the  people  upon  the  question 
has  been  so  well  understood  that  no  em- 
phatic expression  of  it  has  been  invited. 
Popular  objection  to  compensation  has 
naturally  been  based  chiefly  on  reasons  of 
economy.  The  policy  if  applied  in  any 
State  would  enormously  increase  the  pub- 
lic hudget  and  taxation — all  for  the  bene- 
fit of  a  single  class,  a  class  regarded  by 
most  citizens  as  particularly  undeserving, 
corrupt  and  even  criminal.  It  was  not 
needful  for  one  to  be  a  Prohibitionist  to 
oppose  compensation  on  economical 
grounds.  Besides,  the  compensation  prin- 
ciple, if  approved,  would  have  to  be  ob- 
served under  license  as  well  as  under 
Prohibitory  systems.  Should  it  be  de- 
sired to  restrict  the  number  of  licenses  in 
any  community  the  restriction  would 
have  to  be  attended  by  compensation  to 
all  licensed  dealers  deprived  of  their  for- 
mer privileges.  Since  it  was  universally 
recognized  that  no  efforts  to  abolish  the 
license  system  or  even  to  reduce  the  ag- 
gregate number  of  saloons  could  be  made' 
wiiih  satisfactory  prospects  of  success  if 
compensation  were  indispensable,  the  ad- 
vocates of  restriction  and  other  conserva- 
tive temperance  people  were  equally  in- 

-In  some  towns,  however,  liquor-sellers  have  been  paid 
sums  of  money  from  local  public  funds  or  by  private  indi- 
viduals, in  consideration  of  their  willingness  to  surrender 
their  licenses  and  quit  business. 


Compensation.]  90                                  [Compensation. 

terested  with  the  Prohibitionists  in  re-  be  abated.  Everything  prejudicial  to  the 
sisting  the  liquor-sellers'  demands.  health  or  morals  of  a  city  may  be  re- 
But  the  expediency  argument  was  far  moved."  "  If  a  loss  of  revenue  should 
from  representing  the  strongest  objections  accrue  to  the  United  States  from  a  di- 
entertained  by  uncompromising  antago-  minished  consumption  of  ardent  spirits," 
nists  of  the  traffic.  Thomas  Carlyle's  re-  '  said  Justice  Grier,  "  she  will  be  the  gainer 
tort  to  the  publican's  plea  for  compensa-  a  thousand-fold  in  the  health,  wealth  and 
tion,  "  Go  to  thy  father  the  devil  for  com-  happiness  of  the  people." 
pensation!"  was  the  answer  that  temper-  In  185G  the  New  York  State  Court  of 
ance  radicals  were  disposed  to  give.  If  Appeals,  in  its  decision  in  the  case  of 
it  was  urged  that  the  Government,  having  People  v.  Wynehamer  pronouncing  the 
become  a  partner  in  the  licensed  liquor  New  York  Prohibitory  law  unconstitu- 
business  and  shared  the  proceeds,  was  in  tional,  held  that  an  act  operating  to  de- 
honor  bound  to  pay  losses  incurred  by  in-  stroy  existing  property  in  liquors  was  in 
dividual  liquor-sellers  upon  discontinu-  violation  of  the  provision  of  the  State 
ance  of  the  partnership  arrangement,  it  Constitution  that  no  person  should  be  de- 
was  answered  that  the  Government  had  prived  of  property  without  due  process  of 
suffered  incalculably  in  tolerating  the  law.  This  view  of  the  Court  applied, 
saloons  and,  being  a  loser  by  the  bargain,  however,  only  to  liquor  property  actually 
had  no  debt  to  discharge ;  that  such  a  existing  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  the 
traffic  ought  to  be  dealt  with  as  a  robber  Prohibitory  act;  and  the  Court  was  of  the 
and  not  as  a  producer;  that  the  Govern-  opinion  that  a  Prohibitory  statute  would 
ment,  by  making  licenses  subject  to  revo-  be  valid  in  principle  if  operating  against 
cation  for  various  causes,  and  by  holding  prospective  and  not  against  existingliquor 
itself  in  readiness  to  prohibit  the  business  j)roperty.  The  implication  was  that  the 
altogether  at  the  call  of  public  sentiment,  failure  to  make  compensation  for  property 
had  served  the  liquor-sellers  with  notice  destroyed  or  injured  by  the  act  was,  in 
to  quit,  and  that  since  all  licenses  expired  the  opinion  of  the  New  York  Court  of 
annually  and  were  granted  from  year  to  Appeals,  sufficient  justification  for  con- 
year  as  special  and  temporary  privileges,  eluding  that  "  due  process  of  law  "  had 
there  could  be  no  "  vested  rights/^  prop-  not  been  provided  for  by  tlie  framers  of 
erly  so-called.  the  legislation  in  question.    But  even  this 

Court  avoided   direct   discussion   of  the 

EARLY   JUDICIAL    UTTERANCES.   •  compensation  issue. 

In  the  early  stages  of  the  Prohibitory  , 

agitation,  prestige  was  given  to  the  most  ^udge  brewer's  decision. 

radical  claims  of  the  liquor  traffic's  ene-  It  was  not  until  1886  that  the  argument 
mies  by  the  very  impressive  language  used  for  compensation  was  ex[)licitly  defined 
by  Justices  of  the  United  States  Supreme  by  a  judicial  decision  of  first-rate  respec- 
Court  in  deciding  the  celebrated  "  License  tability.  In  the  39  years  that  had  passed 
Cases"  of  1847'.  (See  5  Howard,  504.)  since  the  "'License  Cases"  were  before 
In  separate  opinions  filed  by  the  individual  the  United  States  Supreme  Court,  condi- 
justices  in  passing  upon  these  cases,  the  tions  had  been  altered  by  the  adoption 
right  to  prohibit  tlie  traffic  was  thoroughly  (1868)  of  the  14th  Amendment  to  the 
sustained.  Although  there  was  no  formal  Federal  Constitution,  declaring  in  part 
discussion  of  the  compensation  question  that  "  No  State  shall  make  or  enforce  any 
the  failure  of  the  Court  to  raise  this  law  which  shall  abridge  the  privileges  or 
question  as  one  legitimately  demanding  immunities  of  citizens  of  the  United 
consideration  in  a  review  of  the  general  States;  nor  shall  any  State  deprive  any 
principles  involved  was  highly  significant,  person  of  life,  liberty  or  property  without 
Indeed,  it  was  unmistakably  to  be  inferred  due  process  of  law ;  nor  deny  to  any  per- 
from  the  tenor  of  the  Justices'  written  son  within  its  jurisdiction  the  equal  pro- 
opinions,  that  the  claim  of  liquor-sellers  tection  of  the  laws."  The  terms  of  this 
to  compensation  was  not  recognized  by  Amendment  were  made  the  basis  for  a 
the  Court  at  that  time.  "  The  acknowl-  sweeping  decision  by  tlie  Hon.  David  J. 
edged  police  power  of  a  State,"  said  Jus-  Brewer,  Judge  of  the  8th  Circuit  Court  of 
tice  McLean,  "extends  often  to  the  de-  ':he  United  States.  In  the  case  of  the 
struction  of  property.     A  nuisance  may  State  of  Kansas,  ex  rel.,  v.  John  Walruff, 


Compensation.] 


91 


[Compensation. 


et  al.,  Jan.  21,  1886,  Judge  Brewer  held 
that  while  the  State  could  unquestionably 
proliibit  the  manufacture  and  sale  of 
liquors  for  beverage  purposes,  such  pro- 
hibition, if  unaccompanied  by  provisions 
for  compensating  the  owners  of  existing 
liquor  property,  would  not  be  in  accord- 
ance with  ''due  process  of  law."  John 
Walruff  was  a  brewer,  who  between  1870 
and  1874  had  erected  an  establishment  at 
Lawrence,  Kan.,  which  was  worth  $50,000 
for  the  purpose  of  brewing  beer,  and 
worth  not  more  than  15,000  for  any  other 
purpose.  The  State  of  Kansas,  in  1880, 
adopted  a  Proliibitory  Amendment  to  its 
Constitution,  and  subsequently  an  en- 
forcement statute.  Walruff  accordingly 
claimed  damages  in  the  amount  of 
145,000. 

Judge  Brewer,  in  this  celebrated  case, 
argued  that  Walruff's  liquor  property  had 
been  "acquired  under  every  solemn  un- 
limited guaranty  of  protection  to  property 
which  Constitutional  declaration  and  the 
underlying  thought  of  just  and  stable 
government  could  give ; "  that ''  debarring 
a  man  by  express  prohibition  from  the  use 
of  his  property  for  the  sake  of  the  public 
is  a  taking  of  private  property  for  public 
uses;"  that  "national  equity  as  well  as 
Constitutional  guaranty  forbids  such  a 
taking  of  private  property  for  the  public 
good  without  compensation,"  and  that  the 
confiscation  of  Walruff's  brewing  property 
was  no  more  to  be  Justified  on  strict  legal 
grounds  than  the  confiscation  of  a  glucose 
factory,  a  concern  for  the  manufacture  of 
playing  cards,  or  even  a  flouring  mill 
would  be  in  the  event  of  legislative  Pro- 
hibition of  such  manufacturing  enter- 
prises. 

The  significance  of  the  Walruff  decision 
was  heightened  by  important  circum- 
stances. It  was  delivered  by  a  Federal 
Court  standing  next  in  authority  to  the 
Supreme  Court.  Judge  Brewer  was  a 
Republican  and  a  citizen  of  Kansas; 
moreover,  as  a  member  of  the  Kansas 
Supreme  Court  he  had  given  his  voice  for 
sustaining  the  Prohibitory  law  on  various 
Constitutional  grounds  ' — yet  for  the  sake 

'  But  .Judge  Brewer  was  equally  outspoken  for  compen- 
sation when  on  the  Kansas  Supreme  Bench.  In  January, 
IKSi,  in  the  case  of  Kansas  v.  Peter  Mngler  (29  Kansas 
152),  although  all  the  other  Judges  fully  sustained  the 
Prohil)itory  law.  Judge  Brewer  filed  a  dissenting  opinion, 
advocating  compensation.  In  it  occurred  several  remark- 
able words  which  were  afterwards  cited  by  the  Prohibi- 
tionists as  evidence  that  he  was  actuated  by  intolerance. 
"  But  as  to  the  case  in  which  the  charge  is  of  manufac- 
turing beer,"  said  he,   "  and  without  regard  to  the  pur- 


of  the  compensation  principle  he  ventur- 
ed to  take  issue  with  the  policy  of  his 
party  and  the  strong  public  sentiment 
prevailing  in  Kansas,  and  to  champion 
a  programme  which,  if  established,  would 
render  his  other  decisions  on  the  Prohibi- 
tion question  all  but  worthless  in  prac- 
tice. More  interesting  than  anything 
else  was  the  knowledge  that  the  compen- 
sation question  was  now  regarded  by  the 
United  States  Supreme  Court  with  pro- 
found and  apparently  portentous  seri- 
ousness. In  the  case  of  Bartemeyer  v. 
Iowa  (18  Wallace,  129)  the  Supreme  Court 
had  said : 

"  But  if  it  were  true,  and  it  was  fairly  pre- 
sented to  us,  that  the  defendant  was  the  owner 
of  the  glass  of  intoxicating  liquor  which  he  sold 
to  Hickey  at  the  time  that  the  State  of 
Iowa  first  imposed  an  absolute  Prohibition 
upon  the  sale  of  such  liquor.-,  then  we  concede 
that  two  very  grave  questions  would  aris?, 
namely:  First,  whether  this  would  be  a  f.tat- 
ute  depriving  him  of  his  property  without  due 
process  of  law;  and,  secondly,  whether  if  it 
were  so,  it  would  be  so  far  a  violation  of  the 
14th  Amendment  in  that  regard  as  would  call 
for  judicial  action  by  this  Court. 

"Both  of  these  questions,  whenever  they 
may  be  presented  to  us,  are  of  an  importance  to 
require  the  most  careful  and  serious  considera- 
tion. They  are  not  to  be  lightly  treated,  nor 
are  we  authorized  to  make  any  advance  to  meet 
them  until  we  are  required  to  do  so  by  the  du- 
ties of  our  position." 

And  in  the  case  of  Beer  Company  v. 
Massachusetts  (97  U.  S.,  25)  the  Supreme 
Court  had  used  these  still  more  suggestive 
words ; 

"  We  do  not  mean  to  say  that  [liquor]  prop- 
erty actually  in  existence,  and  in  which  the 
right  of  the  owner  has  become  vested,  may  be 
taken  for  the  public  good  without  compensa- 

pose  for  which  it  was  manufactured,  while  I  do  not  care 
to  formally  dissent  I  must  say  that  my  mind  is  not  fully 
satisfied.  The  defendant  may  have  manufactured  the 
beer  for  his  own  consumption.  It  certainly  is  not  shown 
or  alleged  that  he  did  not,  and  in  a  criminal  proceeding  it 
is  not  to  be  presumed  that  the  defendant  has  done  wrong. 
And  I  have  yet  to  be  convinced  that  the  Legislature  has 
the  power  to  prescribe  what  a  citizen  shall  eat  or  drink, 
or  what  medicine  he  shall  take,  or  prevent  him  from 
growing  or  manufacturing  that  which  his  judgment  ap- 
proves tor  his  own  use  as  food,  drink  or  medicine."  The 
raising  by  the  Judge  of  a  most  unreasonable  supposition 
in  the  brewers'  favor,  and  the  employment  by  him  of  lan- 
guage closely  resembling  that  appearing  in  "personal 
liberty  "  arguments,  excited  severe  criticism. 

Judge  Brewer  was  transferred  to  the  United  States  Cir- 
cuit Court  soon  after  he  gave  his  dissenting  opinion 
in  this  case.  It  was  charged  by  the  Topeka  Capital, 
chief  Republican  newspaper  of  Kansas,  Jan.  26,  1886, 
that  his  promotion  was  due  to  the  representations  in  liis 
favor  made  to  President  Arthur  by  Senator  Vest  (Dem.), 
leading  counsel  of  the  brewers.  (See  the  Voice  for  Jan. 
16,  1890.) 

Upon  his  elevation  to  the  Supreme  Bench  of  the  United 
states.  Judge  Brewer  made  a  statement  to  a  newspaper 
correspondent  reviewing  his  connection  with  the  compen- 
sation cases.  He  recited  the  facts  but  expressed  no  regret 
for  his  action.    (See  the  Voice  for  Jan.  9,  1890.) 


Compensation.  ] 


[Compensation. 


tion,  but  we  infer  that  liquor  in  this  case,  as  in 
the  case  of  Bartemeyer  v.  Iowa,  was  not  iu  ex- 
istence when  the  liquor  law  of  Massachusests 
was  passed." 

THE  COMPENSATIOIf  CASES  IN  THE  UNITED 
STATES   SUPREME   COURT. 

For  nearly  two  years  after  the  Circuit 
Court's  decision  in  the  Wah-uft'  case,  the 
Supreme  Court  refrained  from  giving 
its  judgment.  In  October,  1886,  how- 
ever, the  Iowa  cases  of  Schmidt  Bros.  v. 
E.  M.  Cobb,  and  Arthur  O'Malley  v.  J. 
P.  Farley,  involving  the  question  of  com- 
pensation, were  passed  on  by  the  Su- 
preme Court  (119  U.  S.,  28G).  At  that 
time  one  of  tlie  nine  Justices  of  the 
Court  (Woods)  was  incapacitated  by  sick- 
ness from  joining  in  consideration  of  the 
cases,  and  the  other  eight  Justices  were 
equally  divided.  This  equal  division  of 
the  Supreme  Court  only  14  months 
previously  to  its  empliatic  and  all  but 
unanimous  denial  of  the  right  to  com- 
pensation, is  one  of  the  most  curious  facts 
in  the  history  of  judicial  treatment  of  the 
Prohibition  issue. ^ 

In  the  spring  of  1887  two  cases  car- 
ried up  from  tlie  Kansas  Supreme  Court 
which  that  tribunal  had  decided  adversely 
to  the  interests  of  Peter  Mugler,  brewer, 
were  argued  in  the  Uuited  States  Su- 
preme Court.  Senator  George  G.  Vest 
(Dem.)  of  Missouri,  employed  by  the 
United  States  Brewers'  Association,  rep- 
resented the  liquor  side,  and  tiie  argu- 
ment of  the  Prohibitionists  was  presented 
in  a  brief  prepared  under  the  direction  of 
Attorney-General  Bradford  of  Kansas. 
After  the  hearing  of  the  Mugler  cases  it 
was  by  mutual  consent  arranged  that 
another  Kansas  Prohibition  case,  that  of 

'  Besides  the  comiieiisiitioii  question,  the  legality  of 
closing  liquor  establishments  by  injunction  proceedings 
was  involved  in  the  Iowa  cases  of  1886.  It  may  even  be 
true  that  the  injunction  question  was  a  more  prominent 
feature  of  these  cases  than  the  compensation  question. 
But  stress  was  laid  on  the  compensatioa  argument  by 
Cobb's  counsel,  who  said,  in  their  brief: 

"Now  whilst  by  no  means  conceding  the  correctness  of 
the  decision  in  the  Walruff  case  [which  involved  the  ques- 
tion of  compensation  solely— Ed.]  the  distinction  between 
that  case  and  this  is  world  wide.  In  that  case  the  County 
Attorney  was  proceeding  to  abate  and  shut  up  a  $50,000 
brewery  as  a  nuisance,  and  to  absolutely  prohibit  the 
further  manufacture  of  beer  in  that  establishment — thus 
of  course  destroying  the  business  of  the  owner  and  ren- 
dering the  whole  property  comparatively  worthless.  In 
the  case  at  bar  the  appellants  are  sought  to  be  enjoined 
from  keeping  a  saloon  in  one  corner  of  their  $10,000  brew- 
ery establishment  and  from  selling  beer  therein  at  retail  — 
tills  and  nothing  more.  No  attempt  is  here  made  to  arrest 
the  operation  ot  appellants'  brewery,  and  the  suppression 
of  their  saloon  would  no  more  interfere  with  the  sale  of 
beer  by  appellants  at  wholesale  than  the  suppression  of 
any  other  one  of  the  200  saloons  .  .  .  supplied  with 
beer  by  appellants." 


Ziebold  &  Ilagelin,  brewers  (appealed  by 
the  State  of  Kansas  from  Judsre  Brewer's 
Circuit  Court),  should  be  advanced  on 
the  docket  of  the  United  States  Supreme 
Court  so  that  a  decision  in  it  might  be 
reached  with  that  in  the  Mugler  cases. 
The  Court  listened  to  further  argument 
on  the  nth  of  October,  1887,  tlie  Hon. 
Joseph  11.  Choate  (Rep.),  of  the  eminent 
New  York  law  firm  of  Evarts,  Choate  & 
Beaman,  appearing  for  the  brewers.  The 
Prohi))itionists  were  not  represented  by 
counsel.  It  was  afterwards  shown  that 
the  orewers  had  managed  their  interests 
before  the  Supreme  Court  with  consum- 
mate skill.  Mr.  Choate's  services  had 
been  engaged  secretly,  and  it  was  not 
known  that  he  was  in  the  employ  of  the 
brewers  until  his  argument  had  been 
made.  Mr.  Vest  was  paid  a  fee  of  110,- 
000,  and  Mr.  Choate  received  ^6,144.90.^ 
On  the  other  hand  the  arguments  of  the 
Prohibitionists  were  not  adequately  pre- 
sented. After  the  hearing  on  the  lltli 
of  October  an  effort  was  made  by  Samuel 
W.  Packard  of  Chicago,  representing  the 
National  Proliibition  party,  to  induce  the 
Court  to  reopen  the  cases  and  hear  addi- 
tional argument,  but  the  Court  refused. 

Mr.  Choate,  in  urging  the  claims  of 
Ziebold  &  Ilagelin,  set  up  the  following 
plea : 

"  In  1871,  while  as  yet  heer  was  as  much  a  part 
of  the  daily  food  of  the  people  of  Kansas  as 
bread  and  meat,  they  purchased  a  brewery  in 
that  State,  of  which  they  were  citizens,  invest- 
ing in  it  their  entire  property.  From  time  to 
time  they  enlarged  and  improved  it,  adding 
largely  to  their  investment  Meanwhile  the 
taxes  on  their  property  and  business  contributed 
to  the  support  and  welfare  of  the  State,  as  the 
products  of  their  brewery  did  to  the  wholesome 
sustenance  of  its  inhabitants.  It  was  a  peaceful 
and  legitimate  industry,  as  beneficent  as  th  ■ 
bakers'  or  the  butchers',  contributing  to  the 
community  what  for  centuries  had  been  a  staple 
beverage  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  race." 

SWEEPING    DECISION    AGAINST     COMPEN- 
SATION. 

On  the  5th  of  December,  1887,  the  Su- 
preme Court  announced  its  decision  in 
the  two  Mugler  cases  and  the  Ziebold  & 
Hagelin  case.  The  eight  Justices  who 
had  participated  iii  the  "  divided  "  opin- 
ion of  the  Court  in  the  Iowa  cases  in  Oc- 
tober, 188G,  were  still  on  the  bench. 
Meantime  Justice  Wood   had  died   and 

2  Report  of  proceedings  of  the  United  States  Brewers' 
Association,  held  at  St.  Paul,  May  30  and  31,  1888. 


Compensation.] 


93 


[Compensation. 


his  place  had  not  been  filled.  Justice 
Harlan  read  the  decision,  which  was  con- 
curred in  by  Chief- Justice  Waite  and 
Justices  Miller,  Bradley,  Matthews,  Gray 
and  Blatchford,  Justice  Field  alone  dis- 
senting. 1  The  principles  laid  down  thus 
received  the  sanction  of  the  highest  Court 
by  a  vote  of  seven  to  one ;  and  three  of 
the  seven  Justices  promulgating  these 
principles  had  radically  changed  attitude 
in  14  months.  The  compensation  idea 
was  rejected  in  explicit  and  solemn  lan- 
guage, and  Constitutional  questions 
scarcely  less  important  than  the  question 
of  compensation  were  decided  in  the  inter- 
est of  the  Prohibitionists — particularly 
those  affecting  the  right  of  a  State  to 
prohibit  the  manufacture  of  liquor  for 
the  maker's  own  use,  and  to  enact  a  law 
providing  for  closing  liquor  premises  as 
nuisances  without  jury  trials.  The  fol- 
lowing words  from  the  decision  embrace 
the  answer  of  the  Court  to  the  compensa- 
tion argument : 

' '  Keeping  in  view  these  principles  as  govern- 
ing the  relations  of  the  judicial  and  legislative 
departments  of  Government  with  eacli  other,  it 
is  difficult  to  perceive  any  ground  for  the  judi- 
ciary to  declare  that  the  prohibition  by  Kansas 
of  the  manufacture  or  sale  within  her  limits  of 
intoxicating  liquors  for  general  use  there  as  a 
beverage,  is  not  fairly  adapted  to  the  end  of 
protecting  the  community  against  the  evils 
which  confessedly  result  from  the  excessive  use 
of  ardent  spirits.  There  is  here  no  justification 
for  holding  that  the  State,  under  the  guise 
merely  of  police  regulations,  is  aiming  to  de- 
prive the  citizen  of  his  Constitutional  rights;  for 
we  cannot  shut  out  of  view  the  fact,  within  the 
knowledge  of  all,  that  the  public  health,  the 
public  morals  and  the  public  safety  may  be 
endangered  by  the  general  use  of  intoxicating 
drinks;  nor  the  fact,  established  by  statistics  ac- 
cessible to  every  one,  that  the  disorder,  pauper- 
ism and  crime  prevalent  in  the  country  are  in 
some  degree  at  least  traceable  to  this  evil.     .     . 

"The  principle  that  no  person  shall  be  de- 
prived of  life,  liberty  or  property  without  due 
process  of  law,  was  embodied,  in  substance,  in 
the  Constitutions  of  nearly  all,  if  not  all,  of  the 
several  States  at  the  time  of  the  adoption  of  the 
14th  Amendment,  and  it  has  never  been  re- 
garded as  incompatible  with  the  principle, 
equally  vital,  because  essential  to  the  peace  and 
safety  of  society,  that  all  property  in  this 
country  is  held  under  the  implied  obligation 
that  the  owner's  use  of  it  shall  not  be  injurious 


1  Justice  Field  was  the  only  Democrat  sitting  on  the  Su- 
preme Bench  at  that  time.  He  was  an  uncle  to  Judge 
Brewer.  He  had  made  a  record  as  a  consistent  advocate  of 
compensation.  (See  his  opinion  in  the  case  of  Bartcmcyer 
V.  Iowa,  18  Wallace,  129.)  In  the  nephew's  decision  in 
the  WalrufE  case,  the  only  positive  opinion  from  a  Supreme 
Court  Justice  fully  supporting  his  views  that  he  was  able 
to  quote,  was  an  opinion  delivered  by  Justice  Field. 


to  the  community.  (Beer  Company  v.  Massa- 
chusetts, 97  U.  S.  33;  Commonwealth  v.  Alger, 
7Cush.  53.)     .     .     . 

"The  question  now  before  us  arises  under 
what  are  strictly  the  police  powers  of  the  State, 
exerted  for  the  protection  of  the  health,  morals 
and  safety  of  the  people.     .     .     . 

"  As  already  stated,  the  present  case  must  be 
governed  by  principles  that  do  not  involve  the 
power  of  eminent  domain,  in  the  exercise  of 
which  property  may  not  be  taken  for  public  use 
without  compensation.  A  prohibition  simply 
upon  the  use  of  property  for  purposes  that  are 
declared,  by  valid  legislation,  to  be  injurious  to 
the  health,  morals  or  safety  of  the  community, 
cannot  in  any  just  sense  be  deemed  a  taking  or 
an  appropriation  of  property  for  the  public 
benefit.  Such  legislation  does  not  disturb  the 
owner  in  the  control  or  use  of  his  property  for 
lawful  purposes,  nor  restrict  his  right  to  dispose 
of  it,  but  is  only  a  declaration  by  the  State  that 
its  use  by  any  one  for  certain  forbidden  pur- 
poses is  prejudicial  to  the  public  interests.  Nor 
can  legislation  of  that  character  come  within 
the  14th  Amendment  in  any  ca.se,  unless  it  is 
apparent  that  its  real  object  is  not  to  protect  the 
community  or  to  promote  the  general  well- 
being,  but,  underthc  guise  of  police  regulations, 
to  deprive  the  owner  of  his  liberty  and  property 
without  due  process  of  law. 

' '  The  power  which  the  States  unquestionably 
have  of  prohibiting  such  use  by  individuals  of 
their  property  as  will  be  prejudicial  to  the 
health,  the  morals  or  the  safety  of  the  public  is 
not,  and — consistently  with  the  existence  and 
safety  of  organized  society  -  cannot  be  bur- 
dened with  the  condition  that  the  '  tate  must 
compensate  such  individual  owners  for  pe- 
cuniary losses  they  sustain,  by  reason  of  their 
not  being  permitted  by  a  noxious  use  of  their 
property  to  inflict  injury  upon  the  community. 
The  exercise  of  the  police  power  by  the 
destruction  of  property  which  is  itself  a  public 
nuisance,  or  the  prohibition  of  its  use  in  a 
particular  way,  whereby  its  value  becomes 
depreciated,  is  very  different  from  taking 
property  for  public  use.  or  from  depriving  a 
person  of  his  property  without  due  process  of 
law.  In  the  one  case,  a  nuisance  only  is 
abated  ;  in  the  other,  unoffending  property  is 
taken  away  from  an  innocent  owner. 

"  It  is  true  that  when  the  defendants  in  these 
cases  purchased  or  erected  their  breweries,  the 
laws  of  the  State  did  not  forbid  the  manufacture 
of  intoxicating  liquors.  But  the  State  did  not 
thereby  give  any  assurance,  or  come  under  an 
obligation,  that  its  legislation  upon  that  subject 
would  remain  unchanged.  Indeed,  as  was  said 
in  Stone  V.  Mississippi,  101  U.  S.,  the  supervision 
of  the  public  health  and  the  public  morals  is  a 
governmental  power,  'continuing  in  its  nature,' 
and  '  to  be  dealt  with  as  the  special  exigencies 
of  the  moment  may  require; '  and  that  '  for  this 
purpose  the  largest  legislative  discretion  is  al- 
lowed, and  the  discretion  cannot  be  parted  with 
any  more  than  the  uower  itself.'  So  in  Beer 
Company  v.  Massachusetts  (97  U.  S.  32):  '  If  the 
public  safety  or  the  public  morals  require  the 
discontinuance  of  any  manufacture  or  traffic, 
the  hand  of  the  Legislature  cannot  be  stayed 
from  providing  for  its  discontinuance  by  any 


Comp  ensation.] 


94 


[Compensation. 


incidental  inconvenience  which  individuals  or 
corporalions  may  suffer.' " 

[For  the  text  of  the  decision  in  the  Kansas 
cases,  see  123  U.  S.,  623.  See  also  "  The  Great 
Prohibition  Decision;  with  introduction  and 
annotations  by  Hon.  S.  W.  Packard."  (Funk 
&  Wagnalls,  New  York,  1888.)  For  notable 
State  Court  decisions  against  the  right  of  com- 
pensation see  69  Iowa,  401;  72  Iowa,  377,  and  3 
Michigan,  330.] 

England's  compensation  struggle. 

In  England  the  compensation  question 
has  been  warmly  debated  and  seems  to 
be  settled  in  the  negative.     Lord   Salis- 
bury's powerful  Conservative  ministry,  in 
April,  1888,  introduced  a  Local   Govern- 
ment bill  of  which  an  important  feature 
was  a  provision  for  recognizing  a  vested 
interest  in  existing  licenses  by  granting 
compensation  to  liquor-sellers  whose  ap- 
plications for  renewals  should  be  refused. 
The  plan  was  skilfully  presented,  and  so 
unexpectedly   that   both    the   House    of 
Commons  and  the  country  were  taken  by 
surprise.     The  temperance  people  at  first 
manifested  but  little  disposition  to  organ- 
ize a  determined  and  an  aggressive  oppo- 
sitiou;  it   seemed    idle    to   hope   that  a 
Government  measure  backed  by  an  enor- 
mous majority  in  the  House  of  Commons 
could  be  defeated  by  popular  agitation. 
Some   able   articles  written  by  Mr.  Axel 
Gustafson  directed  popular  attention  to 
the  strongest  arguments  against  compen- 
sation.    Mr.    Gustafson    challenged  the 
Solicitor-General  (who  was  the  projector 
of  the  measure)  to  discuss  vital  proposi- 
tions, and  especially  to  consider  prece- 
dents.    This  official  responded,  and  sev- 
eral letters  were  exchanged,  appearing  in 
the  columns  of  the  Manchester  Guardian. 
Mr.  Gustafson  showed   that  no  Superior 
Court  in  England,  in  passing  on  refusals 
of  licensing  magistrates  to  renew  licenses, 
had   recognized  that  liquor-sellers  had  a 
vested   interest  in  their   licenses.     Lord 
Chief-Justice  Cockburn  had  said,  in  the 
Court  of  Queen's  Bench,  May  18,  1878: 
"  According  to  the  act  of  1828  the  Justices 
have  the  same  discretion  to  refuse  a  renew- 
al as  they  had  to  refuse  granting  a  new 
license."     Mr.  Justice  Field,  in  the  Court 
of  Queen's   Bench,  November,  1882,  had 
said :  "  In  every  case  in  every  year  there 
is  a  new  license  granted.     You  may  call 
it  a  renewal  if  you  like,  but  that  does  not 
make   it   an   old   one.     The  Legislature 
does  not  call  it  a   renewal. 


The  Legisla- 


ture is  not  capable  of  calling  a  new  thing 
an  old  one.     The  Legislature  recognizes 
no  vested  right  at   all  in  any  holder  of  a 
license.     It  does  not  treat  the  interest  as 
a  vested  one  in  any  way."     And   Baron 
Pollock  had  said  in  the  Court  of  Queen's 
Bench,  Jan.  31,  1884;    "The  notion  that 
there  is  a  property  of  the  landlord  in  a 
license   cannot   be   considered   as   sound 
law."     In  fact,  while  the  agitation  upon 
the  Local    Government  bill  was  pending 
(April  30,  1888)  Lord  Field  and  Mr.  Jus- 
tice Mills  decided,  in  an  appeal  case,  that 
the  possession  of  licenses  established  no 
vested   rights.     The   recognition   of  the 
unsoundness  of  the  compensation  argu- 
ment was   so  well   founded   in   English 
jurisprudence  that  Mr.  Nash,  barrister-at- 
law  and  counsel  to  the  Licensed  Victual- 
lers' Association,  had  said :  "  Now,  I  am 
sorry  to  say,  having  looked  into  this  ques- 
tion most  exhaustively,  and  having  com- 
pared notes  with  my  brethren  well  versed 
in  these  matters,  that  there  cannot  be  the 
smallest  doubt  that  in  the  strict  sense  no 
such  thing  as  a  vested  interest  exists.    .   . 
The  mere  mention  of  the  term  '  vested  in- 
terest '  should  be  avoided,  as  it  infuriates 
every  Court,   from   the   Queen's   Bench 
downwards."  ^    The  popular  opposition  to 
the   bill   grew   rapidly   and   the   United 
Kingdom  Alliance  and  other  temperance 
organizations  (at  first  reluctant  or  despair- 
ing) were  persuaded  to  fight  it  with  their 
whole  strength.     A  magnificent  and  won- 
derfully enthusiastic  meeting  in  the  Man- 
Chester  Free   Trade  Hall,   presided  over 
by  Sir  Henry  Roscoe,  aroused  the  country. 
It  was  followed  by  other  great  gatherings, 
and  the  agitation  culminated  in  an  extra- 
ordinary demonstration   in   Hyde  Park, 
London,  on  June  2.     The  strengtii  of  the 
.  opposition  was  so  formidable  that  in  two 
bye-elections  for  Members  of  Parliament 
the  Government  was  defeated  on  tlie  com- 
pensation issue,  a  Conservative  majority 
of  ()68  at  Southampton  being  changed  to 
a  Liberal  majority  of  885,  and  a  Govern- 
ment majority  of  1,175  at   Ayr  Boroughs 
giving  way  to  an  adverse  majority  of  G3. 
The  remarkable  showing  of  popular  in- 
dignation   caused    the    Government    to 
withdraw  the  compensation  clauses  un- 
conditionally, 

Btit  in  the  spring  of   1890  the   scheme 

1  These  different  quotations  are  taken  from  Cardinal 
Manning'8  article  "■  Compensation,"  iu  the  Contejnporary 
Review  tor  June,  1890. 


Compensation.]                                  95  [Compensation. 

was  revived  by  the   Salisbury  Ministry,  a  wise  and  practical  plan  for  reducing  the 

A  bill  drawn   even  more  cunningly  than  drink  tralfic. 

the  one  presented  in  1888  was  introduced  Temperance  opposition  was  instanta- 
in  the  House  of  Commons  and  passed  on  neous.  Mr.  Gladstone  and  the  Liberals 
second  reading  by  a  majority  of  73  (May  were  quick  to  espouse  the  anti-compensa- 
19).  "  '  tion  cause  in  the  House  of  Commons. 
It  was  pretended  that  the  real  object  of  The  real  purposes  of  the  Conservatives 
the  bill  was  to  reduce  the  number  of  were  exposed  in  many  striking  speeches, 
licenses  and  thereby  '"'promote  temper-  "No  valid  precedent  for  compensating 
ance."  Mr.  Goschen,  Chancellor  of  the  publicans  can  be  brought  forward,  and, 
Exchequer,  in  an  imposing  speech  analyz-  therefore,  the  Government  is  endeavoring 
ing  the  budget  figures,  had  shown  that  to  make  a  precedent,"  said  W.  S.  Caine, 
the  Government  revenues  from  the  M.  P.  "  If  compensation  is  once  estab- 
drink  traffic  were  increasing  at  an  enor-  lished,"  he  added,  "the  difficulties  of  the 
mous  rate,  ard  that  of  a  surplus  revenue  temperance  people  will  be  increased  ten- 
of  £3,-300,000,  £1,800,000  was  due  to  the  fold,  and  a  solid  wall  of  200,000,000 
increase  from  liquor  sources.  The  Con-  sovereigns  will  be  built  across  a  path 
servative  statesmen  professed  great  con-  which  is  now  clear  and  unobstructed."' 
cern  at  this  state  of  affairs,  indicating  as  Mr.  Caine  in  very  effective  language  called 
it  did  (in  their  judgment)  an  alarming  attention  to  the  hollow  mockery  of  the 
growth  of  intemperance  among  the  peo-  Government's  claim  that  its  desire  was  to 
pie.  Therefore  they  announced  their  in-  reduce  the  number  of  liquor  licenses.  For 
tention,  as  self-styled  friends  of  temper-  example,  the  amount  of  money  to  be  ai> 
ance,  to  bring  about  a  diminution  in  the  plied  in  London  for  closing  public  houses 
number  of  public  houses  (particularly  in  by  purchase  would  be,  under  the  provi- 
the  number  of  beer-shops)  and  to  forbid  sions  of  the  bill,  only  £T30,000;  and  Mr. 
the  issuing  of  additional  licenses.  It  was  Caine  had  ascertained  by  conclusive  in- 
strenuously  and  arrogantly  claimed  that  quiries  that  the  lowest  average  valuation 
these  were  the  fundamental  objects  of  the  of  public  houses  in  London  entitled  to 
bill,  and  that  the  whole  measure  was  there-  sell  liquor  for  consumption  on  the  prem- 
fore  a  temperance  measure.  But  it  was  ises  was  about  £5,000;  so  that  the  Govern- 
further  provided  that  the  owners  of  all  ment's  bill,  if  enacted,  would  extinguish 
licenses  extinguished  by  the  terms  of  the  only  12  drinking-places  in  the  entire  city 
bill  should  be  granted  compensation  from  of  London.  Mr.  Gladstone  and  others 
the  public  funds  for  their  losses;  and  the  fittingly  characterized  the  bill  as  one  for 
sum  of  £440,000  was  set  apart  from  the  the  "endowment"  of  drink-traffickers, 
liquor  revenue,  to  be  distributed  pro  rata  Mr.  Gladstone  showed  that  if  the  bill 
to  the  various  counties,  and  applied  for  should  become  a  law  the  value  of  every 
buying  out  licensees.  The  Conservative  public  house  would  immediately  be  ma- 
leaders  and  their  newspaper  organs  terially  enhanced.  In  a  speech  in  the 
claimed  that  this  provision  for  compensa-  House  of  Commons  (May  22),  answering 
tion,  besides  being  equitable,  was  thor-  the  Tory  claim  that  the  real  purpose  was 
oughly  unobjectionable,  because  the  whole  to  reduce  the  number  of  drink-shops,  he 
of  the  money  used  for  compensating  used  these  striking  v/ords :  "  The  diminu- 
liquor-sellers  would  be  drawn  from  the  tion  in  the  number  will  not  entail  a  cor- 
liquor  revenue.  Mr.  Ritchie,  in  setting  responding  diminution  in  the  drink  traf- 
forth  the  merits  of  the  bill  in  the  House  fie.  The  business  of  the  remaining  houses 
of  Commons  (May  12),  made  this  curious  will  be  increased  [Hear,  hear],  and  it  will 
plea:  "  It  must  be  remembered,  whether  be  enlarged  to  the  full  extent  of  the  ap- 
our  purposes  be  good  or  bad,  our  details  parent  numerical  diminution  of  the 
ri^ht  or  wrong,  this  money  is  raised  from  houses.  [Hear,  hear.]  "  In  conclusion  he 
drink  for  the  purpose  of  diminishing  the  spoke  impressively  of  the  disastrous  influ- 
sale  of  drink."  The  temperance  people  ence  that  compensation  would  have  upon 
who  fought  the  measure  were  savagely  the  progress  of  the  temperance  reform, 
denounced,  notably  by  the  Tjondon  Times,  saying  that  it  would  "  throw  back  for,  per- 
as  "intemperate  temperance  fanatics,"  haps,  an  indefinite  period,  the  cause 
bent  on   a    policy    of   "  spoliation "   and 

nVi'irfrcaKlQwifV.  ,.r>cr^r^,T:-;Ki1,"f  ,r  fr^^-^^^',c^\-^r^  '  ^f'  ^08  estimated  that  £3(10,000,000  Vv'as  the  amount  of 

Cftargeable  with  responsi  blllty  lor  resisting  capital  invested  in  the  llquor  trame  in  Great  Britain. 


Congo,  Bum  on  the.] 


9(5 


[Congressional  Temp.  Society. 


wnose  progress  we  have  observed  and 
registered  from  day  to  day,  and  in  the 
great  future  triumph  of  which  we  have 
undoubting  confidence.  [Loud  cheers.]  " 
The  result  of  the  second  effort  of  the 
Sahsbury  Government  to  force  compensa- 
tion upon  Great  Britain  was  even  more 
instructive  than  that  of  the  first.  The 
meetings  of  the  opposition  were,  if  pos- 
sible, more  numerous  and  enthusiastic. 
There  was  a  demonstration  in  Hyde 
Park  on  June  7  which  outdid  the  great 
gathering  of  1888.  But  the  Government 
clung  to  the  measure  with  stubborn  te- 
nacity, realizing,  no  doubt,  that  this  was 
its  last  opportunity  for  enacting  compen- 
sation provisions  and  thereby  winning  the 
permanent,  solid  and  devoted  support  of 
the  liquor  interests  for  the  Tory  party. 
Although  the  bill  had  a  majority  of  73  on 
second  reading,  the  real  struggle  came 
when  Parliament  considered  it  in  Com- 
mittee of  the  Whole.  In  this  struggle 
the  advantage  was  wholly  with  the  op- 
position. The  Government's  majority  of 
73  dwindled  to  32  upon  an  important 
motion  made  at  the  beginning  of  June; 
and  on  June  20  the  compensation  clause 
was  carried  by  a  majority  of  only  4  votes. 
A  few  days  later  it  was  withdrawn  ab- 
solutely. 

Congo,  Rum  on  the. — See  Index. 

Congregational  Church. — The  fol- 
lowing resolutions  were  passed  by  its 
highest  representative  body,  assembled  in 
Boston,  Mass.,  October,  1889 : 

"  Resolved,  That  the  National  Council  of 
Congregational  Churches  hereby  declares  its 
unqualified  condemnation  of  this  evil  of  intem- 
perance, and  its  sympathy  with  legitimate 
efforts  for  its  removal;  that  it  commends  to 
churches  and  all  Christian  workers  the  use  of 
wise  measures  to  secure  as  far  as  possible  the 
universal  personal  abstinence  from  all  intoxica- 
ting drinks  as  a  beverage. 

"RESOLVED,  That  this  Council  commends 
the  employment  of  suitable  means  and  methods 
to  promote  the  education  of  the  young  in  the 
principles  of  temperance,  and  in  a  knowledge 
of  the  evils  of  the  use  of  intoxicants ;  and  that 
it  expresses  its  sympathy  with  the  Christian 
women  of  our  land  in  their  efforts  to  secure  the 
teaching  necessary  to  attain  this  end,  and  to 
provide  for  the  purity  of  the  home  and  the  sup- 
pression of  the  evils  of  intemperance. 

"  Resolved,  That  the  saloon  is  so  great  a 
menace  to  the  peace  of  society,  to  the  good 
order  and  welfare  of  the  communities  in  which 
it  exists,  and  so  great  a  hindrance  to  the  advance 
of  the  cause  of  our  divine  Master,  as  to  demand 


the  emplovment  of  the  wisest  and  most  efficient 
legitimate  m'^'ans  for  its  removal;  and  that  we 
cull  upon  our  churches  and  other  bodies  of 
C'hristiaus  to  unite  in  prayer  to  God  for  wisdom 
and  divine  guidance  in  efforts  for  removing  this 
great  evil." 

Congress.— See  United  States  Gov- 
ernment AND  the  Liquor  Traffic. 

Congressional  Temperance  So- 
ciety.— On  the  26th  of  February,  1833, 
at  a  meeting  in  the  Senate  Chamber, 
under  a  call  signed  by  25  members  of 
Congress,  a  Congressional  Temperance 
Society  was  formed.  The  constitution 
for  the  Society,  presented  by  Theodore 
Frelinghuysen,  was  unanimously  adopt- 
ed. The  object  of  the  Society  as  stated 
in  the  preamble  to  the  constitution  was, 
"  by  example  and  kind  moral  influence 
to  discountenance  the  use  of  ardent  spir- 
its and  the  traffic  in  it  throughout  the 
community."  Lewis  Cass,  then  Secretary 
of  War,  who  had  the  year  before  issued 
an  order  prohibiting  the  introduction  of 
ardent  spirits  into  any  fort,  camp  or  gar- 
rison of  the  United  States,  was  made  the 
first  President  of  the  Society,  with  the 
Secretary  of  the  Senate  as  its  Secretary. 
There  were  nine  Vice-Presidents,  an  Ex- 
ecutive Committee  and  about  one  hun- 
dred members.  It  was  found  that  the 
pledge  against  ardent  spirits  did  not  pre- 
vent the  fall  of  those  in  the  Society 
whom  it  was  designed  to  helj).  In  1842 
the  Society  was  reorganized  on  the  basis 
of  abstinence  from  all  intoxicating  drink, 
with  George  N.  Briggs  as. President  and 
nine  eminent  men  as  Vice-Presidents 
from  as  many  different  States.  At  the 
next  public  meeting  after  the  Society 
was  reorganized  on  the  basis  of  total  ab- 
stinence, Thomas  Marshall  began  his 
speech  with  the  words :  "  Mr.  President : 
The  old  Congressional  Temperance  So- 
ciety has  died  of  intemperance,  holding 
the  pledge  in  one  hand  and  the  cham- 
pagne bottle  in  the  other."  The  changes 
in  the  membership  of  the  Society  by 
reason  of  the  changes  of  members  of 
Congress  modified  the  interest  in  its 
maintenance  and  work.  There  were 
periods  of  which  there  are  no  records  that 
anything  was  done ;  and  sometimes  great 
vigor  was  manifest  in  the  holding  of  pub- 
lic meetings,  especially  at  the  anniversa- 
ries. A  notable  period  of  activity  fol- 
lowed the  revival  of  the  Society  in  1867, 
with  Schuyler  Colfax  and  Henry  Wilson 


Connecticut,] 


97 


[Constitutional  Prohibition. 


prominent  in  the  movement.  The  influ- 
ence of  this  Society  has  extended  widely 
over  the  hmd,  and  at  times  has  attracted 
attention  in  other  countries. 

Henry  Ward. 

Connecticut. — See  Index. 

Constitutional   Prohibition/    or 

Prohibition  of  the  manufacture  and  sale 
of  intoxicating  liquors  of  every  kind  for 
beverage  purposes  by  direct  mandate  of 
Federal  and  State  Constitutional  law  — 
tlie  goal  of  the  present  radical  movement 
against  the  liquor  traffic  in  the  United 
States.  The  fundamental  power  of  the 
Federal  Government  and  of  each  State 
Government  being  defined  by  a  written 
Constitution,  which  is  the  permanent 
fountain  of  all  statutory  legislation, 
which  under  our  institutions  can  never 
be  abolished  save  to  give  way  to  another 
written  instrument  of  equal  dignity,  and 
which  cannot  be  changed  or  amended  in 
any  detail  without  mature  deliberation 
and  the  observance  of  carefully  prescrib- 
ed forms,  it  follows  that  the  Prohibition 
of  the  drink  traffic,  if  provided  for  by 
Constitutioiial  enactment,  will  be  in  the 
highest  attainable  degree  authoritative, 
etfective  and  enduring. 

ADVANTAGES   OVER    STATUTORY    PROHIBI- 
TION   AND    LOCAL   OPTION. 

The  fatal  imperfections  of  all  other 
forms  of  Prohibitory  legislation  have  been 
made  manifest  by  varied  experience.  It 
is  always  within  the  power  of  the  Legisla- 
ture to  enact  a  rigid  Prohibitory  statute, 
whether  the  Constitution  commands  it 
to  do  so  or  not ;  and  a  Legislature  may,  at 
will,  prohibit  the  manufacture  and  sale 
of  liquor  absolutely,  over  the  entire  ter- 
ritory under  its  jurisdiction,  even  though 
the  Constitution  is  silent.  But  statutory 
legislation  is  by  its  nature  unstable  and 
ephemeral  because  partisan  or  tentative; 
the  life  of  a  Legislature  in  the  United 
States  never  exceeds  two  years,  and  in 
many  States  the  Legislature  has  but  a 
single  session.  Though  a  Prohibitory  act 
of  the  most  satisfactory  character  may  be 
carried  by  a  great  majority  through  a 
given  Legislature,  there  is  no  assurance, 
so  long  as  the  Constitution  makes  no  ex- 
plicit direction,  that   it  will   be   retained 


'  The  Nebraska  Constitutional  Prohibition  campaif^ii  is 
tlie  sul)ject  of  a  special  article.     (See  pp.  443-50  ) 


on  the  statute-books  for  a  period  long 
enough  to  admit  of  a  fair  trial:  the  very 
next  Legislature,  meeting  at  the  end  of  a 
year   or   at  the  utmost  of  two   years,  is 
then   at    liberty  to  repeal  it.     Political 
vicissitudes,   popular  caprice,  the   influ- 
ence of  systematic  bribery  and  corruption, 
the  violent  opposition  of  a  venal  or  prej- 
udiced press,  the  interference  of  partisan 
managers  or  the  organized   liquor  power 
of  other    States,  may   cause  an    abrupt 
change  of  legislative  attitude  on  the  Pro- 
hibition    question     and     bring      about 
_  repeal  of  the  act  before  it  has  been  tested 
at  all,  or  may  accomplish  the  destruction 
of  a  beneficient   law  while  at  the  height 
of   its   usefulness.     Of  the  many  States 
passing  Prohibitory   statutes  before  the 
Civil  War,  only  four  (Maine,  New  Hamp- 
shire, Vermont  and  Iowa)  have  permitted 
them  to  survive  until  the  present  day;  in 
most    cases    the    Legislatures   rescinded 
these   statutes   before   five  years  had  ex- 
pired and  in  some  cases   within  one  year 
or  two  years;  in  other  instances,  where 
the  laws  were  allowed  to  remain  nominally 
in  force   until  after   the  war,  they  were 
promptly  wiped  out  by  the  Legislature 
when  their  enforcement  or  improvement 
was  seriously  proposed;    discriminations 
in  favor  of  the  manufacture  were  made 
in  several  of  the  early  statutes,  as  orig- 
inally enacted  or   as  amended;  some  of 
them  exempted  (or  were  soon  amended  so 
as  to  exempt)    wine,   beer   and  cider — in 
fact,  many  of  the  conditions  that  must  be 
heeded  if  Prohibitory  laws  are  to  be  gen- 
uine were  ignored  or  evaded.     With  Pro- 
liibition  clauses  in  the  Constitutions  of 
those   States,  the   necessity  of  enacting 
better    statutes    could    not    have     been 
escaped  by  the  Legislatures,  and  it  would 
have  been  impossible  to  repeal  them  with- 
out first  annulling  the  Constitutional  re- 
quirements by  direct  vote  of  the  people. 

The  distinguishing  virtue  of  Constitu- 
tional Prohibition  lies  in  the  necessary  ex- 
istence behind  it  of  a  majority  of  the  whole 
popular  vote,  and  a  very  large  majority 
of  the  votes  of  the  best  citizens.  No 
Constitution  or  Constitutional  Amend- 
ment can  be  adopted  in  any  State  unless 
a  majority  of  the  people  voting  on  the 
question,  at  the  ballot-box,  shall  approve. 
It  follows  that  the  presence  of  a  Prohib- 
itory article  in  any  Constitution  implies 
a  direct  decree  of  the  people  that  there 
shall  be  radical  Prohibitorv  law,  a  decree 


Constitutional  Prohibition.] 


98 


[Constitutional  Prohibition. 


that,  considering  the  peculiar  difficulties 
in  the  way  of  amending  Constitutions,  is 
looked  upon  as  well-nigh  irreversible.  It 
is  true  some  of  the  old  Prohibitory  stat- 
utes were  passed  in  obedience  to  affirma- 
tive votes  of  the  people  on  the  question. 
Shall  the  Legislature  enact  the  Maine 
law  ?  But  these  affirmative  votes  had 
the  significance  of  mere  plebiscites 
rather  than  of  responsible  majorities; 
they  did  not  prescribe  the  scope  of  the 
Prohibition  or  direct  that  it  should  in- 
clude the  manufacture,  and  there  was  no 
power  by  which  they  could  he  made  bind- 
ing. 

In  a  still  wider  and  more  import- 
ant sense  Constitutional  Prohibition  is 
superior  to  Local  Option.  A  Local 
Option  act,  like  a  comprehensive  Pro- 
hibitory statute  unsustained  by  a  Con- 
stitutional article,  has  no  assured 
vitality  but  may  be  overthrown  with 
comparative  ease  by  the  liquor  power  or 
hostile  politicians;  the  repeal  of  the 
Local  Option  laws  of  Pennsylvania  and 
New  Jersey  after  many  counties  in  each 
State  had  voted  for  Prohibition  illus- 
trates the  instability  of  such  measures. 
Besides,  Local  Option  legislation  seldom 
bestows  on  the  people  the  privilege  of 
interfering  with  the  manufacture  of 
liquor,  and  does  not  frequently  provide 
suitable  penalties  for  illicit  sales  by  drug- 
gists and  others.  Again,  though  a  county 
may  vote  for  Prohibition  with  practical 
unanimity,  the  neighboring  counties  of 
the  same  State  may  refuse  to  disturb  the 
rumsellers  within  their  borders,  and  these 
licensed  dealers  may,  by  infringing  the 
laws  of  the  Prohibitory  county,  neutral- 
ize its  good  effects.  But  the  chief  disad- 
vantage of  the  Local  Option  method  is  in 
its  total  failure  in  the  communities  where 
the  liquor  evil  is  greatest.  Underly- 
ing the  theory  and  policy  of  Prohibition 
is  the  claim,  honored  by  observance 
almost  everywhere  in  the  United  States 
and  thoroughly  established  by  judicial 
decisions,  that  because  of  the  admitted 
dangers  of  the  drink  traffic  it  may  right- 
fully be  prohibited  in  any  locality  by  a 
majority  vote  regardless  of  the  wishes  of 
the  minority,  or  in  every  locality  of  a 
whole  State  by  the  will  of  a  Constitu- 
tional majority  of  the  voters  or  legisla- 
tors of  that  State  regardless  of  the  pow- 
el'ful  protests  of  particular  localities.  If 
Prohibitory  legislation  involves  arbitrary 


and  seemingly  despotic  interference  with 
the  prevailing  sentiment  of  particular 
constituencies,  this  interference  is  never- 
theless justified  when  associated  constit- 
uencies, comprised  in  the  same  political 
unit,  declare  by  a  preponderance  of  sen- 
timent that  the  interests  of  the  whole  i)eo- 
ple  demand  Prohibitory  law  for  all. 
With  the  soundness  of  this  principle  rec- 
ognized (and  251'actical  recognition  of  it 
is  inseparable  from  acceptance  of  the 
Local  Option  idea),  the  opponents  of  the 
liquor  traffic  need  not  hesitate  to  invoke 
a  policy  whereby  the  strongliolds  of  their 
enemy  may  be  subdued.  Any  advanced 
form  of  Prohibition  is,  indeed,  merely 
an  extension  of  the  Local  Option  privi- 
lege; and  State  and  National  Prohibition, 
secured  by  Constitutional  Amendments 
ratified  by  the  people,  would  be  but  the 
logical  outcome  of  the  earliest  and  most 
limited  Local  Option  victory. 

EAELY  DEVELOPMENTS. 

The  great  advantage  of  incorporating 
the  Prohibition  principle  in  State  Consti- 
tutions was  recognized,  though  imjDcr- 
fectly,  as  early  as  1850,  when,  upon  the 
adoption  of  the  present  Constitution  of 
Michigan,  the  following  clause  was  in- 
serted in  that  instrument  by  a  vote  of 
36,149  to  9,433: 

"  The  Legislature  shall  not  pass  any  act  au- 
thorizing the  grant  of  license  for  the  sale  of  ar- 
dent spirits  or  other  intoxicating  liquors." 

And  in  1851  an  "additional  section  "  was 
added  to  the  new  Constitution  of  Ohio 
by  a  separate  vote  of  the  people,  the  ma- 
jority being  in  excess  of  10,000.  This 
"  additional  section  "  was : 

' '  No  license  to  traffic  in  intoxicating  liquors 
shall  hereafter  be  granted  in  this  State,  but  the 
General  Assembly  may  by  law  provide  against 
evils  resulting  therefrom." 

But  both  the  Ohio  and  Michigan  Con- 
stitutional provisions  simply  interdicted 
license — they  did  not  direct  the  enact- 
ment of  Prohibitory  laws.  Practically, 
these  interdictions  were  of  little  advan- 
tage to  the  temperance  cause.  Although 
both  Ohio  and  Michigan  passed  Prohibi- 
tory statutes  before  the  war,  the  measures 
so  granted  were  weak  and  did  not  sur- 
vive. Ohio's  related  only  to  consumption 
on  the  premises,  and  Michigan's,  modified 
so  as  to  exempt  beer  and  wine,  was  re- 
scinded in  1875.  Meanwhile  the  Anti- 
License  articles  of  the  Constitutions  were 


Constitutional  Prohibition.] 


99 


[Constitutional  Prohibition. 


found  to  be  absolutely  worthless :  Ohio's 
has  endured  until  this  day,  but  its  intent 
has  been  circumvented  by  the  passage  of 
ingenious  so-called  "tax  "laws;  while  in 
Michigan,  after  the  State  Supreme  Court 
(October,  1875)  had  decided  that  a  "  tax  " 
law  enacted  by  the  Legislature  was  valid 
notwithstanding  the  Constitutional  Anti- 
License  clause,  the  people,  in  November, 
18  7G,  consented  to  the  elimination  of 
this  clause  from  the  Constitution  by  a 
majority  of  8,078  in  a  total  of  113,200.' 

It  was  not  until  1856  that  the  Consti- 
tutional Prohibition  idea  as  now  under- 
stood was  definitely  broached,  and  then 
the  necessity  of  including  the  manufac- 
ture as  well  as  the  sale  of  liquors  seems 
not  to  have  been  perceived.  In  that  year 
William  11.  Armstrong,  Grand  Worthy 
Patriarch  of  the  Grand  Division  of  Sons 
of  Temperance  of  Eastern  New  York, 
proposed  and  discussed  the  plan.  In 
1S57  he  secured  a  unanimous  endorse- 
ment from  the  Grand  Division,  which 
was  renewed  at  three  subsequent  sessions. 
Mr.  Armstrong  printed  in  the  New  York 
Wifness  for  May  29, 1858,  a  very  thorough 
article  defining  the  new  programme,  sug- 
gesting that  an  Amendment  worded  as 
follows  be  added  to  the  Constitution  of 
the  State  of  New  York : 

"The  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  shall  not  be 
licensed  or  allowed  in  this  State  excepting  for 
chemical,  medicinal  or  manufacturing  purposes, 
and  then  only  under  restrictive  regulations  to 
be  made  by  the  Legislature.  It  shall  be  the 
duty  of  the  Legislature  to  prescribe  proper  pen- 
alties for  the  sale  of  liquors  in  violation  of  this 
provision,  such  liquors  being  hereby  declared  a 
common  nuisance,  and  liable  to  confiscation." 

Although  some  temperance  organizations 
Joined  with  the  Sons  of  Temperance  ol 
Eastern  New  York  in  favoring  Constitu- 
tional Prohibition,  no  practical  steps  were 
taken  until  the  legislative  session  of  1860, 
when  the  following  joint  resolution  was 
introduced  into  the  New  York  Senate 
(see  the  New  York  Tribune  for  April  9, 
1860) : 


'  A  new  Constitution  was  submitted  to  the  people  of 
Michigan  for  ratification  or  rejection  in  1869,  and  at  the 
same  time  the  question  whether  the  Anti-License  clause 
should  be  retained  or  eliminated  was  separately  submitted. 
The  temperance  people  then  desired  the  retention  of  anti- 
licjnse  in  the  Constitution,  and  united  their  efforts  for  de- 
feating the  new  Constitution.  The  majority  against  the 
new  Constitution  was  38,749  in  a  total  of  182,31.5,  and  there 
was  a  majoritj;  of  13,681  against  eliminating  the  Anti- 
License  clause  in  a  total  of  158,605.  This  record  of  1869, 
made  before  it  was  known  that  a  tax  law  could  be  legally 
framed  in  spite  of  the  Constitutional  anti-license  provi- 
sion, had  much  the  same  moral  significance  that  a  direct 
vote  for  Prohibition  would  have  had. 


"Resol\ted  (if  the  A.s.sembly  concur).  That 
the  Constitution  of  the  State  be  amended  as  fol- 
lows : 

"  '  The  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  as  a  bever- 
age is  hereby  prohibited,  and  no  law  shall  be 
enacted  or  be  in  force  after  the  adoption  of  this 
Amendment  to  authorize  such  sale,  and  the 
Legislature  shall  by  law  prescribe  the  necessary 
fines  and  penalties  for  any  violation  of  this  pro- 
vision.' 

"  Resolved  (if  the  Assembly  concur).  That 
the  foregoing  Amendment  be  referred  to  the 
Legislature,  to  be  chosen  at  the  general  election 
of  Senators,  and  that,  in  conformity  to  Section 
1  of  Article  13  of  the  Constitution,  it  be  pub- 
lished for  three  months  previous  to  the  time  of 
such  election." 

The  Senate  approved  this  joint  resolution 
on  the  13th  of  March,  1860,  by  a  vote  of 
30  yeas  (29  Eepublicans  and  one  Demo- 
crat) to  6  nays  (all  Democrats),  and  the 
Assembly  concurred  on  April  5,  1861,  by 
69  yeas  to  33  nays.  The  indorsement  of 
the  next  Legislature  was  required  before 
the  proposed  Amendment  could  go  to  the 
people;  but  the  exciting  events  of  the 
Civil  War  caused  the  abandonment  of  the 
plan.  2 

BEGINNIXG  OF   THE  AGITATION". 

A  period  of  17  years  expired  before  the 
next  notable  demand  for  Constitutional 
Prohibition  was  urged.  It  is  somewhat 
difficult  to  determine  who  is  entitled  to 
the  credit  of  first  giving  practical  form 
to  the  movement  which  began  to  make  a 
stir  among  the  temperance  people  of  Iowa 
and  Kansas  in  1878.  Mr.  B.  F.  Wright 
of  Charles  City,  la.,  lays  claim  to  the 
honor.  In  August,  1878  (according  to 
his  statement),  he  suggested  the  Constitu- 
tional Prohibition  method  to  Mrs.  J. 
Ellen  Foster,  who  was  then  conducting  a 
district  session  of  the  Woman's  Christian 
Temperance  Union  in  Charles  City. 
"Mrs.  Foster"- — we  quote  from  Mr. 
Wright — "did  not  at  first  take  kindly  to 
the  suggestion;  but  before  the  State 
meeting  of  the  Iowa  W.  C.  T.  U.,  in  Bur- 
lington, in  December  of  1888,  she  wrote 
to  me  saying  she  had  decided  that  work 
for  a  Constitutional  Amendment  was  the 
best  thing  to  be  done,  and  asking  if  any 
special  suggestions  were  to  be  made  for 
introducing  tne  plan  to  the  public.  I 
answered  this  letter  in  an  article  pub- 
lished in  ihQ  Floyd  County  Advocate,  ^e^t., 
7,  1878,  setting  forth  my  views  at  length.. 


2  For  the  facts  about  the  early  movement  for  Constitu- 
tional Prohibition  the  editor  is  indebted  to  John  N. 
Steams  of  the  National  Temperance  Society. 


Constitutional  Prohibition.] 


100 


[Constitutional  Prohibition. 


Mrs.  Foster,  as  Chairman  of  the  Legisla- 
tive Committee  of  the  W.  C.  T.  U.,  elab- 
orated these  views  in  a  very  able  report 
that  she  made  to  the  State  W.  C,  T.  U. 
Convention,  giving  due  credit '  to  a  friend 
living  in  Floyd  County.' "  But  it  is  cer- 
tain that  in  Kansas  at  about  the  same 
time  the  idea  was  definitely  considered 
and  acted  on.  At  the  session  of  the  Kan- 
sas State  Grand  Lodge  of  Good  Templars, 
held  at  Fort  Scott  in  October,  1878  (ac- 
cording to  Amanda  M.  Way,  late  G.  C. 
T.  of  the  Good  Templars  of  Kansas),  a 
committee  was  appointed  to  prepare  a 
petition  to  the  Legislature  asking  for  an 
Amendment  to  the  Constitution  forever 
prohibiting  the  manufacture,  sale  and  im- 
portation of  alcoholic  liquors,  and  also  for 
a  Prohibitory  law  to  take  effect  at  once. 
Petitions  were  prepared,  circulated  for 
signatures  and  submitted  to  the  Legisla- 
ture at  Topeka  by  the  officers  of  the  Grand 
Lodge, 

The   Amendment  method  was  not  at 
first  approved  by  all  the  friends  of  Prohi- 
bition in  Kansas  and  Iowa,     The  Kansas 
people  felt  stronger  interest  in  the  fate 
of  their  bill  for  statutory  Prohibition; 
and  it  is  a  fact  that  the  Joint  resolution 
submitting  a  Prohibitory  Constitutional 
Amendment  to  the  people  was  brought  to 
the  front  and  passed  by  the  Kansas  Legis- 
lature of  1879  as  a  political  device  for  de- 
feating  the   Prohibitory   bill  and  other 
restrictive   measures,  the  politicians  be- 
lieving  that  so  radical  a  proposition  as 
that    for   a   Constitutional   Amendment 
against    the    manufacture   and    sale    of 
liquors  would  never  be  approved  by  a  ma- 
jority of  the  popular  vote.     In  Iowa  the 
old  Prohibitory  statute  was  still  in  force 
in  1878,  but  it  was  practically  a  dead  let- 
ter because  of  the  exemption  of  wine  and 
beer;  and   the  Iowa  temperance   people 
considered  it  more   desirable  to  labor  for 
a  perfected  statute  than  to  press  the  ap- 
parently hopeless  demand   for  Constitu- 
tional  Prohibition.     In  February,  1879, 
a  State  meeting  of  Reform  Clubs  was  held 
at  Waterloo,  la.,  and  Mr,   B,  F.  Wright 
earnestly   advocated    his    Constitutional 
Prohibition  scheme;  but  the  difi'erences 
of  opinion  were  so  marked  that  the  Com- 
mittee on  Resolutions  of  that  body,  after 
hours   of  exciting  debate,  brought  in  a 
conservative  report  recommending  moral 
suasion  and  statutory  and  Constitutional 
Prohibition. 


EARLY   SUCCESSES. 

When,  however,  the  issue  for  and 
against  Constitutional  Prohibition  was 
definitely  presented  by  legislative  action, 
the  temperance  people  quickly  under- 
stood that  a  rare  opportunity  was  before 
them.  By  concentrating  their  resources, 
arousing  moral  enthusiasm  and  diligently 
presenting  the  claims  for  their  policy, 
they  might  win  a  whole  State  at  a  single 
blow,  and  the  victory  would  be  of  no  un- 
certain nature.  The  result  of  the  first 
campaign,  made  in  Kansas  in  1880,  fully 
confirmed  the  most  sanguine  hopes;  by  a 
majority  of  nearly  8,000  the  following 
Constitutional  Amendment  was  adopt- 
ed: 

"The  manufacture  and  sale  of  intoxicating 
liquors  shall  be  forever  prohibited  in  the  btate, 
except  for  medicinal,  scientiiic  and  mechanical 
purposes." 

A  more  substantial  victory  followed  in 
Iowa  in  1882,  the  majority  reaching 
nearly  30,000,  and  the  text  of  the  Amend- 
ment being  as  follows : 

"  Section  26. — No  person  shall  manufacture 
for  sale,  sell,  or  keep  for  sale  as  a  bt'verage  any 
intoxicating  liquors  whatever,  including  ale, 
wine  and  beei-.  The  General  Assembly  shall, 
by  law,  prescribe  regulations  for  the  enforce- 
ment of  the  provisions  herein  contained,  and 
shall  thereby  provide  suitable  penalties  for  vio- 
lations of  the  provisions  thereof." 

These  two  great  triumphs  aroused  re- 
markable interest  throughout  the  coun- 
try.    Constitutional   Prohibition  became 
the  accepted  policy  of  advanced  temper- 
ance workers  everywhere  in  the  North, 
Republican  and  Democratic  Conventions 
in  the  different  States  were  besought  to 
pledge  submission  of  Amendments.  Leg- 
islatures were  petitioned  and  every  avail- 
able means  of  persuasion  was  used.     The 
striking  result  of  the  Ohio  campaign  of 
1883  seemed  to  emphasize  the  conviction 
that  Constitutional   Prohibition  was  des- 
tined to  sweep  the   country.     That  great 
State,  which  had  persistently  nullified  the 
Anti-License  article  of  the  Constitution 
of  1851,  and  which  was  dominated  politi- 
cally  by  the    German   influence,  gave  a 
majority  of  more  than  82,000  for  the  fol- 
lowing proposed  Amendment : 

"The  manufacture  of  and  the  traffic  in  in- 
toxicating liquors  to  be  used  as  a  beverage  are 
forever  prohibited;  and  the  General  Assembly 
shall  provide  by  law  for  the  enforcement  of  this 
provision,  ' 

while   at   tlie   same  time  an  alternative 


Constitutional  Prohibition.] 


101 


[Constitutional  Prohibition, 


Amendment  providing  that  "The  Gene- 
ral Assembly  sliall  regulate  the  traffic  in 
intoxicating  liquors  so  as  to  provide 
against  evils  resulting  therefrom,  and  its 
power  to  levy  taxes  or  assessments  there- 
on is  not  limited  by  any  provisions  of  the 
Constitution,"  was  voted  down  by  more 
than  92,000.  Although  the  Ohio  Prohib- 
itionists were  robbed  by  technicalities 
of  the  fruits  of  their  victory,  the  moral 
effect  was  most  impressive.  Confidence 
was  still  further  strengthened  by  the 
sweeping  result  in  Maine  in  1884,  the 
following  Amendment  being  added  to 
the  Constitution  of  that  State  by  a  vote 
of  three  to  one : 

"The  manufacture  of  intoxicating  liquors, 
not  including  cider,  and  the  sale  and  keeping 
for  sale  of  intoxicating-  liquors,  are  and  shall  be 
forever  prohibited.  Except,  however,  that  the 
sale  and  keeping  for  sale  of  such  liquors  for 
medicinal  and  mechanical  purposes  and  the  arts, 
and  the  sale  and  keeping  for  sale  of  cider  may 
be  permitted  under  such  regulations  as  the  Leg- 
islature may  provide.  The  Legislature  shall 
enact  laws  with  suitable  penalties  for  the  sup- 
pression of  the  manufacture,  sale  and  keeping 
for  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors,  with  the  excep- 
tions herein  specified." 

Again  in  1885  the  wisdom  of  the  advo- 
cates of  Constitutional  Prohibition  was 
vindicated,  In  tliat  part  of  the  Territory 
of  Dakota  that  has  since  become  the 
State  of  South  Dakota,  a  Constitutional 
Convention  framed  a  Constitution  that 
was  to  become  operative  upon  the  admis- 
sion of  South  Dakota  into  the  Union, 
and  the  following  proposed  article  was 
submitted  to  the  people  separately  and 
ratified  by  a  majority  of  about  200 : 

"  Article  34. — No  person  or  corporation 
shall  manufacture  or  aid  in  the  manufacture  of 
for  sale,  any  intoxicating  liquor;  no  person 
shall  sell  or  keep  for  sale  as  a  beverage  any  in- 
toxicating liquor.  The  Legislature  shall  by  law 
prescribe  regulations  for  the  enforcement  of  (he 
provisions  of  this  section  and  provide  suitable 
and  adequate  penalties  for  the  violation  there- 
of." 

In  the  next  year  (1886)  a  triumph 
more  gratifying,  perhaps,  than  any  that 
had  yet  been  scored  was  witnessed  in  the 
conservative  manufacturing  State  of 
Rhode-  Island,  which  decreed,  by  more 
than  a  three-fifths  vote,  that 

"  The  manufacture  and  sale  of  intoxicating 
liquors  to  be  used  as  a  beverage  shall  be  prohib- 
ited. The  General  Assembly  shall  provide  for 
carrying  this  article  into  effect." 

A   LONG    SERIES   OF   DEFEATS. 

Thus  in  seven  years  five  States  and  one 


prospective  State  had  approved  the  prin- 
ciple of  Constitutional  Prohibition  by 
popular  majorities.  In  this  period  no 
State  had  recorded  a  majority  against  a 
genuine  Proliibitory  Amendment,  al- 
though North  Carolina,  in  1881,  had 
voted  down  by  more  than  116,000  major- 
ity a  so-called  Amendment  that  was 
wholly  unsatisfactory  to  the  temperance 
people.  It  was  naturally  believed  by 
most  friends  of  the  cause  that  the  move- 
ment was  showing  itself  to  be  irresistible. 
But  a  long  series  of  defeats  now  ensued. 
Before  inquiring  more  particularly  into 
causes  and  circtimstances,  we  will  present 
the  texts  of  the  Amendments  voted  on  in 
the  different  States  since  the  Ehode 
Island  election  of  1886,  and  indicate  the 
results. 

Michigan,  1887,  defeated  by  5,645:  "Article 
4,  Section  49. — The  manufacture,  gift  or  sale 
of  spirituous,  malt  or  vinous  liquors  in  this 
State,  except  for  medicinal,  mechanical,  chemi- 
cal or  scientific  purposes,  is  prohibited  :  and  no 
property  right  in  such  spirituous,  malt  or  vinous 
liquors  shall  be  deemed  to  exist,  except  the 
right  to  manufacture  or  sell  for  medicinal,  me- 
chanical, chemical  or  scientific  purposes  under 
such  restrictions  and  regulations  as  may  be  pro- 
vided by  law.  The  Legislature  shall  enact  laws 
with  suitable  penalties  for  the  suppression  of  the 
manufacture,  saleand  keeping  for  sale  or  gift  of 
intoxicating  liquors,  except  as  herein  specified." 

Texas,  1887,  defeated  by  91,357:  "  Section  20. 
— The  manufacture,  sale  and  exchange  of  in- 
toxicating liquors,  except  for  medical,  mechan- 
ical, sacramental  and  scientific  purposes,  is 
hereby  prohibited  in  the  State  of  Texas.  The 
Legislature  shall,  at  the  first  session  held  after 
the  adoption  of  this  Amendment,  enact  neces- 
sary laws  to  put  this  provision  into  effect." 

Tennessee,  1887,  defeated  by  27,093:  "No 
person  shall  manufacture  for  sale,  or  sell,  or 
keep  for  sale  as  a  beverage,  any  intoxicating 
liquors  whatever,  including  wine,  ale  and  beer. 
The  General  Assembly  shall  by  law  prescribe 
regulations  for  the  enforcement  of  the  prohibi- 
tion herein  contained  and  shall  thereby  provide 
suitable  penalties  for  the  violation  of  the  pro- 
visions hereof." 

Oregon,  1887,  defeated  by  7,985:  "Section 
1. — The  manufacture,  sale  or  giving  away,  or 
the  offering  to  sell  or  give  away,  or  the  keeping 
for  sale  of  any  spirituous,  vinous,  malt,  distilled, 
lermented,  or  any  intoxicating  liquor,  is  prohib- 
ited in  this  State,  except  for  medicinal,  scientific 
or  mechanical  purposes. 

"  Sec.  2  — The  Legislative  Assembly  shall 
prescribe  bylaw  in  what  manner  and  by  whom 
and  at  what  places,  such  liquors  or  any  of 
them,  shall  be  manufactured  or  sold,  or  kept 
for  sale  for  medicinal,  scientific  or  mechanical 
purposes. 

"  Sec.  3. — This  Amendment  shall  take  effect 
and  be  in  full  force  in  six  months  from  the  date 
of  its  ratification  by  the  electors. 


Constitutional  Prohibition.] 


103 


[Constitutional  Prohibition. 


(< 


Assembly  shall 

necessary  laws  with  suf- 

necessary    to     enforce     this 


Sec.  4. — The    Legislative 
without  delay  pass  all 
ficient    penalties 
Amendment." 

West  Virginia,  1888,  defeated  hy  34,887: 
"  The  manufacture,  sale  and  keeping  for  sale  of 
all  intoxicating  liquors,  drinks,  mixtures  and 
preparations,  except  as  hereinafter  provided, 
are  forever  prohibited  within  this  State  ;  and  the 
Legislature  shall  without  delay  provide  by  ap- 
propriate legislation  for  the  strict  enforcement 
of  this  provision.  But  the  Legislature  may  pro- 
vide by  law  for  the  manufacture,  sale  and  keep- 
ing for  sale  of  alcohol  and  preparations  thereof , 
for  scientific,  mechanical  and  medicinsl  pur- 
poses, and  of  wine  for  sacramental  purposes, 
under  sufficient  penalties  and  securities  to  insure 
the  due  execution  of  such  laws  as  may  be  en- 
acted under  this  section." 

New  Hampshire,  1889,  defeated  by  5,190: 
"That  the  sale  or  keeping  for  sale,  or  manufac- 
ture of  alcoholic  or  intoxicating  liquors,  except 
cider,  or  any  compound  of  which  such  liquor 
is  a  part,  to  be  used  as  a  beverage,  is  a  misde- 
meanor and  is  hereby  prohibited." 

Massachusetts,  1889,  defeated  by  46.626: 
"The  manufacture  and  sale  of  intoxicating 
liquors  to  be  used  as  a  beverage  are  prohibited. 
The  General  Court  shall  enact  suitable  legisla- 
tion to  enforce  the  provisions  of  this  article." 

Pennsylvania,  1889,  defeated  by  188,027: 
'•  Article  19. — The  manufacture,  sale  or  keep- 
ing for  sale  of  intoxicating  liquor  to  be  used  as 
a  beverage  is  hereby  prohibited,  and  any  viola- 
tion of  this  prohibition  sliall  be  a  misdemeanor, 
punishable  as  shall  be  provided  by  law.  The 
manufacture,  sale  or  keeping  for  sale  of  intoxi- 
cating liquor  for  other  purposes  than  as  a  bev- 
erage may  be  allowed  in  such  manner  only  as 
may  be  prescribed  by  law.  The  General  As 
senibly  shall,  at  the  first  session  succeeding  the 
adoption  of  this  Article  of  the  Constitution,  en- 
act laws  with  adequate  penalties  for  its  enforce- 
ment." 

Rhode  Island,  1889.  repealed  the  Prohibitory 
Amendment  of  1886  by  18,315  majority. 

South  Dakota,  1889,  adopted  by  6,053: 
"Article  24. — No  person  or  corporation  shall 
manufacture  or  aid  in  the  manufacture  of  for 
sale,  any  intoxicating  liquor  ;  no  person  shall 
sell  or  keep  for  sale  as  a  beverage  any  intoxica- 
ting liquor.  The  Legislature  shall  by  law  pre- 
scribe regulations  for  the  enforcement  of  the 
provisions  of  this  section  and  provide  suitable 
and  adequate  penalties  for  the  violation  thereof  •' 

North  Dakota,  1889,  adopted  by  1.159: 
'Article  20. — No  person,  association  or  cor- 
poration shall  within  this  State  manufacture  for 
sale  or  gift  any  intoxicating  liquors,  and  no 
person,  as.sociation  or  corporation  shall  import 
any  of  the  same  for  sale  or  gift,  or  keep  or  sell 
or  offer  the  same  for  sale  or  gift,  barter  or  trade 
as  a  beverage.  The  Legislative  Assembly  shall 
bylaw  prescribe  reffulations  for  the  enforcement 
of  the  provisions  of  this  Article  and  shall  there- 
by provide  suitable  penalties  for  the  violation 
thereof." 

Washington,  1889,  defeated  by  11.943: 
"Separate  Article  No.  2— It  shall  not  be 


lawful  for  any  individual,  company  or  corpora- 
tion, within  the  limits  of  this  State,  to  manufac- 
ture or  cause  to  be  manufactured,  or  to  sell  or 
offer  for  .sale,  or  in  any  manner  dispose  of  any 
alcoholic,  malt  or  spirituous  liquors,  except  for 
medicinal,  sacramental  or  scientific  purposes." 

Connecticut,  1889,  defeated  by  27,595  :  "The 
manufacture  or  compounding  of  and  sale  or 
keeping  for  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors,  except 
for  sacramental,  medicinal,  scientific,  mechan- 
ical or  art  purposes,  shall  be  and  hereby  are  pro- 
hibited in  this  State  ;  and  it  shall  be  the  duty  of 
the  Legislature  to  pass  laws  for  the  enforcement 
of  this  article." 

RECAPITULATIGIS"  AND    GENERAL  REVIEW. 

The  following  table  summarizes  the 
main  statistical  facts  in  connection  with 
Constitutional  Prohibition 
the  various  States : 


struggles 


m 


^ 

00                        go           00           ODOOOOOCOO.OO 

qo                ®        00        ODooaiooocoo 

tt 

>. 

^                      00          ^          OC;i*-C0i.0O 

a 

'                                                                                                                         V                 »                                                          , 

::? 

Kansas. . . . 

Iowa 

Ohio 

Maine 

South  Dak 
Rhofle  Isla 
Michigan.. 

Texas 

Tennessee. 
Oregon  ... 
West  Virgi 
New  Hani's 
Massachnsi 
Pennsyhai 
Rhode  Isla 
Sonth  Dak 
North  Dak 
Washingto 
Connecticu 

o 

> 

M 

^=003:;.  ^C-3 

•     •     ■     Hi  0  •     •     •     • 

;   :   g  g-  p,  p  g-  s-  g- 
fo  • 

:  ■  ■  f'^.'■.  ':  ':  : 

OCC05:<i<>g5^iia>>>:.^<y:0^^ 

H 

o 

iii  h^i^iy          10            ,,        ^-^^ 

t) 

E. 

j.l^,-ij-ij-i  0  OOJO  t-i  05  00  0  jl^jl^J^!  CO  OD  *■ -J  *3 

> 

-4 

' 

H  a  cc  x.  rjirr.  cc^  ^  cc  i.  v.  j.  v.  -  «;  a:  k  hj 

2  S"  c?  (0  G.  2.  a  s:  2.2.2.2.0  <c  w  ggG.2:. 

^ 

0 

•9 

"i  2.£.2,£.£.e,3  g'EEL£.2.£.S.-£.£.Eg' 

ntial 

elec 
ectio 
ectio 
ition 
ectio 
ectio 
elect 
elect 
elect 
ntial 
electi 
elect 
elect 
elect 
ectio 
ectio 
ectio 
;lecti- 

w 

2  355  0  5' 0  2  2. 5" 5" o'ci-5  £.3^  5-  2. 
^-  \  ■  333m'^3B3;  ;  '^ :  :  c  g 

0 

2! 

:  .  ;   ■  :  :  ;  :  0  •  •  :  •  •  0':  :  :  5' 

::::•"::  5,    :::■  3:  ::  S 

s'asJwwwwwoS'a'dWWSiwsi^s) 

00 

►CfT^crOftrD^fDCC^^^^^^f^^O^ 

c 

S"  — 

0    r^ 

0:  ::  :;::«»■  .:::::•  • 

a> Wo      

US' 

S.'^ 

a  S 

3 

3:  :•::::  55     :::::::: 

• 

M 

_ 

^ 

C-J 

JO                           i_n_i.i-i                     CO  1-^ 

^1  ^ 

-1 

tcn-'-i-ico      «:'ao^^^^:^^-'■l--^o*?^-'l-l-7^5C)»':D 

2  D'O 

Oi 

t5:C'aoo:oc:ciicn'-":D--iooociicitocoy'-^ 

3  ^.  ^ 

CO  or  ot  01  0  c;  JO  *?  c:  -^  en  iO  Ci  •-'  OT  ~7  '-^  *^  00 

•    c;  " 

-J  u-  OT  0  m  i-*  4- CO  ci -i  0 '"I  CO  1-1  -1 00  GO  CO -1 

^ 

CO 

tOCliC-OCt-ttCaiOCCO^-OCiCOOCOOO-.O- 

''' 

0 

^ 

E    t> 

^i_i             k-^toi-t             ^^^-l 

s^fltg 

►t^  CO  •-'  CO  M  .X  CO  CO  -1  ii  4-  ii  >Xi         1-1  tC-  *-  iO  OO 

;^  J-' -1  CO  po  ju^^  p  p -*iJ'Pi-J^i'''  >op  jji  *. 

-*  -^  ^. 

0  ^  W  4-  CO  C^  0  ^2  0 1  Ir  "--*  V.  tC(  "t  C  W  X  0 

0  V  " 

-1  X  0  0»  1-^  *t^  Ci  -}  CJi  CJt  1:;  iC-  X  CO  CO  '-'  -1  -J  CO 

w       ^- 

_>t^ 

^^ 

5: 

vT 

*-i                    ?oco      >— ^      cococo           •—t.-^iictp 

Cn0TC0-14-'lZ;4-f:CCii0tOC;'XtC'0D4-tC'OO 
CO  X  00 'I  CO -J  t.pjc  4-co  -}  opp  X^  '"'i^J"*' 

*^ 

f 

OS 

0 

0 

^ 

-:i 

1^Vox"'--"i^OI'— ■y'0-">■L^"xx-">Vcoo^^ 

c  s 

o 

xcoGc^j'-*x--itC/0»;^5icoc!icnQDcoo(xa5 

0    3 

E3     »o 

^ 

o 

0 

— .  ,—  ,— ^  ,.— V  -— .  -"V  ^— -  ,— ^  — .  .— s  f~^  ^— ^  -—V  -—V  /-  V  ,-^  . — —  --^ 

^^    0 

►tOCOO^^^T30^>X)OOOCC^a:"fl 

£.  ^ 

(X 

3222253Srt2?6Sg52oog3 

d  - 

" 

p 

5 
0 

iMMiMMMsi  tiMi 

5       3 

!i? 

00 

i±I  *1  ^  4^  rf*>  0:  _?D  jU^j^l^H^jO -l  to  5;! ->  T^p^ 

uo 

tioi 
ohil 

>ll 

c-. "  '>u  "—  X  00  CO  it*  "t-  CO  0  0  c:  o  en  oc  X' "'—  "'-O  co 

^•T 

o 

?coa»a:4-Oi-'^i-'JC'Xi-^c:coc:'~'4-oo*C' 

■"'  — s 

~  -J 

CO 

OiaocotCjO^COO~iCOCOC:Xli'i-':OC;CnCJf 

5'     S 
3      2 

0 

Constitutional  Prohibition.] 


103 


[Constitutional  Prohibition. 


To  minutely  review  all  the  significant 
features  of  these  contests,  many  pages  in 
excess  of  the  space  that  can  reasonably 
be  allotted  in  this  volume  would  be 
required;  but  since  these  were  the  great 
representative  struggles  for  establishing 
the  principle  of  Prohibition  it  is  proper 
to  consider  the  main  facts  with  some 
degree  of  care. 

The  remarkable  contrast  between  the 
results  of  the  earlier  and  those  of  the 
later  campaigns  is  first  to  be  explained. 
While  all  the  States  voting  on  Constitu- 
tional Prohibition  previously  to  1887  (if 
North  Carolina  be  excepted,  as  it  should 
be)  gave  favorable  majorities  aggregating 
172,898, 11  of  the  13  States  voting  in  the 
years  1887, 1888  and  1889  showed  adverse 
majorities,  and  the  total  anti-Prohibition 
majority  in  these  13  States  was  457,289. 
By  the  superficial  observer  this  change 
may  be  attributed  to  a  radical,  conclusive 
and  permanent  reaction  of  public  senti- 
ment against  Constitutional  Prohibition; 
but  no  intelligent  person  will  make  such  an 
interj)retation  without  impartially  study- 
ing the  conditions.  In  truth  there  was 
no  such  reaction  if  by  that  term  is  im- 
plied a  reaction  occasioned  by  dispassion- 
ate judgment  and  deliberate  pondering 
of  truthful  evidence  and  genuine  argu- 
ment. There  was  certainly  an  unmis- 
takable reaction,  not,  however,  of  matur- 
ed and  well-informed  public  sentiment 
and  therefore  not  necessarily  conclusive 
or  permanent. 

In  the  first  place,  dismissing  for  the 
present  all  the  explanatory  circumstances 
and  examining  the  figures  by  themselves, 
it  is  seen  that  in  the  11  States  giving  hos- 
tile majorities  there  was  a  very  large  ele- 
ment of  qualified  voters  that  took  no  part 
in  the  elections  on  the  issue  of  Constitu- 
tional Prohibition.  The  number  of  ab- 
stainers in  each  State  (estimated  on  the 
basis  of  the  returns  for  the  nearest  polit- 
ical election  at  which  a  tolerably  full  vote 
was  polled)  is  set  down  in  the  last  col- 
umn of  the  above  table.  For  example, 
in  the  State  of  Massachusetts  there  were 
85,242"  votes  for  Constitutional  Prohibi- 
tion and  131,062  votes  against  it,  an 
ajiparent  adverse  majority  of  45,820 ;  but 
at  the  Presidential  election  of  1.888  the 
whole  vote  polled  in  Massacnusetts  was 
344,517,  or  128,213  more  than  the  whole 
vote  polled  on  the  question  of  Constitu- 
tional   Prohibition    in    1889;  hence  the 


anti-Prohibitionists  really  lacked  41,197 
of  an  actual  majority  of  the  voting  pop- 
ulation of  Massachusetts.  The  following 
summary  presents  more  clearly  this  qual- 
ifying phase  of  the  anti-Prohibition  ma- 
jorities: 


Prohibition. 

o 

is 

a  >> 

^o& 

State. 

«  S  s 

§..?. 

03  O        c 

Yes. 

No. 

O.03 

<B 

§1.1-2 

Michigan. . . 

178,636 

184,281 

5,645 

17,968 

Texas   

129,270 

220,627 

91, .357 

7,610 

Tennessee.. 

117,504 

145,197 

27,693 

41,083 

Oregon 

19,973 

27,958 

7,985 

7,023 

W.Virginia. 

41,068 

76,555 

34,887 

41.317 

New  Hamp. 

25,786 

30,976 

5,190 

34,160 

Mass 

85,242 

131,062 

45,820 

128,213 

Penn 

296,617 

484,641 

188,027 

216,307 

Rhode  I^d.. 

9,956 

28,315 

18,359 

4,840 

Washington 

19,540 

31,489 

11,943 

7,408 

Conn 

22,379 

49,974 

27,595 

81,025 

Totals 

946,577 

1,411.078 

464,501 

587,500 

c2 


«  3 


6,163 

4-41,870 

6,696 

+      480 

—  3,216 
14,486 

—  41,197 
14,141 

4-  0,759 

+  2,267 

-27,016 

-01,530 


Taking  the  footings  of  this  table  and 
attaching  the  totals  for  the  seven  States 
that  gave  Prohibition  majorities  (omit- 
ting the  South  Dakota  vote  of  1885)  we 
have  the  following  results : 


Pbohibition. 

C3 

a 

Q  u  al i  fl  ed 
voters  not  vot- 
ing   on   ques- 
tion. 

'rohibi- 

s   short 

actual 

ty- 

Yes. 

No. 

Anti-F 
tionist 
of  ar 
majori 

Eleven  anti- 
Prohibition 
States 

Seven    Pro- 
h  i  b  i  t  i  o  n 
States  (includ- 
ing R.  I.  vote 
of  1886) 

946,577 

730,026 

1,411,078 
549,916 

464,50lN 
180,110y 

587,560 
.306,063 

61,530 
243,387 

Totals 

1,676,603 

1.960,994 

284. 391 N 

894,193 

304,902 

These  figures  demonstrate  the  errone- 
ousness  of  the  belief  that  the  people,  by 
conclusive  majority  votes,  have  repudi- 
ated Constitutional  Prohibition.  Even 
in  States  where  the  apparent  majorities 
against  the  policy  were  overwhelming 
there  was  a  very  large  reserve  force  which 
took  no  part  in  the  elections  and  which 
must  therefore  be  counted  as  neutral. 
No  considerable  part  of  this  neutral  ele- 
ment, at  least  in  the  hotly-contested 
struggles  of  1887-9,  can  reasonably  be 
supposed  to  have  been  inclined  against 
Prohibition ;  for  in  these  struggles  it  was 
understood  that  the  exi.stence  of  the 
liquor  traffic  of  the  nation  was  at  stake. 


Constitutional  Prohibition.] 


104 


[Constitutional  Prohibition. 


and  also  that  the  possibility  of  testing 
High  License  and  other  alternative  meas- 
ures (believed  by  a  great  many  citizens  to 
be  preferable  to  Prohibition)  depended 
wholly  upon  defeating  the  Constitutional 
Amendments.  Influences  of  extraordinary 
potency  combined  to  bring  to  the  polls 
every  opponent  of  Prohibitory  legislation, 
to  win  to  the  anti-Prohibition  side  every 
hesitating  voter,  to  confuse  the  minds  of 
the  Prohibitionists  themselves  and  to  fill 
the  camp  of  the  neutrals  with  backslid- 
ing Prohibition  sympathizers. 

Of  these  influences  the  most  important 
were: 

1.  The  concentration,  in  each  State 
contested  since  1S86,  of  the  energies  and 
resources  of  the  thoroughly  alarmed, 
powerfully  organized  and  enormously 
wealthy  liquor  interest.  Previously  to 
1887  the  "■  trade  "  was  not  especially  ac- 
tive in  the  Constitutional  Prohibition 
fights.  But  after  the  result  in  Rhode  Is- 
land in  the  spring  of  188G,  the  National 
Protective  Association  of  distillers  and 
wholesale  rumsellers  was  formed,  for  the 
sole  purpose  of  defeating  Prohibition. 
From  that  time  forward  the  liquor  traffic 
of  the  nation  at  large  made  the  anti-Pro- 
hibition cause  in  each  State  its  own,  im- 
mense sums  of  money  were  raised  to  de- 
feat the  Amendments,  and  the  campaigns 
were  managed  with  the  utmost  shrewd- 
ness and  unscrupulousness. 

2.  The  diligent  agitation  of  High  Li- 
cense and  Local  Option,  in  order  to  sat- 
isfy conservative  temperance  people  and 
woo  them  from  their  inclination  to  favor 
Prohibition. 

3.  The  artful  opposition  of  the  most 
influential  political  leaders  and  the  use  of 
the  machinery  of  both  the  old  political 
parties. 

4.  The  hostility  of  well-nigh  every  im- 
portant daily  newspaper  and  the  conse- 
quent suppression  or  perversion  by  the 
representative  public  journals  of  Prohi- 
bition argument  and  evidence. 

5.  The  employment  by  the  anti-Pro- 
hibitionists of  the  most  unfair  methods 
of  warfare.  Newspapers  were  delibe- 
rately purchased  outright ;  false  statistics, 
scandalously  dishonest  statistical  deduc- 
tions, "  manufactured  "  news  dispatches 
and  misleading  and  meretricious  ap- 
peals of  all  sorts  constituted  their  stock 
of  campaign  material.  Ridicule,  intim- 
idation, outrages,  violence  and  fraud  con- 


tributed to  the  anti-Prohibition  majorities 
in  all  the  States. 

Having  considered  in  a  comprehensive 
way  the  chief  general  facts,  we  may  now, 
as  briefly  as  possible  in  justice  to  the 
importance  and  interest  of  the  cam- 
paigns, present  the  main  particulars  for 
the  separate  State  contests. 

CAMPAIGNS   OF    1880-6. 

Kansas.  • 
As  already  stated,  the  submission  of  the  Pro- 
hibitory Ameudment  in  tliis  State  was  granted 
by  the  politicians  as  a  compromise,  the  Legisla- 
ture not  being  willing  to  pass  the  Prohibitory 
statute  demanded  by  the  temperance  people, 
but  readily  consenting  to  the  plan  of  referring 
the  question  to  the  people.  The  submission 
bill  was  introduced  in   the  Senate  on  Feb.  8, 

1879,  by  Senator  Hamlin,  and  was  passed 
by  that  body  Feb.  21— ayes,  37  (83  Repub- 
licans, 2  Democrats  and  2  Greenbackers); 
nays,  none;  not  voting,  3  (all  Republicans). 
The  House  of  Representatives  passed  it  on 
March  5,  the  vote  standing :  ayes,  88  (65 
Republicans,  16  Greenbackers  and  7  Dem- 
ocrats); nays,  31  (17  Republicans,  13  Demo- 
ocrats  and  1  Greenbacker) ;  not  voting,  14(10 
Republicans,  3  Democrats  and  1  Greenbacker). 
It  was  approved  by  Governor  John  P.  St.  John 
March  8,  and  the  day  of  the  Presidential  elec- 
tion, Nov.  3, 1880,  was  named  as  the  day  for  the 
popular  vote.  The  State  Temperance  Union, 
of  which  Governor  St.  John  was  the  President, 
took  charge  of  the  Amendment  campaign,  and 
assistance  was  given  by  the  Woman's  Christian 
Temperance  Union  Good  Templars  and  other 
temperance  organizations,  headquarters  being 
established  at  Lawrence  in  charge  of  Rev.  A. 
M,  Richardson.  A  weekly  jourcal  the  Kansas 
Palladium,  was  published  at  Lawrence,  edited 
by  James  A.  Tioutman. 

The  State  was  thoroughly  canvassed.  The 
clergymen  were  practically  unanimous  for  the 
Amendment.  The  Methodist  Episcopal  Confer- 
ence (at  Topekn),  Kansas  Baptist  C'onvention 
(at  Emporia),  State  Congregational  Association 
(at  Sterling)  State  Uuiversalist  Convention  (at 
Junction  City)  and  Presbyterian  Synod  of  Kan- 
sas (at  Atchison)  were  amongthe  religious  bod- 
ies that  declared  heartily  for  the  measure.  The 
State  Teachers'  Association  at  Teipcka,  in  June, 

1880,  passed  a  resolution  as  follows: 

"  Resolved,  That  we  heartily  indorse  the  Prohibition 
Aniendinent  ami  pledge  ourselves  to  use  our  influence  to 
secure  its  adoption." 

The  Kansas  Af/rkulturalist,  organ  of  the 
farmers,  emphatically  declared  "  in  favor  of  it, 
first,  last  and  all  the  time."  But  the  resources 
of  its  advocates  were  meagre  :  the  funds  for 
prosecuting  the  campaign  aggregated  less  than 
12,500.  The  liejuor  men  organized  a  "  People's 
Grand  Pre)tective  Union,"  with  headeiuarters  at 
Topeka,  appealed  for  help  to  "the  trade" 
throughout tlie  country,  and  received  and  used 
large  sums  of  money,  although  probably  not  in 

1  The  editor  is  indebted  to  Kev.  A.  M.  Richardson  of 
Lawrence,  Kan. 


Constitutional  Prohibition.] 


105 


[Constitutional  Prohibition. 


a  very  systematic  way.  Among  the  Prohibition 
speakers  from  other  States  who  participated  in 
the  contest  were  Frances  E.  Willard.  George 
W.  Baiu,  John  B.  Finch,  E.  B.  Reynolds  Frank 
J.  Sibley,  Mrs.  J.  Ellen  Foster,  Miss  Viola  E. 
Dickman,  George  Woodford,  David  Tatum, 
Prof.  George  E.  Foster  and  J  N.  Stearns.  Some 
of  the  leading  local  speakers  were  Rev.  D.  C. 
Milner  Albert  GrifTiu,  Rev  Richard  Wake, 
Mrs.  Drusilla  Wilson,  Mrs.  M.  E.  Griftith,  Mrs. 
M.  B.  Smilh,  Mrs.  R.  C.  Chase,  Miss  Blanche 
Ileasbeth,  Rev.  D.  P.  Mitchell,  Rev.  J.  H.  By- 
ers,  Rev.  J.  R.  Detwiler,  J.  P.  Root.  Sidney 
Clarke,  A.  W.  Benson,  Judge  S.  O.  Thatcher, 
W.  S.  Wait,  W.  A.  H.  Hains  and  John  H. 
Rice. 

The  vote  by  counties  was  as  follows : 


Prohibition. 


COITNTIES.  Yes. 

Marion  1,020 

Marshall 1,428 


Prohibition. 

Counties.  Yes.  No. 

Allen 1,305  0.51 

Anderson 909  870 

Atchison 1,343  3,147 

Barbour 220  213 

Barton 490  1,0.58 

Bourbon 1,410  1,9(54 

Brown I,:i45  1,288 

Butler 2,211  1,141 

Chase .597  600 

Chautauqua...  1,0.51  819 

Cherokee 2,421  1.944 

Clay 1,296  907 

Cloud 1,4.54  1,201 

Coffey 1,025  1,209 

Cowley 3.243  870 

Crawford 1,055  1,469 

Davis  628  607 

Decatur  146  2.51 

Dickinson....  1,477  1,222 

Doniphan 821  2,150 

Douglas 2,711  1,602 

Edwards 121  194 

Elk 1,2.32  564 

Ellis  .          ...  .3.55  403 

Ellsworth Oil  781 

Ford 125  488 

Franklin 1,967  1,293 

Graham  207  358 

Greenwood....  1,0.59  941 

Harper 424  316 

Harvey 1,148  8.58 

Hodgeman 147  65 

Jackson 1,0.56  1,098 

Jefferson 1,306  1,723 

Jewell 1,557  1,2.56 

Johnson 1,545  1,787 

Kingman 265  .346 

Labette 2,082  2,123 

Leavenworth..  1,486  3,882 

Lincoln 613  7.33 

Linn 1,494  1,292 

Lyon 2,3;37  877 

'The  figures  commonly  accepted  are:  For  Prohibition, 
92,.302;  against,  84,304— majority  for,  7,998.  Those,  how- 
ever, are  incorrect.  The  ofHcial  figures  are  those  presented 
above,  as  certified  to  the  editor  of  this  work.  April  18, 1890, 
by  William  Higgins,  Secretary  of  State  of  Kansas,  under 
his  official  seal. 

Iowa. ' 

The  submission  of  Constitutional  Prohibition 
in  Iowa  was  due.  as  in  Kansas,  to  a  political 
compromise.  The  old  Prohibitory  law  of  the 
State,  passed  in  1855  by  the  Democrats  chiefly 
through  the  influence  of  Hiram  Price  (who  was 
at  that  time  a  Democratl,  had  been  weakened 
by  the  Republicans  when  they  came  into  power. 
From  tlie  beginning  it  had  se  mcd  to  be  the 
policy  of  the  Republican  party  of  Iowa  to  cater 
to  the  large  German  element  of  the  State  ;  and 


>  The  editor  is  indebted  to  B.  F.  Wright  of  Charles  City, 
la.,  and  E.  W.  Brady  of  Davenport,  la. 


McPherson...  2,1,34 

Miami  1,488 

Mitchell 1,.348 

Montgomery.  1,9.39 

Morris 895 

Nemaha 1,213 

Neosho 1,.528 

Ness 200 

Norton 575 

Osage 2,287 

Osborne  ....  1,0.35 

Ottawa 1,163 

Pawnee 604 

Phillips 978 

Potta\\atomie.  1,121 

Pratt 1.51 

Reno 1,006 

Republic 1,330 

Rice  1,087 

Riley  1,178 

Rooks .503 

Rush   315 

Russell 443 

Saline 1,410 

Sedgwick 1,808 

Shawnee 3,1.59 

Sheridan 101 

Smith 1,274 

Stafford 393 

Sumner 2,.394 

Trego 220 

Wabaunsee  . . .  622 

Washington  . .  1,112 

Wilson 1,487 

Woodson  .   ...  7'48 

Wyandotte....  1,222 


Totals' 91,874 

Majority 7,837 


No. 

825 

1,8.53 

912 

1,751 

1,178 

1.2.50 

885 

1,185 

1,164 

216 

491 

1,084 

873 

835 

218 

708 

1,208 

143 

932 

919 

625 

828 

696 

305 

6.55 

1,207 

1,716 

2,513 

69 

851 

301 

1,201 

120 

990 

1,610 

1,069 

530 

2,481 

84,037 


the  wine-and-beer-exemption  clause  was  accord- 
ingly continued,  while  no  effort  was  made  to 
shut  up  the  numerous  flourishing  breweries.  In 
1877,  howi'ver,  there  sprang  up  a  strong  political 
movement  for  restoring  full  Prohibition  to  Iowa. 
Tlie  activity  of  the  Prohibitionists  was  increased 
by  the  nomination  in  that  year  of  John  II.  Gear 
as  the  Republican  candidate  for  Governor.  Mr. 
Gear  was  reputed  to  b^;  an  uncomi)romising 
anti-Prohibitionist;  and  the  friends  of  Prohibi- 
tion set  up  an  independent  candidate,  Elias 
Jessup,  for  whom  they  polled  the  considerable 
vote  of  10,5-15— a  vote  large  enough  for  the  first 
time  since  tlie  Republicans  obtained  the 
ascendancy  in  Iowa,  to  deprive  their  nominee 
of  a  majority  of  the  entire  popular  vote.  This 
demonstration  of  p-ilitical  strength  by  the  Pro- 
hibitionists made  them  still  moie  aggressive, 
and,  as  we  have  seen,  the  demand  for  Con.stitu- 
tional  Prohibition  was  openly  made  in  1878. 
But  this  demand  was  held  subordinate  to  that 
for  a  strengthened  statute.  In  1879  Governor 
Gear  aspired  to  re-election,  and  the  shrewd 
leaders  of  his  party,  in  order  to  avoid  the  direct 
issue  of  improving  the  Prohibitory  statute, 
caused  the  following  plank  to  be  inserted  in 
their  platform,  adopted  at  Des  Moines  in  June  : 

"  That  we  reaflirm  the  position  of  the  Republican  party 
heretofore  expressed  on  the  subject  of  temperance  and 
Prohibition,  and  we  hail  with  pleasure  the  beneficent  work 
of  Reform  Clubs  and  other  organizations  in  promoting 
personal  temperance,  and,  in  order  that  the  entire  question 
of  temperance  may  be  settled  in  a  non-partisan  manner,  we 
favor  the  submission  to  the  people,  at  a  special  election,  of 
a  Constitutional  Amendment  prohibiting  ihe  manufacture 
and  sale  of  all  intoxicating  liquors  as  a  beverage  within 
the  State." 

In  .spite  of  the  Republican  pledge,  the  Prohi- 
bition party  that  had  polled  10,545  votes  in  1877 
did  not  disband  in  1879.  Strong  pressure  was 
exerci.sed  to  per.suade  its  leaders  not  to  nominate 
a  candidate  against  Gear,  and  Prohibition  advo- 
cates of  much  prestige— including  Mrs.  J.  Ellen 
Foster— opposed  a  separate  nomination.  Never- 
theless D.  R.  Dungan  was  put  in  the  field  as  the 
candidate  of  the  Prohibition  party  for  Gover- 
nor, and  3,258  votes  were  cast  for  him.  The 
respectable  strength  thus  retiined.  under  ad- 
verse circumstances,  by  the  party  Prohibition- 
ists, convinced  the  politicians  that  they  would 
become  an  organized  and  de'ermincd  partisan 
factor  in  the  event  of  bad  faith.  Both  branches 
of  the  Legislature  of  1880  were  controlled  by 
the  Republicans,  and  a  Proliibitory  Constitu- 
tional Amendment  resolution  was  passed  in 
each  House  and  referred  to  the  Legislature  of 
1880  for  final  action.  That  body  lalso  domi- 
nated by  the  Re])ublicans  i  approved  it,  and  the 
question  was  submitted  for  the  decision  of  the 
people  at  a  special  election  to  be  held  June  27, 
1880.  The  friends  of  Prohibition  worked  har- 
moniously, made  a  thorough  cam-iaigu  and 
carried  the  Amendment  by  the  following  vote: 


Prohibition. 

Counties.  Yes.  No. 

Adair 1,.515  904 

Adams 1,1.57  820 

Allamakee  ...  1,1.51  1,803 

Appanoose....  2,162  748 

Audubon 807  779 

Benton 2,198  2,081 

Black  Hawk..  2,226  1,755 

Boone 2,205  1,413 

Bremer 1,268  1,303 


Prohibition. 

Counties.  Yes.  No. 

Buchanan 1,862  1,901 

Buena  Vista..  1,004  342 

Butler 1,069  820 

Calhoun 985  344 

Carroll 1,1.38  1,.5.56 

Cass 1,826  1,725 

Cedar  2,191  1,234 

Cerro  Gordo  .  1,451  640 

Cherokee.  ...  1,151  352 


Constitutional  Prohibition,] 


106 


[Constitutional  Prohibition. 


Prohibition. 

Counties.  Yes.  No. 

Chickasaw....  1,;582  1,008 

Clarke 1,011  4.52 

Clay  707  330 

Clayton 1,823  2,905 

Clinton 2,029  3,537 

Crawford 958  977 

Dallas 2,450  1,0,55 

Davis 1,.302  1,300 

Decatur 1,340  1,137 

Delaware 1,803  1,3.55 

Des  Moines...  1,917  3,053 

Dickinson 374  102 

Dubuque 1 ,223  6,283 

Emmet 214  29 

Fayette 2,371  1,.528 

Floyd 1,381  1,457 

Franklin 1,071  557 

Fremont 1,503  1,120 

Greene 1,.572  773 

Grundy 1,1.55  803 

Guthrie 1,9.33  811 

Hamilton 1,344  652 

Hancock 409  206 

Hardin 2,175  979 

Harrison 1,701  1,.330 

Henry 2,028  1,220 

Howard 7.30  835 

Humboldt  ....  615  351 

Ida 916  453 

Iowa 1,192  1,.560 

Jackson 1,609  2,.350 

Jasper 3,148  l,.30O 

Jefferson 1,774  1,284 

Johnson 1,770  2,008 

Jones 2,484  1,179 

Keokuk 1,873  2,321 

Kossuth 700  025 

Lee 2,290  .3,.553 

Linn 4,434  2,830 

Louisa 1,595  824 

Lucas 1,.529  693 

Lyon 259  101 


Prohibition, 


Counties.  Yes. 

Madison 1,906 

Mahaska 2,761 

Marion 2,427 

Marshall 2,5;38 

Mills 1,327 

Mitchell 1,200 

Monona 853 

Monroe 1,284 


Montgomery. . 
Muscatine  ... 

O'Brien 

Osceola 

Page. 


1,832 

2,114 

719 

394 

2,206 


Pafo  Alto....'.  511 

Plymouth 750 

Pocahontas. . .  449 

Polk 4,630 

Pottawattamie  2,576 

Poweshiek....  2,211 

Ringgold 1,640 

Sac. 1,383 

Scott 1,467 

Shelby 1,313 

Sioux 432 

Story 1,921 

Tama 2,244 

Taylor 1,056 

Union  1,687 

VanBuren....  1,543 

Wapello 1,465 

Warren 2,1.31 

Washington  . .  2,201 

Wayne 1,849 

Webster 1,498 

"  5.57 


Winnebago 
Winneshiek  . 
Woodbury . . . 

Worth 

Wright  


1,411 
1,163 

784 


No. 

1,103 

1,855 

1,811 

1,798 

1,018 

881 

399 

700 

671 

2,023 

278 

168 

965 

306 

1,186 

204 

2,519 

3,468 

1,018 

570 

548 

5,197 

1,231 

5,58 

553 

1,477 

054 

1,008 

1,543 

2,498 

1,173 

1,079 

1,007 

1,260 

89 

1,096 

1,220 

3,50 

401 


Totals ....  1.55.436  125,67 
Majority..   :C9,759 


This  decisive  result  did  not,  however,  imme- 
diately have  its  legitimate  effect.  The  Repub- 
lican State  Convention  met  Aug.  1,  1882 — five 
weeks  after  the  great  ProhJbitiou  victory—  and 
strangely  refused  to  allow  any  expression  on 
the  Amendment  or  Prohibition  question  to  ap- 
pear in  the  platform.  It  was  the  programme  of 
the  leaders  to  divorce  the  party,  if  pos.sible, 
from  the  Prohibitory  issue,  so  as  to  hold  the 
German  vote  for  the  Republican  candidates  for 
Congress  in  the  coming  November.  But  this 
cowardly  attitude  had  the  contrary  effect:  gene- 
ral demoralization  ensued  and  the  Republicans 
lost  three  Congressmen. 

Another  and  a  more  serious  repudiation  of 
the  will  of  the  people  .seemed,  for  awhile,  to  vi- 
tiate the  effect  of  the  vote.  In  the  fall  of  1882 
the  Supreme  Court  of  Iowa,  by  the  decision  of 
four  of  its  Judges,  declared,  in  an  appeal  case, 
that  tlie  Amendment  had  not  been  properly 
submitted  to  the  people.  The  Court  found  that 
a  certain  amendment  of  three  words  which  had 
been  added  by  the  Legislature  of  1880  to  the 
original  text  of  the  Submission  act  did  not  ap- 
pear in  the  Legislative  Journal  as  kept  by  the 
Clerk  of  the  House.  It  was  admitted  that  the 
Constitutional  Amendment  itself,  as  voted  on 
by  the  people,  was  precisely  the  same,  in  every 
word,  as  the  Constitutioaal  Amendment  sub- 
mitted by  the  Legislatures  of  1880  and  1882; 
but  the  Court  held  that  the  slight  and  imma- 
terial omission  in  the  Clerk's  Journal  of  three 
words  that  had  been  added  to  the  original  text 
of  the  act  of  submission  was  .sufficient  to  in- 
validate the  popular  vote.  Accordingly  the 
Constitutional  Amendment  was  on  this  techni- 
cal ground  annulled.  The  Prohibitionists  quick- 


ly manifested  their  determination  not  to  lose  the 
fruits  of  their  victory.  A  mammoth  State  Con- 
vention, on  a  non-partisan  basis,  was  held  a  lew 
months  later,  and  it  was  plainly  declared  in  the 
resolutions  adopted  by  that  body  that  the  domi- 
nant party  would  be  held  responsible  for  any 
failure  to  carry  out  the  unmistakable  desire  of 
the  great  majority  of  the  citizens  of  Iowa.  In 
the  next  Legislature  a  statutory  Prohibitory  law 
was  passed,  which  was  subsequently  strength- 
ened and  which,  because  of  its  demonstrated 
success  in  nearly  the  whole  of  Iowa  and  the 
support  accorded  it  by  the  people,  has  stood  the 
test  of  all  efforts  made  for  its  repeal  or  the  modi- 
fication of  its  provisions. 

Ohio.^ 

We  have  seen  that  Ohio  has  since  1851  sus- 
tained a  unique  relationship  to  the  liquor  ques- 
tion.    While  the  Constitution  prohibits  license 
it  does  not  provide   for  Prohibition.     Although 
the  Anti-Liceus3  clause  was  at  first  regarded  by 
the  temperance  people  as  a  decree  in  favor  of 
Prohibition,  the  politicians  refused  to  recognize 
it  as  such  and  the  traffic  was  practically  unre- 
strained.   But  the  representative    liquor  men 
and  their  political  friends  looked   with  much 
dissatisfaction   upon  the   Anti-License  clause. 
Its  effect  was  to  discourage  all  attempts  to  de- 
fine  the  precise  status    of    the    busmess   and 
put  it  on  a  permanent  and  strictly  legal  basis. 
Consequently  efforts  were  made  to  repeal  the 
Anti-License  clause  and  substitute  for  it  a  Con- 
stitutional Amendment  permitting  license.     In 
1874  such  an  Amendment  was  submitted  to  the 
people,  and  the  vote  on  it  stood:  For,  172,252; 
against,    179,5S8;    total    vote  on   Secretary  of 
State  at  same  election,  461,425;  necessary  to  the 
adoption  of  the  License  Amendment,  233,713; 
License  Amendment  short  of  a  majority,  61,461; 
majority  against  license  of  those  voting  on  the 
question,  7,286.     This  defeat  of  the  lieense  ad- 
vocates demonstrated   the   impracticability  of 
the  scheme  of  amending  the  Constitution  in  be- 
half of  the  liquor  interests,  although  the  Demo- 
cratic party  did   not  cease  to  advocate  license. 
Meanwhile  the  liquor  question  continued  prom- 
inent in  State  politics.       The  Prohibition  party 
maintained    its    organization    and     nominated 
separate  candidates  each  year,  and  there  was 
every  probability  that  the  pressure  for  Prohibi- 
tion would  increase.     The  brewers  and  liquor- 
dealers — or  the  responsible  men  among  them — 
desired  a  definite  law  for  the  "regulation  "  and 
protection  of  the  business.       The  conservative 
temperance  people  favored  re  gulation,  restriction 
and  revenue,  and  also  advocated  Local  Option 
and    Sunday-closing.     The   Germans,   forming 
a  very  influential  element  in  Ohio,   manifest«ed 
extreme  sensitiveness  and  stood  ready  to  resent 
at  the  polls  any  serious  interference  with  "  per- 
sonal liberty."    The    State,    though  naturally 
Republican,  was    considered    fickle,    and   the 
problem  of  dealing  judiciously  with  the  delicate 
liquor  question  was  a  most  perplexing  one  for 
the  politicians. 

During  the  administration  of  Governor  Foster 
— one  of  the  shrewdest  of  all  the  Ohio  Re- 
publican leaders — the  policy  of  circumventing 

1  The  editor  is  indebted  to  Mrs.  Mary  A.  Woodbridge  of 
Ravenna,  0.,  and  Oscar  B.  Todhunterof  Cinciimati. 


Constitutional  Prohibition.] 


10^ 


[Constitutional  Prohibition. 


the  Anti-License  provision  of  the  Constitution 
by  the  enactment  of  "  tax  "  laws  at  last  becjuue 
the  settled  policy  of  the  Republican  party.  The 
Pond  Tax  law  was  passed  in  1880,  and  though 
soon  declared  unconstitutional  by  the  State 
Supreme  Court,  was  followed  by  the  Scott  Tax 
law  of  1883.  Meanwhile  the  Re'publicans  ex- 
perimented with  Sunday-closinir  legislation, 
passing  the  Smith  Sunday  bill  only  to  repeal  it 
after  hnding  that  it  was  distasteful  to  the  Ger- 
mans and  the  whale  liquor  element.  During 
the  1883  session  of  the  Legislature  the  chief 
work  before  the  Republican  majority  was  to 
frame  and  pa^s  a  liquor  tax  bill  to  take  the  place 
of  the  unconstitutional  Pond  law.  The  Scott 
bill  (introduced  by  Dr.  Scott,  Representative 
from  Warren  County)  was  accepted  by  the 
party  leaders  after  it  had  obtained  the  full  ap- 
proval of  the  brewers.  At  the  last  preceding 
Gubernatorial  election  (1881)  the  Prohibition 
party  had  polled  the  largest  vote  ever  cast  by  it 
up  to  that  time  in  Ohio — 16,597,  as  against  only 
2.616  in  1880.  The  Prohibitionists  now  made 
no  secret  of  their  hostility  to  the  Scott  bill 
and  demanded  the  submission  of  a  Prohibi- 
tory Amendment.  Both  the  Scott  bill  and 
the  Amendment  pronosition  had  active  sup- 
porters in  the  Legislature,  while  a  strong  ele- 
ment opposed  both.  Finally  a  compromise  was 
effected,  the  Amejdment  advocates  voting  for 
the  Scott  bill  and  the  champions  of  the  Scott 
bill  consenting  to  submission.  This  agreement 
was  not  carried  out,  however,  until  it  was  ar- 
ranged that  two  Amendments  should  be  sub- 
mitted to  the  people  concurrently,  one  provid- 
ing for  license  and  the  other  for  Prohibition,  so 
that  the  liquor  men  might  have  another  oppor- 
tunity to  insert  a  license  clause  in  the  Constitu- 
tion. During  the  campaign  that  followed  the 
License  Amendment  was  familiarly  known  as 
the  1st  Amendment,  and  the  Prohibitory  Amend- 
ment as  the  2d  Amendment.  The  day  for  de- 
ciding whether  license  or  Prohibition  should 
prevail  was  also  the  day  of  the  State  and  legis- 
lative elections.  J.  B.  Foraker  and  George 
Hoadly,  respectively,  were  the  Republican  and 
Democratic  ctmdidates  for  Governor.  Mr.  Fo- 
raker, in  a  speech  delivered  soon  afttr  his  nomi- 
nation, made  the  notable  declaration  that  '  the 
principles  of  regulation  and  taxation  for  which 
it  [the  Republican  party]  declares  are  eternal 
and  will  stand  ;  and  to  these  principles  of  reg- 
ulation and  taxation  of  the  liquor  trafHc.  be  it 
known  of  all  men.  the  Republican  party  is  un- 
alterably committed."  '  Mr.  Hoadly,  who  had 
been  connected  with  the  liquor  interests  as  their 
lawyer,  announced  himself  as  decidedly  for 
license,  and  both  the  Republican  and  Demo- 
cratic parties  were  arrayed  again.st  Prohibition 
throughout  the  contest,  although  the  latter  was 
the  more  demonstrative. 

The  opponents  of  Prohibition  not  only  had 
the  CO  operation  of  the  political  leaders  and  or 
ganizatious  but  commanded  the  services  cf  the 
great  newspapers  of  the  State— the  Cincinnati 
Commercial  Gazette  and  Enquirer,  the  Cleveland 
Leader  and  Plain  Dealer,  etc.,  most  of  them  at- 
tacking Prohibition  with  extreme  bitterness  and 

1  From  a  speech  before  the  Lincoln  Club  of  Cincinnati, 
as  reported  in  the  Cincinnati  Commercial  Gazette,  June 
25,  1883. 


treating  the  arguments  of  its  friends  unfairly, 
unscrupulously  and  contemptuously.  It  was 
impossible  to  obtain  a  hearing  for  the  Prohibi- 
tion cause  in  the  influential  press.  The  liquor 
interests,  although  they  did  not  fight  so  actively 
and  .systematically  against  Prohibition  as  they 
did  in  subsequent  Amendment  contests  in  other 
States,  were  far  more  aggressive  than  they  had 
been  in  either  Iowa  or  Kansas.  The  brewers 
offered  organized  resistance,  under  the  leader- 
ship of  Leo  Ebert  of  Ironton,  and  the  local  or- 
ganizations of  saloon-keepers  exhibited  a  lively 
interest.  Besides,  the  Prohibition  movement 
was  discountenanced  by  many  individuals  who 
professed  devotion  to  the  interests  of  "  true 
temperance."  One  of  the  particularly  discour- 
aging things  was  the  publication  of  a  letter  from 
Rev.  Theodore  L.  Cuyler  D.  D.,  the  well-known 
Eastern  temperance  champion,  in  the  National 
Temperance  Advocate  for  October,  1883,  in 
which  Dr.  Cuyler  wrote: 

"  The  defeat  of  the  Scott  law  would  be  a  disaster  to  our 
cause.  It  is  probably  the  best  law  that  the  present  Consti- 
tution of  Ohio  makes  possible  ;  and  our  friends  ought  not 
to  assume  the  responsibility  of  overthrowing  it.  A  partial 
victory  this  year  m  the  election  of  Foraker  and  the  main- 
tenance of  the  Scott  law  must  strengthen  our  hands  for  a 
further  advance  in  restrictive  legislation.  During  the  Civil 
War  some  of  the  old  and  impracticable  Abolitionists  did 
little  else  than  cavil  at  and  cripple  Abraham  Lincoln  be- 
cause he  did  not  adopt  their  shibboleth  and  pursue  their 
policy.  We  temperance  reformers  must  not  sacrifice  our 
blessed  cause  to  the  unreasonable  demands  of  the  imprac- 
ticables.  If  we  can  hold  the  Scott  redoubt  in  Ohio,  then 
are  our  guns  planted  just  so  much  nearer  the  enemy's 
citadel."  2 

Nevertheless  the  Prohibitionists  made  a  most 
aggressive,  enthusiastic,  thorough  and  hopeful 
campaign  It  was  in  charge  of  the  Woman's 
Christian  Temperance  Union.  Circulars  were 
addressed  to  well-nigh  every  class  of  citizens — 
ministers,  educators,  students,  manufacturers, 
'  railroad  companies  and  their  employees,  etc  , — 
and  abundant  encouragement  and  assistance 
was  volunteered.  There  were  scores  of  able 
speakers  iu  the  field,  including  John  B.  Finch, 
John  P.  St.  John.  George  W.  Bain,  George 
Woodford.  M.  V.  B.  Bennett,  Frances  E.  Wil- 
lard.  Mary  T.  Lathrap  and  Walter  T.  Mills. 
Crowded  meetings  were  held  everywhere,  and 
the  masses  .showed  a  very  cordial  feeling.  The 
prospect  of  victory  seemed  to  grow  brighter  as 
the  campaign  progressed.  The  evidences  of  the 
great  strength  of  Prohibition  sentiment  were 
not  apparent  to  the  politicians  at  the  outset,  but 
they  l)ecame  distinct  in  the  closing  month. 
John  B.  Finch  one  morning  announced  at  Pro- 
hibition headquarters  that  a  political  council  had 
been  held  in  Cincinnati  and  it  had  been  decided 
that  the  Amendment  must  not  carry.  Mr.  Finch 
also  said  that  every  political  device  would  be 
used  to  keep  down  the  vote,  and  exhibited  many 
Democratic  and  Republican  tickets  upon  which 
the  Prohibitory  Amendment  proposition  was 
inaccurately  printed.    In  Hamilton  County  and 

'  Mrs.  Mary  A.  Woodbridge,  commentin|;  on  Dr.  Cnyler's 
letter,  says:  "  '  The  Scott  redoubt'  repealed  the  law  making 
the  sale  of  liquor  over  the  bar,  or  to  be  drunk  on  the 
premises,or  upon  the  Sabbath  day,  statutory  crimes.  It  gave 
us  a  Local  Option  Sabbath,  and  gave  the  liquor-dealer  right 
to  sell  without  filing  an  application  or  securing  a  bond.  "  It 
removed  all  restrictions  and  elevated  the  business  to  a  legal 
plane  with  other  trades.  Its  vaunted  Local  Option  feature 
gave  no  power  to  suppress  the  sale,  only  to  close  places 
when  they  became  unmitigated  nuisances." 


Constitutional  Prohibition.] 


108 


[Constitutional  Prohibition. 


other  counties  all  the  Democratic  ballots  had 
printed  upon  them,  after  the  1st  Amendment 
only  the  word  "  Yes,"  and  after  the  2d  Amend- 
ment ouly  the  word  "No" — a  deliberate  device 
for  securing,  in  behalf  of  license  and  against 
Prohibition  the  support  of  all  Democrats  who 
were  indifferent  on  tlie  liquor  question  or  who 
were  accustomed  to  vote  the  "  straight "  Demo- 
cratic ticket  witliout  critical  inspection.  Other 
unscrupulous  tactics  were  used  by  the  opposi- 
tion, and  the  work  of  the  Prohibitionists  was 
thus  handicapped  in  the  most  effective  manner. 
Notwithstanding  all,  the  vote  for  Prohibition 
was  so  overwhelming,  as  evidenced  by  the  re- 
turns received  up  to  midnight  of  the  day  of  the 
election,  that  there  was  no  reasonable  doubt  in 
any  quarter  of  the  success  of  the  proposition. 
The  tigures  of  the  Central  Committees  of  the 
Republican  and  Democratic  parties  on  ihat 
evening  indicated  a  vote  for  Prohibition  many 
thousands  in  excess  of  that  subsequently  shown 
by  the  ofBcial  returns.  Both  these  Committees, 
in  telegraphic  messages,  reported  30,000  votes 
for  the  Prohiliitory  Amendment  in  Hamilton 
County  ;  but  the  official  canvass  gave  only  8  403 
for  the  Amendment  in  a  total  of  60,761  in  that 
county.  There  were  indisputable  evidences  of 
fraud  in  the  count,  and  the  result  was  that 
though  the  Prohibitory  Amendment  had  a 
majority  of  83,'J14  of  thosL^  voting  on  the  ques- 
tion, it  "lacked  87,467  of  a  majority  of  all  the 
votes  polled  on  St  lU'.  candidates,  and  therefore, 
according  to  the  requirements  of  the  Ohio  Con- 
stitution, failei  of  adoption.  An  effort  was 
made  by  the  Prohibitionists  to  bring  about  a 
recount  of  the  ballots,  but  it  was  urged  that 
the  docket  of  the  Supreme  Court  was  over- 
crowded and  that,  since  the  Court  would  soon 
be  Democratic,  nothing  could  come  of  such  an 
attempt. 

The  outcome  wms,  however,  a  great  moral 
victory  for  the  cause  of  Prohibition,  all  the 
greater  in  view  of  the  ignominious  defeat  of 
the  License  Amendment.  That  proposition 
was  supported  by  the  whole  strength  of  the 
liquor  influence  and  the  managers  of  the  Demo- 
cratic party — the  party  that  carried  Ohio  on  the 
same  day  for  its  State  and  legislative  tickets, 
polling  359,793  votes  for  Hoadly  for  Governor; 
yet  the  License  Amendment  received  only  99,- 
849  votes,  while  193  197  were  cast  against  it, 
making  an  anti-license  majority  of  92,268  of 
those  voting  on  the  license  question,  while  the 
license  programme  lacked  260,807  of  a  Consti- 
tutional majority.  Yet  though  the  people,  by  a 
most  extraordinary  preponderance  of  sentiment, 
showed  their  preference  for  Prohibition  as 
against  license,  every  effort  to  establish  the 
Prohibitory  policy  in  Ohio  has  been  crushed  by 
the  politicians  of  both  the  leading  parties,  and 
the  liquor  legislation  of  the  State  has  been 
shaped,  as  it  was  previously  to  the  election  of 
Oct.  9,  18S3,  in  behalf  of  the  liquor  interests. 

The  following  table  shows  the  vote  by 
counties  for  and  against  the  License  and  Prohib- 
itory Amendments: 

License.  Prohibition. 

Counties.  Yes.         No.  Yes.  No. 

Adams 138        3,150       

Allen 1,003         2,823         3,(567         2,379 

Ashland 889         2,777         2,9G1         2,041 


Counties 


License. 
Yes.         No. 


Prohibition. 

Yes.         No. 


Ashtabula 539 

Athens 806 

Anglaize 627 

Belmont 1,473 

Brown 720 

Butler 2,240 

Carroll 507 

Champaign 976 

Clark 1,749 

Clermont 1,086 

Clinton  809 

Columbiana 1,252 

Coshocton 493 

Crawford 963 

Cuyahoga 2,850 

Darke  1,232 


74 

812 

1,366 

921 

692 

Franklin 3,185 


Defiance . 
Delaware. 

Erie 

Fairfield.. 

Fayette . 


Fulton. 
Gallia. . 
Geauga. 
Greene . 
Guernsey 


624 
248 
324 
800 
654 


Marion 7  74 

Medina  645 

Meigs 577 

Mercer  . .   481 

Miami 1,241 

Monroe  1,014 

Montgomery 4,393 

Morgan  217 

Morrow 877 

Muskingum 1,114 


563 
387 
611 
491 
943 
564 
483 
Preble  1,189 


Noble 
Ottawa . . . 
Paulding. 
Perry 
Pickaway 

Pike 

Portage 


Putnam 
Richland . 

Ross 

Sandusky 
Scioto  .. . 
Seneca. .. 
Shelby  .. 

Stark 1,681 

Summit     1,188 

Trumbull 1,140 


358 
965 
1,673 
960 
613 
757 


Tuscarawas . 

Union   

Van  Wert... 

Vinton 

Warren 

Washington. 

Wayne 

Williams. . .. 

Wood 

Wyandot 


930 
881 
985 
333 
1,192 
866 
975 
501 
940 
771 


1,241 
3,420 
4,467 
7,408 

'  4.497 

646 

951 

3,150 


5,158 

3,051 

3..538 

15,341 


4,134 
2,673 


9,037 

" "  '4.34 

1,77'2 


4,925 
2,967 
1,506 
2,446 


Hamilton 14,780        34,375 

Hancock 51 1        

Hardin 812 

Harrison 574 

Henry 679 

Highland 715 

Hocking 548 

Holmes 674 

Huron 543 

Jackson 439 

Jefl^^erson 1,286 

Knox 1,144 

Lake 448 

Lawrence  1,268 

Licking 1,248 

Logan 1,354 

Lorain ...  615 

Lucas 3,080 

Madison 492 

Mahoning 2,007 


6,748 

*  2,406 

3,028 

'  3,194 
3,374 

""572 
8,999 
1,004 
4,431 
2,234 
4,761 

'  2,604 
3,001 
2,358 

13,459 

'  2.075 
6,920 


1,108 
3,913 
2,663 
1,343 

'  3,337 

'  2,648 

'  3,821 

2,866 


3,068 
4,391 

'  3,832 
2,832 
2,086 
2,008 
2,336 
3,378 


2,351 


6,699 
4,099 
1,386 
6,154 
3,519 
1,970 
2,725 
3,503 
5,094 
3,941 
3,.530 
6,651 
3,351 
2,784 
12,9.54 
3,555 
2,232 
4,070 
1,860 
3,193 
3,327 
6,203 
2,819 
2,721 
2,535 
4,374 
4,303 
8,403 
3,797 
3,933 
3,387 
2,199 
3,966 
2,311 
1,763 
4,181 
3,372 
4,455 
3,803 
2,468 
2,900 
4,057 
4,051 
5,007 
4,914 
2,526 
4,502 
2,820 
2,948 
2,853 
1,732 
4,331 
1,789 
6,443 
2,649 
3,474 
5,.534 
2,753 
1,345 
3,311 
3,272 
2,1.57 
1,881 
3,373 
2,167 
2,715 
4,433 
3,765 
2,619 
2,104 
3,789 
2,201 
7,791 
5,004 
5,333 
4,421 
3,578 
3,195 
1,434 
2,759 
3,935 
5,113 
3,264 
4,279 
2,674 


570 
1,291 
3,798 
3,785 


4,949 

'  i',636 
3,199 


2,505 

1,481 

3,358 

16,350 

'  3,762 
1,392 


8,455 

"316 
375 


41,437 

'  2,673 

814 

1,083 

1,163 


3,406 

'  i',i96 
1,940 


2,388 
2,731 

624 
3,738 

609 
3,801 
1,098 
2,458 

'  '2,647 
2,536 
2,126 

12,878 
1,323 
3,016 


726 
2,225 

2,232 
1,013 

"  2,84i 

"2,463 


2,816 
2,568 


2,643 
2,070 

'  i',763 
1,710 
1,679 
1,911 
2,351 
2,652 


1,802 


240,975 


Totals 99,849      192,117      32.3,189 

Majorities 92,268        82,214 

Whole  vote  on  State  officers i21,310 

Necessary  to  adopt  either  Amendment 360,656 


Constitutional  Prohibition.] 


109 


[Constitutional  Prohibition. 


Maine. 

The  friends  of  the  Maine  law  have  always 
had  difficulty  in  persuading  political  leaders  to 
make  certain  enforcement  provisions  of  the 
statute  thorouij;hly  radical.  After  30  years  of 
statutory  Pi-ohibition  in  Maine,  the  Prohibition- 
ists were  still  pleadiui?  for  important  additions. 
The  politicians  replied  that  there  was  already  as 
much  law  as  public  sentiment  would  sustain. 
"Very  well,"  answered  the  Prohibitionists, 
"  Let  us  test  public  sentiment  by  submitting  to 
the  people  a  Constitutional  Amendment."  Af- 
ter much  hesitation  the  political  leaders  assented, 
and  at  the  legislative  session  of  1884  (a  concur- 
rent vote  of  Two-thirds  being  required)  the  two 
branches  submitted  the  Amendment,  the  vote 
standing  in  the  Senate  21  yeas  to  1  nay  (a  De- 
mocrat), and  in  the  House  91  yeas  (five  of  them 
being  Democrats)  to  30  nays  (23  Democrats  and 
7  Republicans).  The  resolve  was  approved  by 
the  Governor  on  Feb.  21,  and  the  popular  vote 
was  taken  at  the  regular  State  election  in  Sep- 
tember. As  originally  framed,  the  Amendment 
contained  the  words,  "The  Legislatiire  shall 
enact  laws,"  etc.  The  politicians,  before  sub- 
mitting the  propo.sition,  voted  to  substitute  the 
word  "  may  "  for  "  shall,"  but  "  shall "  was  re- 
stored after  a  long  wrangle.  A  spirited  cam- 
paign was  waged.  The  Woman's  Christian 
Temperance  Union  and  Good  Templars  did  ac- 
tive work.  John  B.  Finch  made  speeches,  as 
did  Col.  R.  S.  Chevcs  of  Kentucky,  Mr.  Mann 
of  Alabama,  A.  A  Phelps  of  New  York,  Mr. 
Munson,  Grand  "Worthy  Chief  Templar  of 
Maine,  United  States  Senator  Frye,  Congress- 
man Dinghy,  Miss  Frances  E.  Willard,  Mrs.  L. 
M.  N.  Stevens,  Mrs.  Mary  A  Woodbrldue.  Mrs. 
Pearson  of  England,  Emily  Pitt  Stevens  of  Cali- 
fornia and  many  others  The  anti-Prohibition- 
ists held  no  public  meetings,  but  strove  in  va- 
rious ways  to  defeat  the  Amendment.  The 
Democratic  press  of  the  State  opposed  it,  and 
the  Republican  newspapers  with  but  few  excep- 
tions discouraged  the  movement  quietly,  not 
daring  to  offer  open  opposition.  Comparatively 
little  help  came  to  the  Prohibitionists  from  out- 
side the  State  in  the  way  of  pecuniary  contri- 
butions, but  there  were  some  donations:  Dr  R. 
H.  McDonald  of  San  Francisco  sent  a  check 
for  5;500.  Lewiston  was  the  only  city  giving  a 
negative  majority. 

The  election  was  held  while  the  exciting 
Blaine-Cleveland  Presidential  contest  was  at  its 
height.  Persistent  efforts  had  been  made  by 
the  friends  of  Prohibition  throughout  the  coun- 
try to  induce  the  Republican  and  Democratic 
parties  and  their  leading  representatives  to  con- 
sider and  discuss  the  Prohibition  issue  accord- 
ing to  its  merits,  and  Mr.  Cleveland,  the  Demo- 
cratic candidate,  had  inserted  in  his-  letter  of 
acceptance  a  paragraph  opposing  Prohibitory 
laws.  Mr.  Blaine  had  not,  however,  committed 
himself.  Since  he  was  a  citizen  of  Maine  his 
action  upon  the  Constitutional  Amendment 
then  pending  was  awaited  with  much  curiosity. 
At  the  election  in  September  he  went  to  the 
polls  in  tlie  city  of  Augusta,  voted  for  the 
Republican  candidates,  and,  although  requested 
by  the  ladies  to  vote  also  for  the  Amendment, 
declined  to  do  so,  and  ignored  that  measure. 
In  an  address  made  that  evening  he  said  : 


"  The  issue  of  a  temperance  Amendment  to  the  Con- 
stitution has  been  very  properly  and  very  rigidly  separated 
from  the  political  contest  of  the  State  to-day.  Many 
Democrats  voted  for  it  and  some  Republicans  voted 
against  it.  The  Republican  party,  by  the  desire  of  many 
leading  temperance  men,  took  no  action  as  a  party  on  the 
Amendment.  For  myself,  I  decided  not  to  vote  at  all  on 
the  question.  I  tooli  this  position  because  I  am  chosen  by 
the  Republican  party  as  the  representative  of  national 
issues,  and  by  no  act  of  mine  shall  any  question  be 
obtruded  into  the  national  campaign  which  belongs 
properly  to  the  domain  of  State  politics.  Certain  advo- 
cates of  Prohibition  and  certain  opponents  of  Prohibition 
are  each  seeking  lo  drag  this  issue  into  the  national 
canvass,  and  thus  tending  to  exclude  from  popular  con- 
sideration questions  which  press  for  national  decision. 
If  there  be  any  question  that  belongs  solely  to  the  police 
power  of  the  State  it  is  the  control  of  the  liquor  trattic, 
and  wise  men  will  not  neglect  national  issues  in  the  year 
of  the  national  contest.  The  judicious  friends  of  Pro- 
tective tariff,  which  is  the  practical  issue  of  the  campaign, 
will  not  divert  their  votes  to  the  question  of  Prohibition, 
which  is  not  a  practical  issue  in  a  national  campaign." 

The  vote  by  counties  stood  as  follows: 


Prohibition. 

Counties.  Yes.  No. 

Androscoggin .  4,486  2,438 

Aroostook 3,899  782 

Cumberland...  0,247  3,856 

Franklin 2,.571  623 

Hancock 3,047  806 

Kennebec 7,108  2,175 

Knox 3,049  755 

Lincoln 2,031  .586 

Oxford 4,002  1,718 

Penobscot 7,380  3,078 


Prohibition. 


COITNTIES.  Yes. 

Piscataquis 2,212 

Sagadahoc 2,385 

Somerset 4,191 

M'aldo 3,492 

Washington...  3,755 

York.... 7,208 


No. 

350 

741 
1,227 
1,108 

812 
2,750 


Totals 70,783  23,811 

Majority . . .    40,972 


Neal  Dow. 


South  Dakota. 


The  vote  on  Constitutional  Prohibition  in 
South  Dakota  in  1885,  being  simply  experimen- 
tal (since  no  part  of  Dakota  Territory  had  at 
that  time  been  admitted  into  the  Union  of 
States,  and  there  was  no  prospect  of  early  ad 
mission),  excited  little  interest.  No  general 
campaign  was  made,  and  the  indifference  of  the 
public  was  shown  by  the  very  small  total  vote 
—less  than  31,000. 

Rhode  Island. 

Rhode  Island  is  the  only  State  in  which  Con- 
stitutional Prohibition  has  been  repealed  ;  she 
adopted  a  Prohibitory  Amendment  April  7, 
1886,  by  more  than  a  three-fifths  popular  vote, 
and  annulled  it  June  20,  1889,  also  by  moif  than 
three-fifths.  The  circumstances  leading  to  the 
repeal  are  presented  in  the  proper  place.  (See 
pp.  124-6.1 

Long  before  Constitutional  Prohibition  was 
agitated,  Rhode  Island  had  enacted  and  re- 
scinded Prohibitory  statutes.  In  1852  a  Pro- 
hibitory law  was  passed  by  a  Democratic  Leg 
islature,  which  was  declared  unconstitutional 
in  1853,  re-enacted  by  the  "Know-Nothings" 
in  1855  and  repealed  by  the  Republicans  in 
1863.  Again  in  1874.  after  a  spirited  fight. 
Prohibition  was  enacted  by  statute,  and  again 
in  1875  the  liquor  politicians  were  strong  enough 
to  repeal  it.  These  successive  victories  and  de- 
feats showed  the  strength  of  the  Prohibitory 
sentiment,  but  demonstrated  the  superior 
strength  of  unscrupulous  partisan  managers. 
Yet  It  was  apparent  that  the  majority  of  the 
dominant  party  would  have  sustained  the 
Prohibition  principle  if  left  untrammeled  by 
the  liquor  leaders  ;  for  in  1875,  on  the  direct 


Constitutional  Prohibition.] 


110 


[Constitutional  Prohibition. 


issue  of  the  repeal  of  the  Proliibition  law.  the 
Guoernatorial  vote  stood:  Independent-Prohi- 
bition candidate,  8.724 ;  Republican  (liquor) 
candidate,  8,368  ;  Democratic  (neutral)  candi- 
date, 5,166.  After  the  success  of  Constitutional 
Prohibition  in  Kansas,  the  friends  of  Prohibition 
in  Rhode  Island  abandoned  their  efforts  to 
re-enact  the  old  ,«tatute,  and  united  in  behalf  of 
an  Amendment  to  Ihe  Constitution.  In  1881, 
1883  and  1883  they  petitioned  the  Legislature, 
but  were  unable  to  secure  even  a  favorable 
report  from  the  Legislative  Committee.  After 
the  adjournment  of  the  Legislature  of  1883  the 
Woman's  Christian  Temperance  Union  began  a 
vigorous  campaign  for  .submission,  and  large 
meetings  were  held,  addressed  by  Mrs.  Mary  A. 
Livcrmore,  Mrs.  J.  Ellen  Fo.ster,  John  P. 
St.  John,  George  W.  Bain  and  John  B.  Finch. 
In  1884  a  petition  for  submission  signed  by 
11,000  citizens  was  presented  to  the  Legi-slature, 
and  on  March  25  a  Submission  resolution  passed 
the  House  of  Representatives  by  53  yeas  to  8 
nays ;  it  was  approved  by  the  Senate  unani- 
mously. The  endorsement  of  the  next  Legis- 
lature (to  be  chosen  in  April,  1884)  was 
required  before  the  Amendment  could  go  to 
the  people.  It  was  now  discovered  that  there 
had  been  a  technical  defect  in  the  proceedings 
already  taken,  and  the  work  had  to  be  done 
anew.  Despite  the  irritations  occasioned  by 
the  St.  John  campaign,  the  Legislature  of  1885 
voted  unanimously  for  submission,  and  the 
Legislature  of  1886  (March  10)  did  the  same. 

Less  than  four  weeks'  time  was  allowed  for 
the  campaign.  At  the  start  very  few  of  the 
Prohibitionists  hoped  for  victory.  The  obsta- 
cles seemed  to  be  insurmountable.  Three-fifths 
of  all  the  votes  cast  upon  the  question  were 
required  for  the  adoption  of  the  article.  Rhode 
Island  was  then  regarded  as  one  of  the  most 
conservative  States  of  the  Union,  the  right  of 
suffrage  being  limited  by  a  property  qualifica- 
tion. The  State  Census  of  1885  showed  that  58 
per  cent,  of  the  population  was  embraced  within 
four  cities,  while  in  those  cities  30  percent,  of 
the  people  were  of  foreign  birth;  and  the  pro- 
portion of  the  inhabitants  engaged  in  manufac- 
turing pursuits  was  very  large.  Rhode  Island 
was  also,  at  that  time,  one  of  the  strongest  of 
Republican  States,  and  it  was  to  be  expected 
that  Republican  resentment  against  the  Prohi- 
bitionists, stimulated  by  bitter  memories  of  the 
St.  John  campaign,  would  be  practically  mani- 
fested in  Rhode  Island,  as  it  had  been  in  the 
New  York  town  meetings  that  spring.  Indeed, 
the  management  of  the  Republican  party  of  the 
State  was  thoroughly  under  the  control  of  the 
liquor  interests. 

The  opponents  of  Prohibition  looked  with 
idle  curiosity  and  amusement  upon  the  efforts 
of  the  Amendment's  friends.  They  considered 
the  prospects  of  a  Prohibition  majority  so  slight 
as  to  require  no  active  attention,  and  the  un- 
commonly interesting  struggle  for  important 
political  offices  absorbed  their  energies.  The 
position  of  Attorney-General  is  a  highly  influ- 
ential one  in  Rhode  Island,  and  the  person  occu- 
pying it  is  directly  responsible  for  the  adminis 
tration  of  the  liquor  laws.  Attorney-General 
Colt  had  been  entirely  subservient  to  the  rum- 
sellers,    and  damaging  revelations    had   been 


made  public  concerning  the  conduct  of  his 
office.  His  re-election  was  desired  by  the  saloon 
element,  which  had  forced  his  renoraination  in 
the  Republican  Convention.  The  affairs  of 
practical  politics  thus  engaged  the  liquor  men, 
and  they  ignored  the  Prohibitory  Amendment. 
Although  a  considerable  sum  of  money  had 
been  provided  for  opposing  the  Amendment — 
about  $10.000— it  was  either  not  expended  at  all 
or  was  not  used  effectively. 

At  this  time  Rhode  Island  was  under  a  low 
license  law,  so  moderate  in  its  provisions  that 
the  most  sensitive  advocates  of  the  •  rights  "  of 
the  liquor  traffic  could  have  found  little  fault 
with  it.  Yet  the  liquor-dealers  were  not  con- 
tent with  these  easy  conditions ;  they  insisted 
on  nullifying  the  mild  restrictions  of  tlie  stat- 
utes, they  compelled  the  officials  to  disregard 
the  law  and  they  required  the  dominant  party 
lo  accept  their  servants  as  candidates  for  office. 
The  disgraceful  situation  was  v.ell  known  to  the 
people  of  the  State;  the  notorious  violations  of 
one  of  the  most  moderate  liquor  laws  of  the 
covmtry  had  been  going  on  for  years;  it  was  un- 
derstood to  be  impofsible  to  punish  even  the 
most  flagrant  olTen.'es  in  the  city  of  Provi- 
dence, and  the  public  disgust  was  intensified  by 
the  exposures  in  the  Attorney-General's  office. 
A  very  large  number  of  people  not  entirely  in 
sympathy  with  the  Prohibition  policy  were 
therefore  ready  to  record  their  protest  against 
the  existing  conditions,  and  the  Prohibitory 
Amendment  provided  them  an  immediate  op- 
portunity. The  belief  that  there  was  no  chance 
for  the  Amendment's  adoption  smoothed  the 
way  for  these  conservative  individuals.  To 
understand  the  triumph  of  Prohibition  in 
Rhode  Island  in  1880  this  explanation  must  be 
given  prominent  recognition. 

The  Prohibition  canvass  was  very  dexterously 
man;iged.  No  important  help  was  received 
from  the  press,  but  on  the  other  band  the  lead- 
ing newspapers  did  rot  offer  material  opposition. 
The  Providence  Journal,  at  that  time  the  lead- 
ing Republican  daily  and  afterwards  the  most 
powerful  antagonist  of  Constitutional  Prohibi- 
tion in  Rhode  Island,  did  not  mention  the  sub- 
ject \mtil  just  before  the  election,  when  it  print- 
ed a  few  articles  indirectly  opposing  the  Amend- 
ment. The  Providence  Telegram  (Democratic 
daily)  mildly  opposed  it.  The  campaign  was 
under  the  direction  of  two  organizations,  the 
State  Woman's  Christian  Temperance  Union, 
headed  by  Mr.s.  E.  S.  Burlingame,  and  an  or- 
ganization composed  of  representatives  of  the 
Rhode  Island  Temperance  Union,  Good  Tem- 
plars and  other  societies,  led  by  Rev.  H.  W. 
Conant.  Effective  literature  was  freely  used, 
there  were  many  able  speakers  and  the  clergy 
gave  active  assistance  A  striking  feature  was 
the  organization  of  Blue  Ribbon  clubs,  compos- 
ed of  young  men  who  donned  the  blue  ribbon 
and  .sought  to  awaken  general  interest.  This 
movement  was  inaugurated  by  Senator  Colquitt. 

The  returns  showed  not  only  the  triumph  of 
the  Amendment  but  the  election  for  Attorney- 
General  of  Edwin  Metcalf,  candidate  of  the 
Prohibition  party  (endorsed  by  the  Democrats) 
over  Samuel  P.  Colt,  the  Republican  liquor 
nominee,  by  14,089  to  12,445,  although  on  Gov- 
ernor the  Republicans  had  a  majority  of  1,805 


Constitutional  Prohibition.]  Ill  [Constitutional  Prohibition. 


over  both  Prohibitionists  and  Democrats.  The 
following  table  gives  the  vote  by  counties  on  the 
Constitutional  Amendment : 

Prohibition. 
Counties,  Yes.      No. 

Bristol "9''       5T5 

Newport 1.557       917 

Providence 9,487    0,503 

Washington 2,087       395 

Totals 15,113    9,230 

Majority 5,883 

Majority  in  excess  of  throe-fif t  lis       507 

James  W.  Williams. 

f 

CAMPAIGNS  OF  1887-9. 

Michigan.  '• 

After  the  last  vestiges  of  the  Prohibitory  leg- 
i.slation  enacted  in  Michigan  before  the  war  hud 
been  swept  away  and  the  Tax  law  bad  been  in- 
stituted, the  temperance  people  made  some 
feeble  efforts  to  restore  tbe  old  statute.  They 
met  detinite  defeat  in  the  Legislature  of  1879, 
the  House  of  Representatives  voting  down  the 
Mosher  Prohibitory  bill  by  50  to  37.  (The 
House  contained  66  Republicans,  19  Democrats 
and  13  Labor  men,  and  there  were  two  vacan- 
cies.) In  1881  (the  Senate  being  Republican 
by  30  to  2  and  the  House  by  86  to  14),  more 
than  100.000  citizens  petitioned  for  the  submis- 
sion of  a  Prohibitory  Amendment.  On  Feb. 
23,  1881,  during  the  session  of  the  Legislature, 
a  Republican  State  Convention  met  at  Lansing 
and  in  its  platform  placed  the  following  : 

'■'•  Resolved,  That  when  tlie  people  by  petition  manifest 
a  desire  to  alter  or  amend  the  Constitntion  their  wishes 
shonld  receive  that  consideration  to  which  they  are  enti- 
tled as  coming  from  the  source  of  all  political  power." 

But  submission  was  defeated  in  the  House  by 
a  vote  of  61  yeas  to  33  nays — less  than  the  nec- 
essary two-thirds  voting  in  the  afQrmative.  The 
Republican  State  Convention  of  1882  (Aug.  30) 
reaffirmed  the  submission  pleilge  but  the  Leg- 
islatures of  1883  and  1885  failed  to  submit. 
Aug.  26,  1886,  the  Republican  State  Convention 
ag  tin  pledged  submission,  and  the  Legislature 
of  1887,  tiiough  not  expected  or  requested  to 
do  so,  finally  redeemed  the  pledge.  -  This 
action  was  due  to  the  aggression  of  the  Prohibi- 
tion party.  Previously  to  1881  the  party  was 
very  feeble  in  Michigan,  having  polled  only  942 
votes  for  President  in  1880.  But  in  1881  it  sud- 
denly became  a  serious  factor,  polling  12,774 
votes  at  the  comparatively  unimportant  spring 
election.  For  the  next  four  years  its  votes  were : 
1882.  5,851;  1883,  13,950;  1884  (Presidents 
18,403;  1885,  14,708.  The  repeated  failure  of 
the  Republicans  to  redeem  their  submission 
pledge  made  the  party  Prohibitionists  stronger 
than  ever  in  1886 ;  and   Samuel  Dickie,   their 

■  The  editor  is  indebted  to  Samuel  Dickie. 

-  The  work  of  submission  was  not  accomplished,  how- 
ever, without  a  lively  contest.  In  the  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives the  Submission  resolution  went  through  (Jan. 
13)  with  little  opposition,  by  a  vote  of  74  yeas  to  21  nays 
(ten  Democrats  voting  in  the  affirmative  and  only  one 
Republican  voting  in  the  negative).  In  the  Senate  22 
votes  were  needed,  and  23  of  the  Senators  were  Repub- 
licans. But  two  of  the  Republican  Senators  (Seymour 
and,  Ilnbbell)  rebelled,  and  before  the  resolution  could  be 
carried  it  was  necessary  for  the  Republican  leaders  to 
oust  a  Democrat  and  swear  in  a  new  Republican  Senator. 
The  Senate  voted  to  submit  on  Jan.  27:  .---oas,  22  (all  Re- 
publicans); nays,  10  (8  Democrats  and  2  Republicans). 


candidate  for  Governor  in  that  year,  made  a 
very  energetic  canvass  and  polled  25,179  votes. 
Previously  to  1881  very   few   States  had  given 
Republican   pluralities  as  large  as   Michigan's  ; 
and   in   1880   Roscoe   Coukling,  in   reply  to  a 
statement  that  Michigan  would  rally  nobly  for 
a  certain  candidate  for  the  Republican  Presi- 
dential nomination,    had   sneeringly  remarked, 
*'  Anybody  can  carry  Michigan  !"     But  there 
was  a  strong  Greenback  element  in  the  State, 
which,  by  fusion  with  the  Democrats,  actually 
defeated   the  Republican   party  in   1882,  1883 
and  1885,  and  came  within  about  3,300  of  wrest- 
ing the   Electoral  vote  from  Blaine  in   1884. 
With  an  aggressive  Prohibition  party  in  the 
field,  controlling  25,000  votes,  the  Republicans 
could  not  afford  to  repudiate  their  submission 
pledge  for  a  fourth  time,    and  so  the  Legisla- 
ture of  1887  decided  to  submit  the  Amendment. 
The  friends  of  Prohibition  were  not  prepared 
for  the  contest,   but  they  tock  prompt  action. 
On  Feb.  11  a  mass  convention  was  held  at  De- 
troit and  a  State    Amendment  Committee  was 
organized,   composed    of   10    Republicans,   10 
Democrats  and  10  Prohibitionists.     On  Feb.  16 
Prof.  Samuel  Dickie  was  chosen  Ciiairman  of 
this  Committee.     The  campaign  was  of  46  days' 
duration      Some  liberal  contributions  of  money 
were  made,  and  a  grent  number  of  prominent 
speakers  from  many  States  gave  their  services. 
The  Good  Templars,  Sons  of  Temperance  and 
other  organizations  were  very  active,  and  the 
State  Woman's  Christian  Temperance  Union, 
under  the  management  of  Mrs.  Mary  T.    La- 
thrap,  (President)  and  Mrs.  Emma  A.  Wheeler 
(Secretary)  was  an  important  factor.     No  ma- 
terial help  was  received  from  the  political  lead- 
ers of  the  old  parties,  and  the  failure  of  Gover- 
nor Luce  to  give  his  influence  for  the  Amend- 
ment was  especially  disappointing,  since  the 
Governor  was  known  as  a  life-long  temperance 
man,  and  the  Farmers'  Alliance,  with  which  he 
had  been  identitied,  had  adopted  energetic  Pro- 
hibition resolutions.    Congressmen  Allen  and 
Cutcheon  were  probably  the  most  prominent 
public  men  openly  supporting  the  cause.   Every 
d  lily  newspaper  in  the  State  was  hostile  or  silent. 
A  conspicuous  effort  was  made  to  command  the 
formal   antagonism    of  conservative  men    not 
personally  identified  with  the  liquor  traffic,  and 
two  distinguished  gentlemen,  D.  Bethune  Duf- 
field  and  Prof.    Kent,   made  speeches  against 
the  Amendment.  Their  arguments  were  found- 
ed on  the  claim  that  the  High  License  ( or  tax) 
sy.stem  then  prevailing  in  Michigan  was  prefer- 
able to  Prohibitory   law ;  and   the  impression 
made  upon   the  masses  of  the  people  by  their 
pleas  was  so  effective  that  Miss  Willard  after- 
wards declared  that  the  Michigan  Amendment 
had    "died  of  High  License."    Mr.    Duffleld 
was  met  in  debate,  however,  by  John  B.  Finch, 
who  made  a  very  able  and  eloquent  reply,  sup- 
ported by  a    great  array   of  testimony.     The 
liquor-.sellers  themselves  put  no  speakers  in  the 
field,  but  they  operated  in  secret  ways,  receiv- 
ing the  co-operation  of  the  traflic  in  other  States, 
the  sum    of  $5  000  being  contributed  by  the 
United  States  Brewers'  Association. 

At  the  election  frauds  were  perpetrated  sys- 
tematically by  the  liquor  men,  especially  in 
Det;  jit  and  Gogebic  County.    It  was  proved  by 


Constitutional  Prohibition.] 


112 


[Constitutional  Prohibition. 


what  the  Detroit  Free  Press  called  "  shoals  of 
affidavits  "  that  the  election  iu  Detroit  was  a 
mere  farce ;  in  one  precinct  from  which  only 
nine  votes  for  the  Amendment  were  returned, 
more  than  70  men  made  affidavit  that  they  liad 
voted  for  it.  Gogebic  County  was  created  by 
tlie  Legislature  of  1887  out  of  Ontonagon 
County,  wljich  in  November,  1886,  cast  only 
1,589  votes.  Yet  this  new  county,  at  the  Amend- 
ment election,  returned  2,527  votes,  of  which 
2  341  were  against  Prohibition.  The  evidences 
of  fraud  were  duly  presented,  in  detail,  to  the 
Legislature,  which  was  still  in  session,  but  that 
body  refused  to  appoint  an  investigating  com- 
mittee. 

The  following  is  the  vote  on  the  Prohibitory 
Amendment  by  couniies  : 


Prohibition. 

Counties.  Yes.  No. 

Alcona  331  3(51 

Alger 56  170 

Allegan  4,040  2,728 

Alpena 1,003  l,4ti3 

Antrim 1,094  (i.57 

Arenac 302  480 

Baraga  151  371 

Barry 3,099  1,933 

Bay 2,4.58  5,078 

Benzie 093  213 

Berrien 4,112  4,0.52 

Branch 4,334  1,091 

Calhoun 5,458  3,424 

Cass         2,808  1,701 

Charlevoix 1,295  450 

Cheboygan 753  973 

Chippewa 040  .524 

Clare 682  508 

Clinton 3,389  2,.583 

Crawford 219  223 

Delta  222  1,347 

Eaton  5,318  2,088 

Emmet 907  531 

Genesee 4,709  3,190 

Gladwin 225  188 

Gogebic 180  2,341 

Grand  Traverse  1,355  815 

Gratiot 3,048  1,007 

Hillsdale 5,200  1,873 

Houghton 1,100  2,084 

Huron  ... 1,090  2,204 

Ingham 5,47  7  2,048 

Ionia 4,840  2,095 

Iosco 1,187  1,0.58 

Iron   129  720 

Isabella 2,175  840 

Isle  Koyal No  returns 

Jackson 5,220  4,302 

Kalamazoo....  4,215  3,390 

Kalka.ska 018  283 

Kent 0,042  10,907 

Keweenaw 1.53  28f 

Lake 1,008  570 

Lapeer 2,847  2,030 


Prohibition. 


Counties.  Yes. 

Leelanaw 562 

Lenawee 5,771 

Livingston 2,949 

Luce 149 

Mackinac 392 

Macomb 1,719 

Manistee 1,527 

Manitou 18 

Marquette 1,47'5 

Mason 1,413 

Mecosta 2,459 

Menominee  . . .  1,242 

Midland 1,320 

Missaukee  418 

Monroe 2,121 

Montcalm  ....  4,031 

Montmorency..  168 

Muskegon 2,810 

Newaygo .....  2,309 

Oakland 4,435 

Oceana  2,053 

Ogemaw  359 

Ontonagon 64 

Osceola     1,686 

Oscoda  178 

Otsego 572 

Ottawa 2,829 

Presque  Isle ...  67 

Roscommon.,.  100 

Saginaw ..  3,181 

Sanilac 2,161 


Schoolcraft . 
Shiawassee. . , 


384 
3,934 


St.  Clair  2,909 


St.  Joseph     .   .  3,321 

Tuscola 3,.523 

Van  Buren 5,111 

Washtenaw....  4,110 

Wayne 5,860  28,109 

Wexford 1,410       773 


No. 

604 

4,784 

2,017 

188 

5.57 

4,279 

1,799 

124 

3,013 

1,094 

1,454 

2,601 

691 

3.58 

3,757 

2,032 

103 

3,882 

1,273 

4,687 

731 

475 

286 

750 

132 

257 

3,043 

748 

174 

9,033 

2,458 

554 

2,241 

5,875 

2,150 

2  222 

L549 

4,099 


Totals 178,630  184,281 

Majority 5,545 


Texas. ^ 

In  the  Amendment  contest  in  Texas,  more 
than  in  any  other  State,  North  or  South,  the 
political  leaders  engaged  iu  a  general  discussion 
of  the  question,  and  openly  took  sides  upon  it. 
The  refusal  of  the  Prohibition  managers  to 
accept  offers  of  speakers  from  the  North,  the 
publication  of  Jefferson  Davis's  letter  again.st 
Prohibition,  the  successful  efl'orts  of  the  liquor 
advocates  to  control  the  negro  vote  and  the 
heavy  rural  majorities  in  opposition  to  the 
Amendment,  were  other  unique  features. 

To  satisfy  the  temperance  people,  a  clause 
guaranteeing  Local  Option  was  placed  in  the 
Texas  Constitution  in  1875.      For  a  number  of 

>  The  editor  is  indebted  to  J.  B.  Cranfill  of  Waco,  Tex. 


years  Local  Option  work  absorbed  the  energies 
of  the  saloon's  opponents,  but  the  weakness  of 
this  method  was  finally  recognized,  and  from 
1831  to  1887  the  Legislature  was  repeatedly 
petitione  i  to  submit  a  Prohibitory  Constitu- 
tional Amendment.  Submission,  when  ob- 
tained, was  due  to  the  organization  and  activity 
of  the  Prohibition  party  Until  1880  there  had 
been  no  separate  party  movement  by  the 
Prohibitionists,  although  3  534  votes  had  been 
secured  for  St.  Joiin  in  Te.vas  without 
organization.  In  1886  the  Democrats  refused 
to  pledge  the  submis.sion  of  an  Amendment.  A 
Proliibiticn  Convention  was  then  held,  a  State 
ticket  was  nominated  with  E  L  Dohoney  as 
the  candidate  for  Governor,  and  19,186  votes 
were  polled  for  Mr.  Dohcmey.  The  Legislature 
of  1887  promptly  voted  to  submit,  the  House  of 
Representatives  passing  the  Submission  reso- 
lution by  80  yeas  to  21  nays,  and  the  Senate 
concurring  (Feb.  25)  by  22  yeas  to  8  nays. 
This  Legislature  was  overwhelmingly  Demo- 
cratic—unanimou.'^ly  so  in  the  Senate"  while  the 
House  of  Kepresentatives  contained  only  six 
opposition  members  in  a  total  of  1G9. 

In  the  campaign,  for  which  preparations  were 
promptly  made,  Rev.  B.  H.  Carroll,  D.D.,  was 
Chairman  of  the  Prohibi:lon  Executive  Com- 
mittee, and  a  fund  of  $15,000  was  raised  in  the 
State,  which  was  increased  by  contributions 
from  the  North — considerable  sums  being  sub- 
scribed by  readers  of  the  Voice.  The  liquor 
element  showed  an  aggressive  disposition  from 
the  start,  and  with  the  approval  of  some  of  the 
chief  Democratic  politicians — notably  Con- 
gressman Roger  Q.  Mills,  Lieutenant-Governor 
Barnett  Gibbs,  and  Speaker  Pendleton  of  the 
Texas  House  of  Representatives— announced 
that  the  anti-Prohibition  fight  would  be 
essentially  a  Democratic  party  fight.  These  rum 
champions,  at  the  outset,  issued  a  curious  call 
for  a  State  meeting,  in  which  they  ventured  to 
.solicit  the  attendance,  among  other  lovers  of  the 
liquor-saloons,  of  "  all  who  have  not  yet  lost 
faith  in  the  church,  the  home  and  the  school ; 
patriots  who  revere  the  grandeur  of  our  great 
State;  all  who  believe  the  people  of  Texas  are  a 
religious  people:  all  Christian  people."  But  the 
singular  inappropriateness  of  waging  a  pro- 
liquor  crusade  on  the  basis  of  religion  and 
morality  was  soon  perceived,  and  it  was  decided 
to  abandon  sentimental  professions  and  appeal 
to  Democratic  partisan  prejudices.  This 
a,ssump!ion  that  the  party  was  fundamentally  a 
whiskey  party  aroused  the  resentment  of  many 
prominent  Democratic  lenders,  wh'ch  was  all 
the  stronger  since  the  last  Democratic  State 
platform  had  declared  that  "  the  views  of  any 
citizen  upon  the  question  of  Local  Option" 
should  not  "interfere  with  his  standing  in  the 
Democratic  party."  United  States  Senator 
John  H.  Reagan,  ex  Senator  S.  B.  Maxey, 
Congressmen  Culberson  and  Lanham,  ex- 
Congressman  Herndon  and  others  pronounced 
for  the  Amendment.  "  In  every  community," 
wrote  Senator  Reagan,  "  we  find  men,  once 
honored  and  respected,  reduced  to  poverty, 
wretchedness,  and  dishonor,  spending  their 
money  and  time  in  drinking  saloons,  wives 
weighed  down  with  grief  and  .sorrow  and  want, 
and  heartbroken  and  helpless  children  growing 


Constitutional  Prohibition.] 


113 


[Constitutional  Prohibition. 


up  in  ignorance,  bes^gary  and  vice,  because 
husbands  and  fathers  have  been  made  drunkards 
and  vagabonds  b}'  patronizing  the  drinking 
saloons.  Millions  of  dollars  are  invested  in 
this  business  of  making  men  drunkards  and  in 
jiroduciug  the,  desolation  and  ruin  of  women 
and  children,  which  ii:' employed  in  agricultural, 
manufacturing  or  commercial  pursuits,  and 
directed  by  the  talents  and  time  wasted  in  these 
drinking  houses,  would  add  untold  millions  to 
the  aggregate  wealth  of  the  State,  and  make 
as  many  thousands  of  happy  familiis  as  are 
now  made  mi.serable  because  this  money  and 
time  are  given  to  the  selling  and  drinking  (^f 
intoxicating  liquors.  In  view  of  these  facts, 
with  all  re,«pectto  the  meeting  at  Austin  and  its 
c'ommittee,  I  must  express  my  regret  that  any 
effort  has  been  made  to  make  a  party  question 
of  it ;  and  especially  do  I  regret  that  Democrats 
should  seek  to  identify  that  great  and  grand 
historic  party  with  the  fortunes  and  fate  of 
whiskey-shops,  drunkards  and  criminals." 

But  the  methods  of  the  Prohibitionists  in  the 
campaign  were  defensive.    Their  energies  were 
directed   chiefly   toward    competing   with   the 
rumsellers  for  Democratic  iutluence.     Proffers 
from  th3  North  were  rejected  ;  the  help  of  the 
women  was  not  invite,!;  '  the  strongest  efforts 
were  made  in  the  cities  and  the  rural  districts 
were  neglected,  and  sufficient  attention  was  not 
given  to  cuUivati)ig  the  support  of  the  very 
ia-ge  negro  element.     On  the  other  hand  the 
anti-Prohibitionists  (under  the  management  of 
(reorge  Clark,   a  chrewu    Democratic  leader, 
who,  it  was  alleged  by  Thomas  R.  Bonner,  re- 
ceived  j50,000   for  his  services)  made  a  very 
vigorous  campaign.    They  worked  in  coopera- 
tion   with   the    national    liquor    organizations 
which,  since  the  narrow  escape  from  defeat  in 
Michigan,  had  manifested  a  dettrmination  to 
crush  Prohibition  in  all  subsequent  contests.^ 
They  received  asubsciiption  of  ^5,000  from  the 
United  States  Brewers'  Association,  and  sent  a 
committee  to  canvass  for  contributions  in  the 
Northern  cities;    and  this    committee    raised 
large  sums,  obtaining,  it  was  said.  $50,000  in 
Cliicago  alone. ^'  They  made  special  exertions  to 
win  the   colored  vote,  sending  out  Archibald 
(  ochran  (the  Republican  candidate  for  Governor 
in   1888)  to  work  among  the   negroes.     They 
jilaced  no  restraints  upon  their  followers  :  the 
)uo.st  vindictive  langua,e  was  Indulged  in,  and 
Congressman  MilK  bitterly  attacked  the  clergy- 
men who  were  advocating  the  Amendment,  de- 
claring that  "  the  political  preachers"  ought  to 
be  '-scourged  back  to  their  pulpits."  Prohibition 
meetings  were    broken    up  ;  at  San  Antonio, 
Jime  7.  the  venerable  Bishop  H.  M.  Turner 
(colored)  of  Georgia  was  mobbed  and  his  audi- 
ence was  dispersed.    The  support  of  the  leading 
daily  papers  was  secured  for  the  liquor  cause  by 


'  The  Texas  Woman's  Christian  Temperance  Union, 
liowcver,  led  by  Mrs.  Jennie  Bland  Bcauchamp  and  others, 
made  independent  exertions. 

-  The  policy  of  these  organizations  was  thus  expressed  by 
ihe  Louisville  Weekly  Bulletin^  a  leading  whiskey  organ, 
.\pril  1,3,  1887: 

■•  If  we  carry  Texas  and  Tennessee,  and  defeat  the  pres- 
ent st.ate  of  affairs  in  Atlanta,  we  can  then  bid  Prohibition 
dffiance  and  go  into  Iowa  and  Kansas  assured  of  re-estab- 
lishing law  and  order  where  all  is  now  confusion." 

3  See  the  Voice,  June  23,  1887. 


the  payment  of  generous  sums  ;  the  'Dallas  and 
Galveston  Nevs,  principal  daily  of  the  State,  was 
liberally  patronized,  an  enormous  quantity  of 
anti-Prohibition  matte  rbeing  published  in  it  at 
advertising  rates'*  The  only  daily  newspapers 
advocating  the  Amendment  were  the  Waco 
Advance  and  Day  and  the  Dallas  Times- Herald, 
although  all  th^  religious  and  many  of  the 
country  Aveeklies  supported  it.  Very  large  meet- 
ings were  held  by  both  sides.  Ten  days  before 
th'!  election  there  was  a  mammoth  State  gather 
ing  of  anti-Prohibitioni.stsatFort  Worth,  and  to 
insure  ord:r  at  this  great  demonstration  in  favor 
of  the  drink  traffic  the  sale  of  liquor  on  the 
grounds  was  rigidlj"  prohibited  and  .suppressed. 
The  greatest  .sensation  of  the  campaign  was 
produced  on  this  occasion,  a  letter  from  Jefler- 
■son  Davisa;.'ainst  Constitutional  Prohibition  be- 
ing read.  His  argument  was  based  on  opposi- 
tion to  paternal  governments,  the  belief  that 
"  1h,?  world  is  sroverned  too  much  "  the  convic- 
tion that  legilimate  personal  rights  .would  be 
interfered  with  l.y  Prohibition  the  opinion  that 
legislation  should  be  directed  agidr.st  the  abu.se 
and  not  the  use  of  1  quor,  and  the  belief  that 
a  Prohibitory  law  could  not  le  enforced.^  A 
marked  effect  was  produced  by  the  Davis  letter. 
The  vote  by  counties  on  the  Prohibitory 
Amendment  stood  as  follows: 


Prohibition. 
Counties.  Yes.      No. 

Anderson 1,231 


Angelina. 
Aransas. . 
Archer. .. 
Atascosa  . 

Austin 

Bandera  . 
Bastrop. . 
Baylor  . . . 

Bee  

Bell 

Bexar 

Blanco. .. 


420 

6 

54 

210 

.325 

236 

774 

142 

124 

2,742 

773 

:37l 

Bosque 1,207 


Bowie 
Brazoria. . 
Brazos  . . . 
Brewster  . 

Brown 

Burleson 
Burnet 


1,.'5.58 

284 

898 

36 

ai6 

814 
087 

Caldwell 1,028 

Calhoun 4 

Callahan 376 

Cameron  .....  85 

Camp 683 

Cass 621 

Chambers 107 

Cherokee ,4.59 

Childress 28 

Clay   321 

Coleman 397 

Collin    2,7,56 

Colorado 743 

Comal.    .     27 

Comanche C26 

Concho 83 

Cooke 2.073 

Coryell 1,263 

Crosby 35 

Dallas .3.626 

Delta 770 

Denton 1,639 


2,109 

665 

lOP 
44 

382 
2,987 

428 

2,479 

84 

253 
3,.501 
6,344 

.507 
1,494 
1,321 
l,0:il 
1 .965 
-  49 
1,1.50 
1.500 

802 
1,.5;38 

143 

391 
1,216 

489 
2,019 

224 

1,828 

16 

395 

429 

2,895 

2.870 

1,264 

1,398 

7'4 

1,973 

1,763 

16 

6,.381 

692 

2,354 


Counties. 
De  Witt  .. 
Dimmit  .. 

Donley 

Duval 

Eastland 
Edwards  . . 

Ellis 

El  Paso.... 

Rncinal 

Erath 

Falls....:. 


Prohibition. 


Yes. 

415 

61 

34 

17 

563 

72 

2,711 

211 

1,013 
1,117 

Fannin 4,071 

Fayette 791 

Fisher 77 

Fort  Bend ;399 

Franklin 421 

Freestone 748 

Frio 1.52 

Galveston 1,206 

Gillespie 59 

Goliad 175 

Gonzales 881 

Grayson  3,991 

Cirecr 21 

Gregg 680 

Grimes 1,017 

Guadalupe 7:51 

Hale 15 

Hamilton 708 

Hardeman.   ...  l;?9 

Hardin 228 

Harris..    ..-,..  1,515 

Harrison 899 

Haskell 73 

Hays   883 

Henderson 813 

Hidalgo 6 

Hill   2,.5f2 

Hood 680 

Hopkin 1,6.55 

Howard 86 

Houston 1,088 

Hunt  2.281 


T-7o. 
1,709 

.53 

84 
2.8;? 

774 

116 
3..3;?7 
1,866 

10 
],&51 
2.894 
2,910 
4,627 

.54 
1,.595 

749 
2,286 

236 
2,.561 
1,180 

739 

2,009 

4,147 

24 

928 

2,668 

2,045 

1 

998 

181 

309 

4,.323 

2,951 

75 

954 
1,415 

4.^5 
2,695 

589 
2,oa3 

112 
2,179 
2,764 


■"  This  journal  originated  the  policy  adopted  by  news- 
papers in  all  the  States  subsequently  vo"tingon  Prohibition, 
of  refusing  to  print  articles  foi'  or  against  Prohibition  un- 
less paid  for  doing  so.  The  liquor,  men,  having  abundant 
funds,  were  able  to  control  its  columns. 

5  For  the  text  of  Jefferson  Davis's  letter,  sec  "The  Po- 
litical Prohibitionist  for  1888,"  p.  145. 


Constitutional  Prohibition.]  114  [Constitutional  Prohibition. 


Prohibition. 


Counties.  Yes. 

Jack.., 495 

.Jackson 193 

•Jasper 144 

.Jeff  Davis..'...  22 

.Jefferson 169 

.Jobnson 2,137 

.Jones 209 

Karnes 120 

Kaufman 2,140 


Kendall . 

Kerr 

Kimble. 
Kinney. 
Knox  .. 


64 

252 

145 

39 

72 

lAmar 3,1&1 


Lampasas. 
La  Salle  , 
I.Kivaca. . 
Lee  .... 
l^on .... 
Jjiberty 


762 
60 
.591 
447 
719 
223 

Limestone 1,432 

Live  Oak 73 

Llano 417 

Madison 371 

Marion 390 

Martin 33 

Mason 331 

Matagorda 114 

Maverick 25 

McCulloch 174 

McLennan 3,423 

McMullen 45 

Medina 128 

Menard 59 

Midland 82 

Milam  1,615 

Mitchell 184 

Montague 1,173 

Montgomery . . .       803 

Morris 428 

Nacogdoches . .       731 

Navarro 2,392 

Newton 123 

Nolan 142 

Nueces  171 

Oldham 18 

Orange 209 

Palo  Pinto 509 

Panola 74 

Parker 1,461 

Pecos 4 

Polk 398 


No. 

740 

313 

668 

78 

512 

2,161 

65 

294 

2,iM9 

636 

370 

207 

256 

41 

3,200 

797 

135 

2,.393 

1,473 

1,091 

460 

213 
626 
747 

1,336 
47 
•491 
514 
420 
268 

4,413 

71 

W2 

125 

28 

2,778 
148 

1,660 

1,0.59 
609 

1,670 

3,969 
448 
75 
796 
(i5 
310 
619 

1,508 

1,681 
74 

1,0.59 


Prohibition. 


Yes. 
1 


Counties. 
Presidio  . . 

Rains PiO 

Red  River 1,885 

Reeves 54 

Refugio 13 

Robertson 1,423 

Rockwall ....       459 

Runnels 234 

Rusk 1,291 

Sabine  ...        2.56 

San  Augu.stine.       336 

San  Jacinto 222 

San  Patricio. ..  8 

San  Saba .527 

Scurry. ......         53 

Shackelford...       144 

Shelby 924 

Smith 1,719 

Somervell 2.53 

Starr 18 

Stephens 311 

Stonewall 10 

Tarrant 3,136 

Taylor 535 

Throckmorton.       102 

Titus 587 

Tom  Green 192 

Travis 2,421 

Trinity  451 

617 

885 

206 

91 

1,250 

229 

528 

.385 

1,593 

56 

225 

43 

129 

187 

2,338 

378 

1,.522 

1,126 

336 

61 


Tyler 

Upshur 

Uvalde 

Val  Verde 

Van  Zandt  

Victoria 

Walker 

Waller 

Washington  . . . 

Webb 

Wharton 

Wheeler 

Wichita 

Wilbarger 

Williamson..  .. 

Wilson  

Wise 

Wood 

Young 

Zapata 

Zavala 


No. 

395 

387 

2,052 

73 

133 

3,219 

544 

160 

2,494 

188 

713 

800 

79 

389 

12 

124 

1,177 

2,9.39 

282 

250 

295 

8 

2,833 

270 

40 

758 

512 

4,104 

068 

069 

1,259 

280 

ISO 

1,807 

1,178 

1,393 

1,.533 

3,430 

(594 

1,1:5 

113 

146 

118 

2,018 

1,1.54 

2,321 

1,5.58 

361 

69 

46 


Totals....  129,270220,627 
Majority 91,:B57 


Tennessee. 


Though  the  Amendment  election  in  Ten- 
nessee was  held  only  eit;ht  weeks  after  the  great 
defeat  in  Texas  and  was  materially  affected  by 
that  result,  it  was  not  productive  of  a  propor- 
tionately large  anti  Prohibition  majority,  or 
one  commensurate  with  the  expectations  of  the 
liquor  men.  The  campaign  of  the  oppo.sitio:i 
was  just  as  unscrupulous  and  corrupt  as  in 
Texas,  and  the  various  influences  for  controll- 
ing th?  popular  verdict  were  manipulated  with 
well-nigh  equal  success.  But  the  Prohibition 
canvass  was  made  under  more  favorable  condi- 
tions; the  tempernnce  organizations  were 
stronger;  the  work  of  education  and  agitation 
in  behalf  of  personal  temperance  and  against 
the  saloon  had  been  more  thoroughly  done  ; 
the  smaller  nrea  of  the  State  gave  better  oppor- 
tunities for  systematic  management  of  the  con- 
test, and  the  benefits  of  the  "'  Four  Mile  "  Pro- 
liibitory  law  had  pre|)ared  the  people  for  more 
radical  action. 

After  several  years  of  unavailing  agitation 
for  the  submission  of  a  Constitutional  Amend- 
ment, the  Prohibitionists  persuaded  the  Legis 
lature  of  1885  to  take  the  initial  step,  and  the 
next. Legislature,  in  1887,  completed  the  work, 
appointing  the  29th  of  yeptember,  1887,  as  the 


day  for  the  election.'  The  State  Temperance 
AUiance  (.1.  H.  Fussell,  President),  and  the  State 
Woman's  Christian  Temperance  Union  (JVlrs. 
Lide  Meriwether,  President)  were  tlie  active 
forces  supporting  the  Amendment  in  the  cam- 
paign. The  brunt  of  the  canvass  was  borr'.' 
by  the  trained  Prohibition  workers,  and  there 
was  no  discrimination  against  Northern  sympa- 
thizers. Valuable  help  was  given  by  leaders 
like  Miss  Wiliard,  A.  A.  Hopkins,  Sam  Jones, 
George  W.  Bain,  C.  N.  Grandison  and  Senator 
Colquitt.  But  some  assistance  was  received 
from  eminent  public  men  of  Tennessee,  like  A. 
S.  Colyar,  editor  of  the  Nashville  ylfl;fr«V«?i,  and 
ex-Supreme  Judges  East,  Campbell  and  Free- 
man. Governor  Taylor  expressed  liis  intention 
to  vote  for  the  Amendment,  but  made  no  effort 
in  its  behalf.  Mast  of  the  leading  newspapers 
were  violently  opposed  to  it  (particularly  those 
published  in  Memphis),  although  the  chief 
Democratic  organ,  the  Nashville  A/Derican,  was 
neutral.  The  principal  Republican,  journal, 
the  Nashville  National  Rerieic,  wa;  intolerantly 
hostile. 

The  anti-Prohibitionists  were  under  the  lead- 
ership of  George  S.  Kinney, President  of  t  he  State 
Liquor- Dealers' Association.  The  United  States 
Brewers'  Association  donated  $3,000  to  their 
campaign  fund,  and  the  National  Protective 
Association,  at  a  meeting  held  in  Cincinnati 
two  weeks  l)efore  the  election,  appropriated 
$15,000.  Very  few  public  meetings  were  held 
by  the  Amendment's  opponents,  but  their  secret 
work,  (specially  among  the  leaders  of  the  col- 
ored men,  was  perseveringly  and  shrewdly 
done,  ^he  Is.wo's.wiWe  Journal  (Rep.)  circum 
sfantially  (barged  that  Mr.  Kinney  offered  a 
Republican  Congressman  .*5,000  for  hi-i  influ- 
ence; and  the  Democratic  Collector  of  Internal 
Revenue  at  Nashville  compelled  alibis  employ- 
ees to  contribute  to  the  anti-Prohibition  cam- 
paign fund.  Prominent  lawyers  and  politicians 
were  also  persuaded  to  perform  special  services. 
Col.  J.  J.  Vertrees,  a  well-known  member  of 
the  bar,  and  State  Treasurer  Atha  Thomas  pub- 
lished artful  appeals  against  Prohibition  on  rev- 
enue grounds. 

One  of  the  most  striking  incidents  of  the  con- 
test was  the  publication  of  the  following,  sign- 
ed by  400  convicts  of  the  State  Penitentiary  : 

"  To  the  Voters  of  the  State  of  Tennessee: 

"In  all  ages  in  the  history  of  mankind,  crises,  reforma- 
tions and  revolutions  have  been  the  direct  result  of  prac- 
tical experiences  by  the  human  family. 

"  One  of  these  experiences  has  taught  the  people  of  the 
State  of  Tennessee  that  their  prisons  are  filled,  their  poor- 
houses  occupied  and  their  paupers  created  by  the  direct 
influences  of  that  soul-destroying  demon.  Whiskey.  We, 
the  inmates  of  the  State  Penitentiary,  knowing  by  obser- 
vation and  convinced  by  undeniable  fads  thiit  liquor  is 
the  cause  of  all  the  misery  we  endure,  of  all  t  !ic  hardships 
and  privations  we  subject  those  to  dependcnl  upon  us,' do 
hereby  most  earnestly  ask  that  the  voters  of  this  ,"re:it 
State  may  seriously  consider  the  question  before  Ihetn 
and  give  their  aid  in  word  and  deed  to  the  cause  of 
l'rohii)ition. 

"  We  do  not  say  that  every  prisoner  in  the  State  is  an 
habitual  drunkaiil.  We  do  not  claim  that  every  criminal 
act  was  perpetrated  under  the  influence  of  whiskey;  but 
we  fearlessly  assert  that  three-fourths  in  these  walls  ("in 
trace  their  downfall  directly  or  indirectly  to  that  cause. 

•  I5oth  Legislatures  had  large  Democratic  majorities. 
The  vote  on  submission  in  1885  stood:  Senate,  20  yeas  to 
II  nays;  House,  .57  yeas  to  20  nays.  In  18K7  the  vole 
.'iiood:  Senate,  39  yeas  to  2  nays;  House,  87 yeas  to  4nay^. 


Constitutional  Prohibition.] 


115 


[Constitutional  Prohibition. 


"Wearing  the  garb  of  disgrace,  being  dishor.ored  and 
counted  \mworihy  to  minfilo  witli  the  people  of  our  State, 
we  yet  have  the  same  devotion  to  our  mothers,  the  same 
affection  for  our  sisters;  and  for  their  salie  and  for  the 
pal^e  of  our  children  we  appeal  to  you  to  unite  as  one  man 
and  free  the  Stale  from  a  curse  created  by  the  hands  of 
men,  discountenanced  by  the  law  of  God." 

The  table  below  shows  the  vote  by  counties  : 


Prohibition. 

CoifNTlES.  Yes.      No. 

Anderson 1,135 

Bedford 2,186 

Benton 822 

Bledsoe 417 

Blount 1,611 

Bradley 1,282 

Campiiell 1,080 

Cannon 480 

Carroll 2,W5 

Carter 1,032 

Cheatham 302 

Chestar 641 

Claiborne 782 

Clay  281 

Cocke 1,299 

Coffee 714 

Croclvett 1,453 

Cumberland...  384 

Davidson 7,178 

Decatur 400 

Be  Kalb....,,..  603 

Diclison 641 

Dyer 1,652 

Fayette  1,393 

Fentres 156 

Franklin 904 

Gibson 4,178 

Giles 2,118 

Grainger 890 

Greene 2,483 

Grundy 3.55 

Hamblin 1,322 

Hamilton 3,054 

Hancock 806 

Hardeman 1 ,072 

Hardin 1,170 

Hawkins 1,637 

Haywood 1,327 


Henderson  ....  823 

Henry. 1,796 

Hickman 741 

Houston 437 

Humphreys 627 

Jackson 479 

James 219 

Jefferson 1,587 

Johnson 492 

Knox 5,984 

Lalie  202 

Lauerdale -.  1,317 


571 
2,232 

812 

327 

928 

720 

602 

945 

1,764 

386 

1,160 

687 

484 

755 

1,018 

1,641 

1,154 

365 

9,980 

703 

1,883 

1,.510 

1,661 

2,653 

478 

2,062 

1,819 

3,045 

789 

1,783 

607 

471 

4,177 

355 

2,035 

1,346 

1,194 

2,488 

1,236 

1,669 

1.676 

507 

1,350 

1,367 

434 

1,012 

589 

2,001 

410 

1,898 


P»ROHIBITION' 

Counties.  Yes.  No. 

Lawrence 614  915 

Lewis 94  252 

Lincoln 1,911  2,840 

Loudon 905  381 

Macon 423  1,117 

McMinn 1,621  928 

McNairy 880  1,113 

Madison 2,152  2,.532 

Marion  682  1,148 

Marshall 1,833  1,510 

Maury 3,7.56  3,.523 

Meigs 450  648 

Moiiroe  1,210  791 

Montgomery ...  1 ,31 2  3,626 

Moore 220  912 

Morgan 338  448 

Obion 2,277  2,,577 

Overton 444  1,299 

Perry 103  579 

Pickett 71  4C0 

Polk 331  621 

Putnam 515  1,344 

Rhea 1,(M5  791 

Roane 1,073  1,001 

Robertson 1,237  2,245 

Rutherford....  1,451  4,300 

Scott 447  513 

Sequatchie  ....  83  286 

Sevier      .       ...  1,113  1,22:3 

Shelby 4,550  10,574 

Smith 897  1.880 

Stewart  578 

Sullivan 1,870 

Sumner 1,481 

Tipton 1,818 


Trousdale 366 

Unicoi 333 

Union 663 

VanBuren 134 

Warren  760 

Washington...  2,211 

Wayne     681 

Weakley  2,510 

White 603 

Williamson 1,414 

Wilson 2,219 


1,363 

1,005 

2,387 

1,863 

C82 

196 

1,006 

355 

1,514 

816 

654 

2,128 

1,353 

2,814 

1,913 


Totals 117,504145,197 

Majority 27,693 


Oregon. 


Oregon,  at  the  beginning  of  her  history,  en- 
joyed Prohibition  for  a  period  of  five  years — 
from  1843  to  1848.  At  various  times  before  and 
after  her  admission  as  a  State,  unsuccessful  at- 
tempts to  procure  Prohibitory  measures  were 
made  by  the  Temperance  Alliance  and  other 
organizations.  In  the  Legislature  of  1883  a  bill 
for  submitting  a  Prohibitory  Amendment  was 
introduced,  but  owing  to  a  technical  error  it 
was  withdrawn.  The  LcgLslalures  of  1885  and 
1887  voted  for  submission,  the  latter  wit;i 
but  three  dissenting  votes  (all  Republicans). 
The  temperance  sentiment  of  Oregon  had  always 
been  considered  strong,  and  the  result  of  the 
election  was  a  surprise  to  many  persons.  It 
was,  however,  a  perfectly  natural  con.^equence 
of  irresistible  influences.  The  Portland  Ore- 
gonian,  leading  Republican  organ,  which  had 
probably  greater  weight  witli  the  public  of  the 
State  than  all  other  newspapers  combined,  took 

1  The  editor  is  in(.'.ebtcd  to  II.  S.  Lyman. 


most  emphatic  ground  against  the  Amendment. 
The  jiowcr  of  the  Oregonian  had  been  demon- 
strated in  the  political  canvass  of  1886,  when  it 
had  bolted  the  Republican  ticket  because  of  the 
corruption  of  the  party  and  had  given  its  sup- 
port to  the  Prohibition  candidates.  Although 
the  State  had  always  been  reliably  Republic.in, 
the  Oregoniiin'suXiiludiQ  defeated  the  Republican 
nominee  for  Governor  and  increased  the  vote  of 
the  Prohibition  party  from  492  in  1884  to  2,700. 
At  the  same  election  the  Chairman  of  the  Re- 
publican State  Committee,  Joseph  Simon,  had 
sacrificed  the  interests  of  the  decent  elements  of 
the  party  by  deliberately  "knifing"  Hon.  J.  B. 
Waldo,  Republican  and  Prohibition  candidate 
for  Judge  of  the  Supreme  Court,  and  causing 
the  election  of  his  Democratic  opponent,  who 
was  a  tool  of  the  liquor  men.  This  disgraceful 
act  caused  the  Oregonian  to  say: 

"  The  Republican  party  has  been  betrayed  by  villainous 
leadership  into  an  alliance  with  the  liquor  ring.  It  has 
been  debauciied  and  prostituted  to  the  liquor  ring's  ser- 
vices. It  must  shake  off  that  leadership,  repudiate  that 
alliance  or  go  to  its  death.  It  cannot  support  the  infamy 
of  such  associations.  It  will  lose  all  its  men  of  character, 
conscience  and  decency,  and  it  will  die  ignoniiniously,  as 
it  deserves.  Redeem  the  Republican  party  from  the  liquor 
ring!    Disenthrall  it,  or  let  it  die." 

But  in  the  Amendment  campaign  of  1887  the 
respectable  Oregonian  and  the  disreputable 
Simon  united  their  energies  against  Prohibition. 
Simon  was  still  Chairman  of  the  Republican 
State  Committee,  and  he  u.sed  his  position  to 
help  the  liquor  men.  He  controlled  the  distri- 
bution of  the  large  fund  brought  into  the  State 
a  short  time  before  the  election  by  an  emissary 
of  the  Eastern  liquor  interests.  Under  his  dex- 
terous management  the  Republican  counties 
gave  a  very  large  anti-Prohibition  majority,  al- 
though the  vote  of  the  counties  that  had  gone 
Democratic  in  the  June  election  of  1886  was 
nearly  equally  divided  for  and  against  the 
Amendment.  It  was  charged  that  Simon  op- 
posed the  Amendment  on  the  distinct  under- 
standing that  the  liquor  vote  would  be  thrown 
for  the  Republican  party  in  the  Presidential 
year  of  1888 ;  and  developments  justified  this 
charge.  2 

The  Prohibition  canvass  was  conducted  by  a 
State  League,  of  which  A.  M.  Smith  was  Chair- 
man and  G.  M.  Peirce  was  Secretary.  The 
various  temperance  organizations  gave  cordial 
assistance.  Numerous  addresses  were  made  by 
Oregon  workers  and  by  leaders  from  other 
States.  The  exclusion  of  ex-Governor  St.  John 
of  Kansas  from  the  campaign,  at  the  demand 
of  intolerant  Republicans,  caused  much  dissatis- 
faction. No  important  public  meetings  were 
held  by  the  liciuor  men,  but  they  had  the  ser- 
vices of  some  prominent  persons,  especially 
Abigail  Scott  Duniway.  Characteristic  liquor 
documents,  specially  appealing  to  the  farmers, 
taxpayers  and  public  generally,  were  abun- 
dantly distributed  and  frauds  were  committed 
at  the  polls.  The  election  day  was  stormy  and 
only  a  light  vote  was  cast  in  places  where  there 


2  In  June,  1888,  the  Republican  candidate  for  Congress 
received  7,407  plurality,  and  Harrison's  plurality  in  No- 
vember was  6,769.  These  pluralities  were  largely  in  excess 
of  any  that  had  been  obtained  in  recent  years  by  the  Re- 
publicans in  Oregon,  even  under  ^erv  favorable  conditions. 
In  1884  Blaine's  plurality  was  only  2^,256. 


Constitutional  Prohibition,] 


116 


[Constitutional  Prohibition. 


was  an  honest  poll,  the  total  being  47,931  as 
against  54,954  at  the  State  election  of  lb86.  Yet 
in  the  county  cf  Multomah  (containing  the  city 
of  Portland)  the  vote  was  9,476  as  against  only 
7,964  for  Congressman  at  the  exciting  contest  of 
1886. 
The  vote  by  counties  follows: 


Counties. 

Baker 

Benton 

Clackamas . 

Clatsop  

Columbia. . . 

Coos 

Crook 

Curry 

Douglas  . . . . 

Gilliam 

Grant 

Jackson  

Josephine.. 
Klamath  . . . 
'Lake 


Prohibition. 


Yes. 
389 
880 
849 
468 
18(5 
679 
439 
129 
890 
414 
498 
553 
184 
251 
IfiO 


Lane 1,023 


No. 
730 
724 

1,2.39 

1.101 
356 
534 
172 
120 

1,067 
362 
535 

1,.311 
5.56 
170 
214 

1,200 


Prohibition. 
Counties.  Yes.     No. 

Linn 1,915 


Malheur 

Marion 

Morrow 

Multomah  . . 

Polk 

Tillamook.. 


149 
1,498 

497 
1.945 

739 

2.58 


Umatilla 1,331 


LInion 

Wallowa 

Wasco 

Washington  . . 
Yamhill 

Totals . . . . 
Majority. . 


759 
245 
790 
675 
1,180 


967 
226 

2,036 
360 

7,.531 
517 
346 

1,081 
913 
226 

1,2()0 
918 

1,077 


19,973  27,958 
7,985 


West  Virginia  ^ 

The  day  of  the  Presidential  election  of  J  888 
was  the  day  for  deciding  the  question  of  Con- 
stitutionalProliibition  in  West  Virginia.  This 
has  always  been  considered  unfortunate  by  the 
Prohibitionists  of  that  State.  The  Cleveland- 
Harrison  campaign  was  very  exciting  there,  and 
the  strength  cf  the  two  leading  parties  was  so 
nearly  equal  that  there  was  a  difference  be- 
tween them  of  only  506  votes  in  a  total  of  about 
160,000.  At  the  same  time  warm  contests  were 
waged  for  the  State,  Congressional,  legislative 
and  other  ollices.  Naturally  in  this  fierce  parti- 
san fight  the  interests  of  Prohibition  were  sacri- 
ficed. For  other  reasons  there  was  not  a  fair 
trial  of  the  question  on  its  merits  Dissensions 
among  the  friends  of  Prohibition  prevented  an 
energetic  and  .systematic  campaign.  Proper  ef- 
forts were  not  made  for  securing  the  services  of 
the  best  Prohibition  workers  from  other  States, 
and  the  demands  of  the  Prohibition  political  can- 
vass throughout  the  Union  engaged  well  nigh  all 
the  speakers  of  national  reputation.  On  the 
other  hand  the  anti  Prohibitioni.sts  were  not  only 
favored  by  conditions,  but  by  abundant  funds, 
aggressive  work,  corrupt  practices,  newspaper 
support  and  all  the  other  agencies  so  indus- 
triously and  successfully  applied  in  the  tj^pical 
liquor  campaigns  against  Constitutional  Pro- 
hibition. 

West  Virginia's  movement  for  submission  be- 
gan in  1880,  and  was  originated  and  promoted 
by  representatives  of  leading  religious  denomi- 
nations of  the  State.  The  submission  of  the 
Amendment  was  due  to  the  organization  and 
activity  of  the  Prohibition  party.  In  the  Demo 
cratic  Legislature  of  1887  the  House  promptly 
voted  for  submission  by  55  to  10,  but  the 
Senate,  Avhile  favoring  the  raea.sure  by  a  ma- 
jority, refused  to  give  the  necessary  two-thirds 
until  the  Prohibition  managers  threatened  to 
pass  a  statutory  law  granting  complete  Pro- 
hibition, when  the  obstructionists  permitted  the 
submission  resolution  to  go  through. •' 

>  The  editor  is  indebted  to  Dave  D.  Johnson  of  Parkers- 
burg,  W.  Va. 

2  The  Legislature  of  18S7  was  Democratic  in  both 
branches— ill  the  Senate  by  14  to  12  and  in  the  House  by  3o 


A  "non-partisan  League"  was  organized, 
after  considerable  discussion,  to  manage  the 
Prohibition  campaign;  but  practically  no  sup- 
port was  given  to  it  by  the  Republicans  and 
Democrats  who  had  strenuously  demanded  its 
creation,  and  it  did  no  important  work.  The 
Woman's  Christian  Temperance  Union  was  the 
most  serviceable  organization,  employing  able 
speakers.  But  no  very  large  public  meetings 
were  held,  and  the  general  feeling  was  apathetic. 
The  liquor  managers  used  money  corruptly.-^ 
After  the  election  i  Nov.  10)  Bonfort's  IFmc  and 
Spirit  Circular,  the  leading  national  organ  of 
the  whiskey-sellers,  said: 

"  During  months  past  tons  of  literature  have  been  scat- 
tered broadcast  over  the  State,  and  scarcely  a  county  but 
has  heard  a  public  speaker  for  our  cause,  and,  wherever 
possible,  a  joint  debate.  Fcr  this  result,  as  in  each  of 
those  preceding  it,  the  trade  owes  a  lasting  debt  of  grati- 
tude to  the  National  Protective  Association,  and  to  the 
gentlemen  who  have  so  admirably  directed  its  afl'airs." 

The  Wheeling  Intellir/enccr  (Rep.^i  and  Regis- 
ter (Dem. ),  the  chief  dailies  of  the  State,  fought 
the  Amendment  unscrupulously,  and  compan;- 
tively  few  of  the  country  weeklies  favored  it. 
The  newspapers  generally  were  corrupted  by 
saloon  money.  The  Parkersburg  Freeman, 
State  organ  of  the  Prohibition  party,  was  the 
principal  supporter  of  the  cause.  An  attempt 
was  made  to  analyze  the  vote.  Since  the 
Amendment  question  was  printed  on  the  party 
ballots,  it  was  possible  to  ascertain,  by  keeping 
a  tally  at  each  polling  place,  how  the  Republi- 
cans and  Democrats  stood  concerning  it.  At 
the  direction  of  the  Prohibition  State  Commit- 
tee, tallies  were  kept  at  43  precincts  in  28  dif- 
ferent counties,  representing  about  one-twelfth 
of  the  vote  of  the  State.  Of  the  5  283  Demo- 
cratic voters  in  these  43  precincts,  2  004  were 
for  the  Amendment  2,168  against  it  and  1.121 
did  not  vote  either  for  or  against.  Of  the 
5  502  Republican  voters,  1,967  supported  the 
Amendment,  2,816  opposed  it  and  2,316  ig 
nored  it. 

The  vote  in  detail  is  given  in  the  following 
table  : 


Prohibition. 


Counties.  Yes. 

Barbour 4.57 

Berkeley 97'5 

Boone 

Braxton    1,032 


Brooke . 

Cabell  , , 

Calhoun . 

Clay  

Doddridge 


928 
1,398 
411 
406 
547 


Favette 1,3:32 

Gilmer 5:W 

Grant   ,  352 

Greenbrier —  811 

Hampshire 163 

Hancock 527 

Hardy 247 

Harrison ],.500 

Jackson 1,069 

Jefferson 1,026 

Kanawha 2,720 


No. 

1,919 
2,030 

l',246 

691 

1,877 

720 

296 

1,4:31 

1,8.50 

1,007 

790 

1,999 

1,900 

;321 

1,154 

2,:329 

1.842 

1,939 

3,:B50 


Prohibition. 


Counties.  Yes. 

Lewis 1,075 


Lincoln 

Logan  . 
Marion . 


225 
101 
1,427 
Marshall 1,504 


Mason 

Mei- ■'^r 

Mineral    .... 
Monongalia. 

Monroe 

Morgan 

McDowell 

Nicholas    1,0:30 

Ohio 1,620 


1,297 
425 
610 

1,019 
713 
394 


Pendleton 

Pleasants 

Pocahontas. . 
Preston  .... 

Putnam 

Kaleigh  


253 
413 
330 
1,:321 
970 


No. 
1,271 
1,062 

266 
2,:319 
2,275 
2,365 

780 
1,071 
1,7:32 
1,047 

800 

'5:37 
6,951 
1,.3:32 
742 
813 
2,5:3s 
1,240 


to  29.  Of  the  16  votes  against  submission  cast  in  the  two 
branches,  13  were  given  by  Democrats  .nd  3  by  Bepub- 
licans.  The  stubborn  tight' was  due  to  the  great  fear  of 
the  liquor  men  that  the  Amendment  would  be  ratified  if 
sent  to  the  people.  It  \vill  be  rememberi'd  that  the  West 
Virginia  submission  struggle  was  made  before  the  votes  of 
Michigan,  Texas,  Tennessee  and  Oregon  had  given  new 
courage  to  the  tratlic. 
s  See  the  Voice,  Dec.  27,  1888. 


Constitutional  Prohibition.] 


11' 


[Constitutional  Prohibition. 


Counties. 
Kaiulolph. . 

Kik-hie...., 

Roiine 

Sumuicrs  . . 
Taylor  . . .  , 
Tucker  ... 

Tyler 

Ifpshur 

Wayne 


Prohibition. 


1,305 

85a 

463 
684 
385 
773 
1,08.") 
835 


No. 
1,661 
1,543 
1,315 
1,301 
1,631 
5-27 
1,435 
1,108 
1,410 


Prohibition. 


Counties.  Yes. 

Webster aW 

Wetzel 9.58 

Wirt ,578 

Wood 2,075 

Wyoming Si;2r3 


No. 

534 
2,267 
1,015 
2,528 

386 


Totals 41,668  76,555 

Ai,'s;regate 118,233 

Majority 34,887 


Hew  HampsMre. 

For  a  generation  New  Hampshire  had  been 
under  a  partial  and  defective  Prohibition  hiw 
before  any  recognition  of  the  appeals  made  by 
its  iriend.s  for  more  stringent  provisions  was 
vouchsafed  by  th  3  political  rulers  of  the  State. 
The  statutes,  while  prohibiting  the  common 
sale  of  intoxicating  beverages,  permitted  the 
manufacture.  Under  this  peculiar  measure 
several  extensive  brewing  establishments  nour- 
ished, and  in  time  they  became  exceedingly 
powerful  in  State  politics.  Remarkable  and 
conflicting  conditions  prevailed.  Though  una- 
ble to  establish  thorough  Prohibition  the  tem- 
perance people  were  able  to  compel  the  reten- 
tion of  the  old  law,  and  one  of  the  most  ex- 
treme Prohibition  advocates  of  the  entire  coun- 
try (Henry  W.  Blair)  was  sent  to  represent  New 
H-.iinpshire  in  the  United  States  Senate.  They 
were  also  strong  enough  to  command  tolerably 
satisfactory  enforcement  of  the  law  in  nearly 
every  community  excepting  a   few  cities.     On 


the  other  hand,   wherever 


real   advantage 


any  ^^^,  ^^,^^.^g^^ 
was  sought  by  the  Proiiibitionists  the  liquor 
influence  seemed  to  be  omnipotent.  At  one 
s;!ssioa  of  the  Legislature  a  deputation  of  ladies 
a  Ivocating  certain  amendments  was  received 
wi;h  great  discourtesy,  and  members  of  the 
legislative  committee  filled  the  room  with 
tobacco  smoke  while  the  ladies  presented  their 
case.  It  was  a  curious  fact  that  while  New 
Hampshire  was  intensely  Republican  her 
wealthiest  Democratic  liquor  manufacturer 
(Frank  Jones)  had  an  influence  with  the  Legis 
lature  outweighing  that  of  the  best  elements  of 
citizens.  The  explanation  of  Mr.  Jones's  suc- 
cessful opposition  to  furth  a-  Prohibitory  legis- 
lation was  significantly  hinted  at  in  testimony 
which  he  gave  in  the  famous  bribery  investi- 
gation of  1887.  ''Men  are  a  good  deal  like 
hogs,"  said  Mr  Jones  in  that  testimony;  "they 
don't  like  to  be  driven.  But  you  throw  them 
down  a  little  corn  and  you  can  call  them  most 
anywhere." 

In  New  Hampshire  the  Legislature  has  no 
power  to  propose  Amendments  to  the  Constitu- 
tion, and  such  Amendments  can  be  submitted 
only  by  Constitutional  Conventions  held  not 
oftenerthan  once  in  seven  years.  A  two  thirds 
vote  of  the  people  is  required  to  ratify  and 
adopt  an  Amendment.  Therefore  the  Prohibi- 
tionists of  the  State  in  their  efforts  to  imjirove 
the  law  wei'c  forced  to  appeal  to  the  Legisla- 
ture for  statutory  action.  The  Legislature  of 
1887  was  asked  to  pass  an  act  prohibiting  the 
manufacture  of  liquor,  but  although  the  Re- 
publican State  Convention  of  18S6  had  made 
warm  jirofessions  of  loyalty  to  the  Prohibition 
cause,  the  bill  against  the  manufacture  was 
defeated.  In  January,  1889,  the  Constitutional 
Convention  met,  and  the  Prohibitionists  appeal- 


ed to  it  to  submit  an  Amendment  providing  for 
complete  Prohibition.  Such  an  Amendment 
was  accordingly  submitted  (Jan.  10'.  A  cam- 
paign organization  of  Prohibitionists  was 
effected  soon  afterwards,  with  George  A. 
Bailey  as  Chairman.  The  dift'erciit  elements 
of  Prohibitioni.sts  worke.l  in  liarmony  in  th.; 
canvass.  Cliairman  Bailey  claimed  that  three- 
fourths  of  the'iOO  clergymen  in  the  State  were 
"actively  engaged"  in  behalf  oi  the  Amend- 
ment. Governor  elect  D.  H.  Goo  Jell  wa:3 
a  prominent  speaker  for  it,  and  even  so 
shrewd  a  R  'publican  poiilicii.n  as  Senator  Wil- 
liam E  Chandler  wrote  a  letter  endorsing  it. 
It  wa5  commonly  Rnown  that  the  fund  used  by 
the  liquor  people  aggregated  $10 J, 000.  But 
they  held  only  one  small  public  m(e  ing,  which 
was  addressed  by  William  P.  Tonlmsou,  a 
Democratic  editor  from  Kansas.  The  most 
notable  f.'ature  of  the  discussion  in  the  press 
was  upon  the  cader-exemption  clause  of  the 
Amendment.  This  clause  had  been  inserted 
at  the  instance  of  some  Prohibitionists  who 
thought  votes  would  be  gained  among  the 
farmers  by  tiiscrimiuating  in  favor  of  cider, 
and  who  reasoned  that  the  Legislature  coidd 
afterwarjs  suppress  the  alcoholic  cider  traffic 
by  statute,  as  tiie  Maine  Legislatui-e  had  done. 
But  by  milking  this  exemption  the  Prohibition- 
ists introduced  a  confusing  element  into  the 
contest,  were  forced  upon  the  defensive  and 
lost  many  votes.  Although  some  of  the  news- 
papers refrained  from  offensive  hostility,  the 
behavior  of  the  press  in  general  clearly  showed 
that  much  of  the  money  of  the  liquor  managers 
had  been  placed  in  the  newspaper  offices. 
We  give  below;  the  county  vote.'^. 


Prohibition. 

Counties.  Yes.  No. 

Belknap 1,.593  1,.568 

Carroll    l,37o  1,234 

Cheshire 2,023  2,381 

Coos 1,317  1,144 

Grafton 2,745  3,028 

Hillsborough..  4,1)56  7,.3.58 

Merrimack....  3,769  4,.327 


Prohibition. 
Counties.  Yes.      No. 

Roekinurham..    3,301    5,113 

Strafford 3,460    3,303 

Sullivan 1,247    1,530 


Totals 25,780  30,976 

Agsiregate 50,762 

Majority 5,190 


Massachusetts. 

A  long  and  eventful  .struggle  preceded  the 
Massachusetts  campaign  of  1889  for  Constitu- 
tional Prohibition.  In  this  struggle  it  was  re- 
peatedly demonstrated  that  the  intelligent 
classes  desired  Prohibition  by  a  strong  majority; 
and  more  than  once  it  was  found  that  an  actual 
majority  of  all  the  voters  expressing  themselves 
(even  allowing  for  the  ignorant  and  vicious 
classes  and  the  whole  saloon  element)  was  op- 
posed to  the  license  system.  But  this  power- 
ful sentiment,  thou'jjh  directed  by  excellent 
organizations  and  devoted  individuals,  achieved 
only  local,  imperfect  and  temporary  successes. 
The  best  citizens  of  Massachusetts,  and  even  the 
majority  of  all  the  citizens,  though  sentimentally 
preferring  Prohibition  were  unable  to  cop  >  with 
the  artful  liquor  power  and  were  forced  to  ac- 
cept laws  upon  which  the  ingenuity  of  anti- 
Prohibition  politicians  had  been  expend  d  In 
the  20  years  from  1839  to  1889,  three  different 
systems  of  liquor  legislation  were  establislied  — 
the  Prohibitory  .statute  of  1869,  repeah'd  in 
1875,  the  Local  Option  and  license  act  that  was 


Constitutional  Prohibition.]  113  [Constitutional  Prohibition, 

J 


passed  soon  afterwards,  aud  the  High  License 
and  Limitation  law  of  1888  (in  force  May  1, 
1889). 

After  the  repeal  of  the  Prohibitory  law,  all 
the  legislation  enacted  was  cleverly  devised  for 
satisfying  the  moderate  temperance  elements  of 
the  State.  The  Local  Option  aud  license  com- 
bination answered  this  purpose  perfectly.  It 
enabled  the  people  of  every  town  and  city  an- 
nually (the  towns  in  March  and  the  cities  in 
Decemlber)  to  declare  by  majority  vote  whether 
licenses  should  be  granted  within  their  respec- 
tive limits.  More  than  once  the  aggregate  vote 
of  the  communities  on  the  license  question 
(even  including  the  results  in  the  large  cities) 
showed  a  majority  against  the  traffic  ;  and  the 
sentiment  in  favor  of  banishing  the  saloon  was 
so  general  that  four-fifths  of  the  communities 
annually  refused  to  grant  licenses. '  The  nor- 
mal sentiment  of  Massachusetts  was  therefore 
decidedly  favorable  to  Prohibition ;  yet  the  very 
policy  that  invited  its  radical  expression  in  the 
various  localities  operated  to  discourage  exertion 
for  the  complete  redemption  of  the  State.  It 
was  argued  that  the  people  already  had  power 
to  stop  the  traffic,  and  the  conservative  citizens 
manifested  comparatively  little  favor  for  more 
advanced  demands.  Meanwhile  the  politicians 
made  further  concessions,  granting  a  Metropoli- 
tan Police  law  for  the  city  of  Boston,  prohibit- 
ing the  sale  of  liquors  on  all  public  holidays, 
prohibiting  the  sale  in  tenement  buildings,  re- 
quiring the  rumsellers  to  remove  screens  and 
other  obstructions  to  a  full  view  of  their  prem- 
ises from  the  street,  etc.  Finally,  in  1888,  the 
law  establishing  a  minimum  annual  license  rate 
of  $1,300  for  each  saloon  selling  all  kinds  of 
liquors  for  consumption  on  and  off  the  premises 
was  passed,  and  the  same  Legislature  enacted 
another  statute  limiting  the  number  of  saloons 
to  one  for  each  500  of  the  population  in  Bo.ston 
and  one  for  each  1,000  inhabitants  in  every 
other  community.  These  two  statutes  were  not 
to  go  into  effect  until  May  1,  1889,  and  mean- 
while, in  December,  1888,  the  cities  were  to 
vote  on  the  local  que.stion  of  license,  and  the 
towns  were  to  vote  on  the  same  question  in 
March,  1889.  The  results  of  the  city  votes  fully 
confirmed  the  expectation  that  the  general  pub- 
lic would  accept  the  bribe  held  forth  by  the 
High  License  act ;  for  there  was  a  very  strong 
reaction  against  locally  prohibiting  the  issuance 
of  licenses.  This  reaction  encouraged  the  polit- 
ical managers  in  the  Legislature  of  1889  to 
at  last  grant  to  the  people  the  often-refused 
privilege  of  voting  on  a  Prohibitory  Amend- 
ment. 

It  seems  absolutely  certain  that  if  compromise 
measures  had  not  been  enacted  in  Massachusetts, 
the  demand  for  Constitutional  Prohibition 
would  have  proved  irresistible  long  before  tlie 
carefully  laid  schemes  for  defeating  it  were 
perfected.  At  one  legislative  session  (1883) 
petitions  for  Constitutional  Prohibition  from 
50,000  citizens  were  presented,  an<i  at  another 
session  (1884)  the  petitions  had  106.000  signa- 
tures attached.  In  consequence  of  the  evasive 
action  of  successive  Republican  Legislatures, 


'  For  figures,  see  the  tlie  editor's  postscript  to  the  article 
Local  Option. 


the  vote  of  the  Prohibition  party  increased  from 
1,881  in  1883  to  10,947  in  1887,  and  some  of  the 
mo.st  distinguished  and  devoted  temperance 
Republicans  of  the  State  (including  Mary  A. 
Livermore  and  Henry  H.  Faxon)  openly  rebelled 
against  the  faithless  party.  If  the  Republicans 
had  not  been  able  to  point  to  their  Local  Option 
legislation,  to  Prohibitory  conditions  in  four- 
fifths  of  the  towns  and  to  stringent  restrictive 
acts,  they  could  not  have  prevented  a  vote  on 
Constitutional  Prohibition  when  the  temperance 
forces  were  eager  for  a  cont  st  and  before 
counteractive  devices  had  been  set  up. 

As  it  v/as,  the  Republican  leaders  found  it 
neces.sary  to  make  very  plausible  professions  of 
friendship  for  the  temperance  cause.  Their 
State  Convention  for  1886  (Sept.  29)  declared  : 

"  Believing,  also,  that  whenever  a  great  public  question 
demands  settlement  an  opportunity  should  bo  given  the 
people  to  express  their  opinion  thereon,  we  favor'the  sub- 
mission to  the  people  of  an  Amendment  to  our  Constitu- 
tion proliibiting  the  manufacture  aud  sale  of  alcoholic 
liquor.s  to  be  used  as  a  beverage." 

In  1887  a  more  elaborate  utterance  was  made,  as 
follows  : 

"  Recognizing  in  intemperance  the  most  fruitful  source 
of  pauperism,  crime,  corruption  in  politics  and  social 
degradation,  we  afflrm  our  belief  in  the  most  thorough  re- 
striction of  the  liquor  traffic  and  the  enforcement  of  law 
for  its  suppression.  We  approve  the  action  of  the  last  Legis- 
lature in  enacting  so  many  temperance  statutes,  and  de- 
mand the  continued  enactment  of  progressive  temperance 
measures  as  the  policy  of  our  party.  We  repeat  the  recom- 
mendation of  last  year's  Convention  asfollows:  '  Believing 
that  this  great  public  question  now  demands  settlement, 
we  favor  the  submission  to  the  people  of  an  Amendment 
to  our  Constitution  prohibiting  the  manufacture  and  sale  of 
alcoholic  liquors  to  be  used  as  a  beverage.'  In  order  to  have 
this  matter  placed  before  the  people,  we  call  upon  those 
who  are  opposed  to  the  political  control  of  the  grog-shops 
to  unite  with  the  Republican  party  in  electing  Senators  and 
Representatives  who  will  vote  for  the  submission  of  the 
Amendment." 

But  the  crowning  deliverance  of  the  Republi- 
cans of  Massachusetts  was  that  emanating  from 
the  State  Convention  held  on  April  26,  1888,  to 
choose  delegates  to  the  National  Convention. 
It  was  : 

"  The  Republican  party  of  Massachusetts  has  committed 
itself  in  favor  of  pronounced  aud  progressive  temperance 
legislation.  It  has  demanded  the  restriction  of  the  liquor 
traffic  by  every  practicable  measure,  and  now  it  calls  upon 
the  National  Republican  Convention  to  recognize  the 
saloon  as  the  enemy  of  humanity;  to  demand  for  the  peo- 
ple the  privilege  of  deciding  its  fate  at  the  ballot-box;  to 
insist  that  it  shall  be  crippled  by  every  restraint  and  dis- 
ability which  local  public  sentiment  will  sanction;  in 
short,  to  take  that  attitude  upon  the  temperance  question 
which  will  win  to  the  party  all  foes  of  the  liquor  traffic  and 
all  friends  of  good  order." 

The  popular  vote  on  the  Constitutional 
Amendment,  taken  under  the  circumstances  to 
which  we  have  briefly  alluded,  was  necessarily 
farcical.  It  was  shown  by  the  Boston  Trans- 
cript (April  18,  1889)  that  of  the  29  Senators aiKi 
161  Representatives  voting  to  submit  the 
Amendment  in  the  Legislature  of  1889,  only  18 
Senators  and  91  Representatives  were  sufficiently 
friendly  to  the  principle  of  Prohibition  to  vote 
for  the  measure  at  the  polls.  The  same  Legis- 
lature that  passed  the  submission  resolution  re- 
fused to  pass  a  Prohibition  statute  and  even 
refused  to  enact  a  law  permitting  women  to  vote 
on  the  license  question.  The  controlling  Repub- 
lican influences  were  skilfully  direeted  against 
the  Amcnlment,  and  the  Democratic  party  was 
openly   hostile.    The  Boston  dailies   espoased 


Constitutional  Prohibition.] 


119 


[Constitutional  Prohibition. 


the  liquor  cause  with  great  ardor.  The  Olobe 
(Dcm.),  I'rauscript  (Rep.)  and  Herald  (Iiid.) 
were  especially  violent  opponents  of  Prohibi- 
tion. The  Globe  gawQ  much,  prominence  to  false 
reports  from  Kansas  and  Iowa,  printing  with 
great  display  letter--  froni  a  few  unimportant 
newspaper  editors  of  those  States  who  were 
willini;-  to  represent  that  Prohibition  was 
a  failure,  and  suppressing  the  abundant 
testimony  to  the  contrary.  The  Transcript 
made  a  pretended  canvass  of  the  clergymen  of 
Mas-achusetts,  and  claimed  that  they  were  about 
equally  divided  for  and  against  the  Amendment, 
allhouiih  a  canva^-s  conducted  with  impartiality 
showed  that  of  1,039  clergymen  expressing 
themselves,  931  were  for  the  Amendment,  91 
were  against  it,  and  11  were  non-committal. 
The  Boston  Journal  (chief  Republican  organ), 
though  nominally  neutral,  was  inclined  against 
th',^  Amendment,  and  compelled  the  Prohibi- 
tionists to  pay  advertising  rates  for  arguments 
appearing  in  its  columns  from  the  pen  of  Dr. 
Daniel  Dorchester;  and  in  printing  these  argu- 
ments it  editorially  disavowed  responsibility  for 
them.  Indeed,  all  but  one  of  the  leading  Bos- 
ton newspapers  refused  to  insert  articles  favor- 
able to  Prohibition  unless  exorbitant  charges 
were  paid.  The  only  Boston  daily  supporting 
the  Amendment  was  the  Traveller  (Rep.). 
Great  clamor  was  made  on  the  score  that  the 
adoption  of  Constitutional  Prohibition  would 
prevent  the  farmers  from  manufacturing  cider 
for  vinegar;  and  although  the  Attorney-General 
printed  an  oflieial  declaration  that  no  such  effect 
would  follow,  the  cider  argument  was  diligently 
us?d  'mtil  the  end  of  the  campaign.  The  liq- 
our  managers  employed  canvassers  who  obtained 
numerous  signatures  from  prominent  clergy- 
men, lawyers  and  business  men,  to  anti-Pro- 
hibition declarations.  A  clergymen's  ■'  protest," 
signed  by  upwards  of  60  ministers,  was  printed 
a  few  days  before  the  election.  The  less  earnest 
temperance  people  were  discouraged  from  sup- 
porting the  Amendment  bj^  the  attitude  of  one 
of  the  representative  religious  organs  of  New 
England,  the  Boston  Congregationalist,  which 
on  Feb.  21  printed  an  elaborate  editorial  article 
distinctly  unfriendly  in  tone.  The  Congrega- 
a./nalisfs  course  was  repudiated  by  an  authorita- 
tive meeting  of  Congregational  clergymen ;  but 
tliat  journal's  arguments,  s'jconded  by  pleas 
against  the  Am^endment  from  several  eminent 
divines,  had  much  weight  with  undecided 
voters.  The  anti  Prohibition  lawyers  argued 
that  the  success  of  Constitutional  Prohibition 
would  tend  to  diminish  the  respect  in  which  the 
Constitution  was  held  ;  and  it  was  claimed  that 
the  lawy.  rs'  protest  had  the  approval  of  well- 
nigh  all  the  leading  members  of  the  bar.  The 
argument  was  answered  in  withering  language 
by  United  States  Senator  George  F.  Hoar;  and 
a  canvass  instituted  among  the  lawyers  of  the 
State  showed  that  a  large  majority  oi  them,  out- 
side of  the  city  of  Boston,  favored  the  Amend- 
ment. 

The  .saloon  element  judiciously  took  no  active 
part  opvnly  in  the  canvass.  Having  the  sup- 
port of  so  many  prominent  men  and  of  the 
leadinu-  news'iapers,  the  liquor-dealers  were 
shrewd  enough  to  recognize  that  their  intei'ests 
would  be  jeopardized  by  conducting  a  whisliey- 


sellcrs'  agitation.  Bowler  Bros.,  brewers,  of 
Worcester,  in  a  retrospective  letter  written  to  a 
Nebraska  correspondent  in  1890,  said  that  the 
experience  of  "  the  trade  "  in  iilassachusetts  had 
demonstrated  the  wisdom  of  refraining  from 
public  discussion.  "  We  should  advise  you," 
they  wrote,  "  not  to  hold  any  public  meetings, 
as  those  very  good  Prohibitionists  won't  attend 
them,  and  you  will  have  the  hall  tilled  with  a 
gang  of  loafers  which  will  make  you  look  like 
k  tate's  prison  birds,  and  the  papers  will  come 
out  the  next  day  wiih  '  A  man  is  known  by  the 
company  he  keeps.'"'  But  the  whole  anti- 
Prolnbition  campaign  was  really  managed  by 
the  liquor-sellers  exclusively.  It  was  under 
saloon  auspices  that  the  various  protests  against 
Prohibition  were  invited,  grouped  together  and 
effectively  used.  The  State  was  literally  sown 
with  misleading  documents  prepared  and  cir- 
culated by  the  National  Protective  Association. 
Tbe  falsest  statements  about  the  results  of  Pro- 
hibition were  coined  and  kept  before  the  public. 
Meanwhile  the  virtues  of  High  License  and 
Local  Option  were  dwelt  upon  by  every  peison 
interested  in  the  liquor  business.  The  following, 
emanating  from  the  saloon  managers  and  pub- 
lished with  great  prominence  just  before  tlie 
election,  is  a  specimen  of  the  appeals  : 

"NO.  On  Monday  next,  April  22,  the  contest  takes 
place  between  our  present  Iliffh  License  law,  emlwdyinp 
Local  Option  on  tlie  one  hand.^and  Constitutional  Prohibi- 
tion of  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  alcoholic  beverages, 
includins  CIDER,  on  the  other  hand.  In  the  light  of 
former  Prohibitory  experience,  and  in  the  interest  of  the 
cause  of  tempera  iice,  respect  for  our  laws,  reverence  for  our 
State  Constitution,  commercial  prosperity  and  moderate 
taxation,  every  citizen  having  these  considerations  at  heart 
ehoukl  go  to  the  polls  and  vote  NO." 

The  campaign  of  the  Prohibitionists  was  un- 
der the  direction  of  a  non  partisan  State  Com- 
mittee, of  which  E.  H.  Haskeli  was  Chairman, 
and  Benjamin  R  Jewell  was  Secretary.  The 
different  Prohibition  organizations  co  operated 
harmoniously.  Nearly  all  the  leaders  of  the 
Piohibitiouists  in  the  country  took  part  in  the 
contest. 

Below  is  presented  the  vote  by  counties  : 


Prohibitiox. 
Counties.  Yes.      N<>. 

Barnstable....     1,738       920 

Berkshire 2,884    5,.301 

Bristol 0,645    7,171 

Dukes  ..    354         73 

Essex 11,426  18,287 

Franklin 2,366    2,711 

Hampden 4,720    7,334 

Hampshire ... .     2,859    2,756 
Middlesex 17,621  23,558 


Prohibition. 

Coi:nties.  Yes.      No. 

Nantucket....  170       213 

Norfolk 5,.330    C,964 

Plvniouth 4,873    4,768 

Suffolk 12,207  33,686 

Worcester....  12,050  17,.3aO 


Totals  .. 
Majority. 


85,242  131,063 
45,820 


Pennsylvania. 

Pennsylvania's  majority  against  Constitutional 
Prohibition  seems  colossal;  but  nearly  one-half 
of  it  was  contributed  by  the  single  county  of 
Philadelphia,  and  uearlj'-  three-fourths  by  the 
three  counties  of  Philadelphia,  Allegheny  and 
Berks,  while  the  whole  huge  majority  of  188.- 
027  came  exclusively  from  the  eight  counties  of 
Philadelphia,  Allesdieny,  Bfrks.  Lancaster, 
Montgomery,  Lehigh,  Northampton,  Schuyl- 
kill and  Montgomery— -counties  containing  large 
cities  which  were  carried  for  the  saloon  by  the 
most  corrupt  and  unfair  practices.     The  other 

»  The  Voice,  May  8, 1890. 


Constitutional  Proliibition.l 


120 


[Constitutional  Prokibition. 


59  counties,  taken  as  a  whole,  showed  a  major- 
ity for  the  Amendment,  although  a  number  of 
important  cities  wore  embraced  w^ithin  them 
and  unscrupulous  and  diligent  resistance  was 
everywhere  made  by  the  liquor  leaders.  Under 
the  extraordinary  conditions,  the  large  total 
vote  for  the  Amendm  nt  and  the  preponder- 
ance of  Prohibition  sentiment  in  59  of  the  67 
counties  were  the  really  significant  results  of 
the  contest. 

The  preference  of  the  people  for  Prohibition 
when  the  issue  v/as  presented  on  its  merits  was 
shown  both  before  aud  alter  the  war  Jn  l^-io 
local  Prohibitor}'  measures  were  enacted  in 
obedience  to  the  expicssed  desire  of  the  people, 
and  in  1873  42  of  the  66  counties  voted  for 
Prohibition  under  the  Local  Option  act  of  1872. 
The  political  intiuence  of  the  liquor  element, 
however,  caused  ]n-ompt  repeal  in  each  instance. 
It  is  noticeable  that  the  Local  Option  law  was 
enacted  soon  after  the  orgaviization  of  the  Pro- 
hibition party  in  Pennsylvania.  In  the  year 
of  its  repeal  (1875 1  the  vote  of  that  party 
reached  13,244,  although  it  had  been  only  4.632 
in  1874.  Thisexhibition  of  political  indepen- 
dence by  the  Prohibitionists  wns  short-lived, 
however,  for  in  1876  the  party's  vote  dwindled 
to  1,319;  and  it  remained  unimportant  until 
1884.  when  St.  John  polled  15,283.  It  was  not 
until  after  the  Prohibition  partly  had  become  an 
aggressive  factor  that  there  was  any  indicaticn 
of  willingness  on  the  part  of  the  politicians  to 
listen  to  tne  demands  of  the  friends  of  temper- 
ance. The  Prohibition  vote  cf  1884  was  main- 
tained at  the  unim])ortant  Slate  election  of  1885; 
and  in  1886  the  Prohibitionists  nominated  for 
Governor  the  Independent-Republican  ler.der, 
Charles  S.  Wolfe,  and  prepaied  for  a  vigorous 
canvass.  Then  it  was  that  the  Re]niblicans 
began  to  m,ake  conors'-ions.  The  Republican 
State  Convention  of  1883  declared : 

"  WheveciK,  There  is  an  evident  desire  on  the  part  of 
a  large  nnnit)er  of  intelligent  and  respectable  citizens  of 
Pennsylvania  to  amend  the  Constitution  by  inserting  a 
clanse  prohibiting  the  manufacture  and  sale  "of  intoxicat- 
ing drinks  as  a  beverage  within  the  limits  of  this  com- 
monwealth; therefore 

"Resolved,  That  it  is  the  opinion  and  judgment  of 
this  Convention  that  the  Legislature  of  the  State  should 
at  once  adopt  measures  providing  for  the  submission  of 
this  great  question  to  a  vote  of  the  people  in  accordance 
with  the  true  spirit  of  our  free  institutions." 

The  political  campaign  of  1886  resulted  in  a 
vote  of  32,458  for  the  head  of  the  Prohibition 
ticket ;  and  it  was  plainly  seen  that  early  defeat 
was  in  store  for  the  Republicans  unless  the  tem- 
perance issue  were  met.  But  the  political  lead- 
ers artfully  resorted  to  compromise  schemes. 
The  Legislature  of  1887  proposed  a  Prohibitory 
Constitutional  Amendment,  and  then  framed  a 
High  License  and  restrictive  measiu-e,  known 
as  the  Brooks  law,  which,  while  leaving  the 
traffic  practically  undisturbed  in  65  of  the 
67  counties,  was  designed  to  effect  a  sweep- 
ing reduction  in  the  number  of  saloons  in 
the  cities  of  Philadelphia,  Pittsburgh  and 
Allegheny  and  thereby  satisfy  conservative 
temperance  sentiment  and  militate  again.st 
the  adoption  of  the  Prohibitory  Amendment 
at  the  polls  after  the  work  of  submission 
should  have  been  completed  by  the  Legislature 
of  1889.  (See  High  License.)  The  hostile 
purpose  was  crowned  with  complete  success. 


Having  decided  on  this  shrewd  policy  the 
Republicans,  in  1887  and  1888,  renewed  their 
submission  pledge  of  1886 ;  and  in  1889  the 
State  Legislature,  Republican  by  a  large  major- 
ity in  each  branch,  voted  to  submit  the  Amend- 
ment. The  large  vote  cast  by  the  Prohibition 
party  in  1886  had  meanwhile  decreased  more 
than  one-third,  and  the  politicians  therefore  ielt 
that  it  was  safe  to  proceed  with  their  unscrupu- 
lous plans.  With  the  opening  of  the  legislative 
session  of  1889,  the  active  liquor  men  throughout 
the  country  began  to  exhibit  great  interest  in 
the  Prohibition  struggle  in  I 'enmsylvanii.  They 
openly  boasted  that  the  Brooks  law  andth  'pol- 
iticians would  decide  the  contest  in  their  favor. 
The  situation  as  viewed  from  the  liquor-sell- 
ers'standpoint  was  thus  described  in  the  regu- 
lar Pittsburgh  correspondence  of  Bonfort's 
Wine  and  Spirit  Circular  for  Jan.  25: 

"  Features  in  trade  have  been  lost  sight  of  at  the  present 
time,  and  the  liquor  men  generally  are  absorlicd  in  the 
question  of  Prohibition.  .  .  .  The  dealers  liere  have 
not  .yet  taken  any  step  toward  effecting  an  orLcanization, 
but  a  meeting  will  be  held  this  week.  There  will  be  no 
foolishness  this  time.  The  line  of  action  will  be  High 
License  v.  Prohibition.  A  committee  will  probably  be 
appointed  to  confer  with  a  similar  representation  from 
Philadelphia.  Some  dealers  in  thii;  district  were  in  favor 
of  making  an  effort  to  have  the  Brooks  law  amended 
[i.  «.,  in  the  interest  of  the  liquor  traflic — En. 1,  but  they 
now  see  that  this  v.ould  be  bad  policy  when  the  Pro- 
hibitory Amendment  question  has  been  forced  to  a  verdict 
from  the  people. 

"  Dc'iler.'s  here  feel  th«t  if  the  campaign  is  properly  con- 
ducted, there  need  be  no  fear  but  what  the  Amendment 
will  be  defeated.  Temperance  people  arc  not  a  unit  in 
favor  of  Prohibition  by  any  means.  They  are  already 
agitating  the  cjnestion,  'Is  Prohibition  what  we  want  J' 
and  many  there  are  who  answer  in  the  negative,  and  cite 
the  effects  of  Prohibition  in  Maine,  Kansas  and  other 
places  where  it  has  been  tried  and  proven  most  unsatis- 
factory to  those  who  were  responsible  for  its  enactment. 

"Another  thing  must  not  be  lost  sight  of  in  the  opening 
of  this  campaign:  the  Republican  party  of  Pennsylvania 
has  not  arrayed  itself  in  favor  of  Prohiljition.  It  has  only 
promised  to  let  the  people  liave  a  vote  on  the  question, 
and  Capt.  John  F.  Dravo,  who  has  been  delegated  by  the 
Republicans  to  take  charge  of  the  bill  in  the  House,  comes 
out  in  an  interview  in  a  Pittsburgh  paperand  says:  '  There 
are  many  prominent  Republicans,  leaders  in  the  party  in 
this  State,  who,  while  voting  in  the  Legislature  for  a  sub- 
mission of  the  question,  will  do  all  in  their  power  to  defeat 
it  at  the  polls.  This  is  their  privilege,  and  in  so  doing 
their  true  loyalty  to  the  Repiil)lican  party  will  not  l)e 
questioned.  The  Rei)ublican  party  is  not  pledged  to  Pro- 
hibition. It  simply  says  this  question  can  go  to  the  peo- 
ple for  a  decision.  If  the  matter  is  properly  presented  the 
intelliMnt  people  of  this  Commonwealth  will  probably 
vote  No.' " 


In  the  same  issue  of  Bovforfs  Wine  avd 
Spirit  Circular  the  Philadelphia  correspondent 
said  : 

"  As  matters  now  stand,  it  is  absolutely  necessary  for  the 
entire  trade  to  organize  and  get  to  work.  Wake  up,  espe- 
cially those  who  arc  always  known  as  very  generously  jier- 
mitting  others  to  do  the  work.  This  time  it  is  l)iisine;6: 
so  each  and  every  one  lay  aside  any  i>etty  trade  .iealousics 
you  may  have.  The  enemy  is  strong,  and  to  vancpiish  him 
requires  good  work,  strong  work,  and  work  together, 
with  your  battle  cry,  '  High  License  against  Prohibition.' 
Some  dealers  may  not  realize  this  condition  of  affairs  in 
the  trade,  but  all  will  very  soon  find  out  that,  though  the 
trade  cannot  now  defeat  Prohibition,  High  License  can,  as 
it  will  receive  the  support  of  a  large  majority  of  the  press 
throughout  the  State,  and  the  almost  unanimous  support  of 
all  fair-minded,  sensilile  and  practical  men." 

The  secrets  of  the  anti-Prohibition  campaign 
were  revealed  by  its  chief  manager,  Harry  P. 
Crowell,  in  a  confidential  interview  with  Col. 
R.  S.  Cheves,  in  March,  1890.   The  following  is 


Constitutional  Prohibition.]  131  [Constitutional  Prohibition. 


a  portion  of  the  interview,  as  published  in  the 
Voice  for  Aiml  d,  1890.' 

CroweTl:  "  How  did  we  begin  the  work?  Well,  I'll  tell 
you.  In  the  first  place,  we  knew  for  the  last  three  years 
that  this  fight  was  coming  on,  consequently  we  prepared 
for  it. 

"  The  fir.«t  meeting  of  the  liquor  men  was  called  to  con- 
vene in  Hurrisburfc,  wliicl.  was  a  failure.  The  second 
meeting  was  held  m  Philadelphia,  and  was  a  succciss,  for 
at  that  meeting  a  State  Executive  Committee  was  selected 
and  I  was  macle  Secretary  with  power  to  act  and  arrange 
for  the  fight.  At  that  meetinij  plans  were  also  adopted  by 
which  money  could  be  raised.  In  the  first  place  we  as- 
sessed the  sales  of  all  beer  per  ainnim  at  ten  cents  per  bar- 
rel. We  levied  an  assessment  of  $1,000  on  all  the  large 
hotels  like  the  Continental,  and  they  paid  it  like  little  men, 
and  from  $25  to  §50  on  all  the  smaller  retail  shops.  Besides, 
each  brewer  was  required  to  solicit  money  from  all  kindred 
interests — that  is,  every  man  in  trade  with  whom  they  had 
dealings,  those  engaged  in  making  barrels,  those  from 
whomVe  bought  our  horses,  and  wagons,  and  grain,  and 
machinery,  etc.,  were  solicited  to  contribute  to  a  campaign 
fund,  and  if  such  persons  failed  after  a  reasonable  timeto 
do  so,  a  notice  was  forwarded  intimating  that  a  prompt 
compliance  would  save  trouble  and  a  possible  boycott,  thus 
forcmg  hundreds  to  help  us  who  did  it  reluctantly.  By 
this  plan  we  raised  over  §200,000  which  was  expended  by 
the  State  Committee. ^  Besides,  local  committees  in  every 
community  raised  and  expended  large  sums  during  the 
campaign  and  on  election  day.  Appeals  for  money  were 
made  to  the  trade  throughout  the  country,  and  large"  sums 
were  contributed  by  the  Brewers'  Association  and  the  Na- 
tional Protective  Association." 

Cheves:  "  How  did  you  dispose  of  this  immense  amount 
of  money  ?" 

Crowell  :  "  Besides  the  current  expenses,  we  paid  it  out 
to  the  newspapers,  politicians,  and  some  for  literature  and 
some  for  public  speakers." 

Cheves  :  "  How  did  you  manage  to  enlist  the  politicians 
on  your  side  ?    Did  yo\i  offer  them  money  ?  " 

Crowell:  "Yes;  we  would  go  to  the  leaders,  both  Repub- 
licans and  Democrats,  and  say,  '  This  is  not  a  party  fight 
and  yon  cannot  afford  to  be  against  us;  if  you  do  vve  will 
remember  yon  at  tlie  next  regular  election,  but  if  you  will 
help  us  we  will  pay  you  liberally  for  your  support.' 

"  Such  State  leaders  as  Bill  Leeds,  Charlie  Porter,  who 
is  Chairman  of  the  [Philadelphia]  City  Republican  Com- 
mittee, Cooper  and  Dave  Martni,  and  others,  and  a  lot  of 
Democratic  leaders  we  paid  $500  apiece,  and  $200  apiece  to 
local  leaders,  and  $5  apiece  to  men  who  worked  and 
manned  the  polls  on  the  day  of  election. ^ 

I  An  effort  was  made  by  the  newspapers  and  the  poli- 
ticians implicated  to  discredit  the  interview,  but  Mr. 
Crowell,  in  a  personal  letter  written  to  Col.  Cheves  before 
the  publication  of  the  interview  (see  the  Voice  for  April  10, 
1890),  made  references  to  particular  features  of  the  con- 
versation that  fully  substantiated  the  truthfulness  of  Col. 
Cheves's  report. 

^  Mr.  Crowell  meant  by  this  statement  that  $200,000  was 
raised  in  the  city  of  Philadelphia  alone.  In  an  ex])licit 
article  in  the  Philadelphia  P)-ess  for  June  23,  1889  (evi- 
dently based  on  authentic  information  obtained  from  liquor 
headquarters),  it  was  shown  that  Philadelphia's  contribu- 
tion to  the  anti-Prohibition  campaign  fund  was  $200,000. 
Undenied  reports  of  the  amounts  raised  in  other  quarters 
appeared  from  time  to  time  during  the  Amendment  cam- 
paign. According  to  the  Pittsburgh  Conimercial  Gazette, 
$35,000  was  subscribed  by  the  brewers  of  Allegheny  County, 
and  according  to  a  Pittsburgh  dispatch  in  the  New  York 
THhune  for  May  29,  1889,  an  additional  sum  of  $25,000  was 
contributed  by  the  Retail  Liquor-Dealers'  Association  of 
Allegheny  County.  A  still  more  striking  indication  of  the 
thoroughness  with  which  the  liquor  traffic  throughout  the 
State  A\as  levied  upon  was  afforded  by  a  Scranton  dispatch 
to  the  New  York  Times  in  May,  1889  m  which  the  follow- 
ing was  said:  "In  the  little  mining  town  of  Archibald, 
nine  miles  north  of  Scranton,  there  are  13  saloons.  Each 
of  these  places  has  been  taxed  $100  by  the  Liquor  Com- 
mittee. If  $],:M0  can  be  thus  raised  in  that  village  it  is 
easy  to  see  what  an  enormous  sum  will  be  raised  through- 
out the  State.  Then  come  the  contributions  from  the  out- 
side and  the  effective  work  done  by  the  National  Liquor 
League." 

In  Philadelphia  correspondence  to  the  New  York 
7'iiiies,  May  0, 1889,  it  was  charged  that  the  brewers  of  New 
York  City  had  been  forced  to  contribute  $100,000  to  the 
Pennsylvania  anti-Prohibition  campaign  fund,  and  the 
truth  of  this  charge  was  practically  admitted  by  Andrew 
Finck,  a  prominent  New  York  brewer,  in  an  interview  in 
the  Voice  for  May  9,  1889. 

5  Mr.  Martin  was  openly  in  charge  of  the  Republican 
anti-Prohibition  work  of  the  campaign  in  Philadelphia. 


"  Did  I  pay  Quay  any  money  ?  Yes;  for  three  years  he 
liled  us,  and  our  contributions  to  him  came  very  near  l)eat- 
ing  us  at  the  polls.  It  was  reported  that  we  contributed 
money  to  defeat  Cleveland,  and  the  Democrats  got  hold  of 
it  and  a  plan  was  on  foot  to  have  the  Democratic  vote  catit 
for  the  Amendment  as  a  punishment  to  the  Republican 
brewers  of  the  State,  and  it  would  have  succeeded  if  I  had 
not  found  it  out  in  time  and  '  fixed '  the  boys,  but  it 
cost  us  a  big  pile  of  money  to  do  so.  We  had  all  tlie 
workers  on  our  side,  and  the  machines  of  both  old  parties 
were  with  us.  We  paid  the  County  Commissioners  of  this 
county  [Philadelphia]  to  let  us  have  the  poll-list  exclu- 
sively for  our  use  with  the  understanding  that  we^vere  not 
to  return  the  list  until  after  the  election.  So  the  ProhiV)i- 
tionists,  with  no  window-books,  no  money,  no  organiza- 
tion, had  no  show  whatever  against  us." 

Cheves:  "  Mr.  Crowell,  how  did  yon  manage  to  get  the 
newspapers  pretty  much  all  on  your  side  '!  "  ■ 

Crowell :  "  Why,  we  bought  them  by  paying  down  so 
much  cash.  I  visited  the  editors  in  person  or  had  some 
good  man  to  do  so,  and  arranged  to  pay  each  paper  for  its 
support  a  certain  amount  of  money.  Throughout  the 
State  we  paid  weekly  papers  from  $50  to  $500  to  publish 
such  matter  as  we  might  furnish,  either  news  or  editorial, 
but  the  city  daily  papers  we  had  to  pay  from  $1,000  to 
$4,tX)0,  which  latter  amount  was  paid  to  the  Times  of  this 
city  [Philadelphia].  Other  papers  we  could  not  buy 
straight  out,  consequently  we  had  to  pay  from  30  to  60 
cents  per  line  for  all  matter  published  for  us  according  to 
the  circulation  and  ability  of  the  paper.  We  paid  the 
Ledger  40  cents  per  line  and  the  Record  we  paid  60  cents 
per  line,  though  it  did  some  good  work  for  us  for  nothing. 
It  was  understood  with  most  all  of  the  papers  that  we 
would  furnish  the  matter,  and  so  \\e  employed  a  man  to 
write  for  us  and  prepare  articles  for  publication  which 
would  be  furnished  to  the  papers  to  be  printed  as  news  or 
editorial  matter,  as  we  might,  direct.  The  most  effective 
matter  we  could  get  up  In  the  influencing  of  votes  was, 
that  Prohibition  did  not  prohibit,  and  the  revenue,  taxa- 
tion, and  how  Prohibition  would  hurt  the  farmers.  We 
would  have  these  articles  printed  in  different  papers  and 
then  buy  thousands  of  copies  of  the  paper  and  send  them 
to  the  farmers.  If  you  work  the  farmers  on  the  tax  ques- 
tion you  can  catch  them  every  time. 


In  a  letter,  March  8,  1890,  to  William  E.  Johnson  of  Lin- 
coln, Neb.  (who  had  written  to  him  as  a  representative 
Pennsylvania  anti-Prohibition  leader,  for  suggestions  as  to 
methods  that  should  be  used  for  defeating  Constitutional 
Prohibition  in  Nebraska),  Mr.  Martin  wrote  in  the  char- 
acteristic style  of  a  professional  whiskey  manager.  "  My 
advice  to  j'ou,"  said  Mr.  Martin,  "would  be  to  see  the 
President  of  the  Liquor-Dealers'  Association  of  the  United 
States,  as  the  Association  will  be  able  to  furnish  you  docu- 
ments to  be  distributed  among  the  farmers  and  also  among 
the  religious  people.  As  far  as  the  politicians  are  con- 
cerned I  would  advise  to  take  one  from  each  party  for  each 
voting  district,  and  by  no  means  have  any  public  discus- 
sion between  advocates  of  Prohibition  or  anti-Prohibition. 
It  is  my  opinion  that  if  the  liquor-dealers  will  take  up  the 
High  License  law  and  show  its  advantaMs  as  a  revenue 
measure  by  distributing  documents  signed  by  fifty  or  one 
hundred  of  the  best  citizens  of  each  county  in  the  State 
favoring  High  License  as  against  Prohibition,  the  best 
results  will  be  obtained."  Notwithstanding  Mr.  Martin's 
offensive  iiarticipation  in  the  Pennsylvania  contest,  he  was 
subsequently  appointed  Collector  at  Internal  Revenue  for 
the  Philadelphia  district,  by  President  Harrison. 

Mr.  Cooper,  mentioned  by  Mr.  Crowell  as  one  of  the 
politicians  in  the  pay  of  the  liquor-dealers,  was  Chairman 
of  the  Pennsylvania  Republican  State  Committee,  and  had 
been  one  of  the  principal  leaders  who  brought  about  the 
submission  of  the  Prohibitory  Amendment  and  the  passage 
of  the  Brooks  law.  He,  too, "was  appointed  to  a  lucrative 
office  by  President  Harrison. 

Senator  Quay,  in  the  judgment  of  impartial  observers, 
was  responsible,  more  than  any  other  politician,  for  the 
manipulations  whereby  the  preliminaries  for  defeating  the 
Amendment  were  so  artfully  arranged.  From  the  begin- 
ning of  the  movement  for  submission  in  Pennsylvania 
Senator  Quay's  power  was  absolute  in  the  Republican 
party.  He  controlled  the  three  Republican  State  Conven- 
tions that  pledged  submission.  It  was  known  that  he 
watched  and  directed  every  phase  of  legislative  action  on 
the  Brooks  bill.  In  the  Amendment  campaign  a  word 
from  Senator  Quay  would  have  compelled  Republican 
friendship,  or  at  least  fairness.  But  the  leading  Repub- 
lican politicians  especially  identified  with  Senator  Quay  in 
the  management  of  the  party  were  active  and  unscrupulous 
opponents  of  Prohibition. 

For  particulars  of  thi;  Republican-Democratic  combina- 
tion in  Philadelphia  against  the  Amendment,  see  the 
Voice  for  June  20, 1889. 


Constitutional  Prohibition.! 


12' 


[Constitutional  Prohibition. 


"How  did  I  got  the  names  of  farmers  ?  Wliy,  T  eot 
the  poll-book  in  carh  town  and  hired  some  man  who  was 
well  posted  to  select  the  names  of  every  farmer  and  send 
them  to  me,  and  it  was  liere  we  got  in  our  best  work;  for 
with  the  politicians,  the  papers  and  the  farmers  yon  can 
always  win.  C.  C.  Tnrner,  Secretary  of  the  liquor-dealers' 
publishing  house  at  Louisville,  will  mail  you  a  list  of  the 
farmers  in  Nebraska.  He  is  a  bright  fellow,  and  can  do 
you  much  good  in  some  •  -ays  ;  but  don't  let  him  try  to 
manage  the  newspapers  for  you." 

Cheves  :  "How  did  you  manage,  Mr.  Crowell,  to  get  bo 
many  ministers  on  your  side  ?  " 

Crowell  :  "Oh,  that  is  the  easiest  thing  out.  No,  I  did 
not  go  to  the  preachers  as  I  did  to  the  politicians,  but  I 
always  found  out  a  good  man  in  the  church  who  could 
work  the  preacher  with  but  little  trouble,  for  half  of  the 
preachers  are  cowards.'  Then  I  hired,  for  so  much  a 
name,  some  old  broken-down  newspaper  man  or  politician 
to  go  around  with  a  petition  and  get  the  names  of  ministers 
and  lawyers,  which  we  published  with  fine  effect.  We 
talked  High  License  all  the  time.  Never  try  to  defend  the 
saloon;  if  so,  you  lose  the  influence  of  church  members 
and  ministers  ;"  but  talk  about  the  revenue,  cider,  taxation, 
and  especially  Prohibition  don't  prohibit,  and  clamor  for 
High  License.  I  had  thousands  of  badges  printed  witli 
High  License  and  gave  them  out  to  poll-workers  on  election 
day  and  it  had  fine'effect. 

"  Yes,  we  understood  and  agreed  to  the  passage  of  the 
High  License  law  before  the  Amendment  was  eiibmitted, 
BO  that  we  could  use  it  as  a  means  to  defeat  Prohibition. 
And  it  was  that  and  that  alone  that  saved  us.  With  all 
our  money  and  political  backing  we  could  not  have  defeated 
the  Amendment  on  any  other  jilea  than  High  License." 

Cheves:  "  Mr.  Crowell.  has  High  License,  which  has  re- 
duced the  number  of  saloons,  reduced  to  any  extent  the 
consumption  of  liquor  ?  " 

Crowell:  "No  sir;  on  the  contrary  the  consumption  of 
liquor  has  increased.  The  sale  of  beer  in  this  city  has  in- 
creased 20  per  cent,  the  last  year,  and  gradually  increased 
every  year  since  the  adoption  of  the  Brooks  law.  While 
the  number  of  licensed  saloons  has  been  reduced  under 
High  License,  unlawful  drinking  places  ha.\e  increased. 
AtTfirst  the  officers  made  an  effort  to  enforce  the  law,  but 
now  it  is  a  farce  and  no  effort  upon  the  part  of  the  authori- 
ties to  suppress  illegal  sales  is  being  made.  Yet  I  honestly 
believe  High  Liceiise  is  the  only  practical  way  in  dealing 
with  the  traffic.  I  am  sure  it  will  help  the  business,  make 
it  more  respectable  by  putting  it  in  the  hands  of  a  better 
class  of  men. 

"  Yes,  we  had  a  few  speal^ers,  but  as  a  nile  they  are  no 
good.  I  think  it  is  throwing  money  and  time  away  on 
tliem,  for  all  who  go  out  to  hear  our  speakers  are  generally 
on  our  side  to  start  with.  Yes,  we  had  Kate  Field,  and 
paid  her  $'250  and  expenses  per  day,  but  she  is  no  good — 
money  wasted.  We  also  had  Rev.  Sikes  and  Mr.Tomlinson 
of  Topeka,  but  they  are  not  worth  fooling  with.  Let  the 
speakers  go.  Get  up  good  literature  of  your  own,  and  send 
it  especially  to  the  farmers.  Make  a  plea  for  High  License 
and  the  battle  is  yours— that  is,  if  you  have  the  papers  and 
politicians  with  you,  and  you  can  get  them  if  you  have  the 
money. 

"  No,  you  need  not  go  to  Quay.  He  tries  to  be  on  both 
sides.  It  was  reported  during  our  campaign  that  he  would 
vote  for  the  Amendment.  Our  Committee  investigated  the 
report.  Q,uay  denied  it  and  satisfied  us  that  it  was  false. 
But  all  of  Quay's  stronMSt  personal  friends  and  supporters 
were  with  us  beyond  doubt,  and,  it  was  understood,  with 
his  approval.  It  was  for  that  influence  we  contributed 
liberally  to  his  support  for  three  years. 

"  I  never  want  to  go  through  such  another  fight.    It  al- 

1  It  must  not  be  imagined  that  there  was  any  general  op- 
position to  the  Amendment  among  clergymen.  As  in  all 
other  States,  a  large  majority  of  those  expressing  them- 
selves favored  Prohibititni  with  great  enthusiasm.  To  the 
hearty  co-operation  of  the  clergy  the  Prohibitionists  owed 
much  of  the  organized  and  active  work  that  was  done. 
But  there  were  some  notable  exceptions.  The  Roman 
Catholic  Archbishop  in  Philadelphia  (Ryan)  opposed  the 
Amendment  on  High  License  and  other  conservative 
grounds,  and  the  Cafholic  Total  A/i-sf/ncnce  N'ews  (organ  of 
the  Roman  Catholictotal  abstinence  societies)  also  op^jjosed 
it,  although  earnest  support  was  given  by  some  Catholic 
pastors  and  laymen,  particularly  Martin  I.  J.  Griffin  of 
Philadelphia.  'Bishop  Whitaker'tProlestant  Episcopal)  of 
I'hiladelphia  was  understood  to  be  inclined  against  Pro- 
hibition, and  various  influential  clergymen  throughout  the 
State,  in  interviews  or  otherwise  by  example,  gave  encour- 
agemen''  to  the  anti-Prohibitionists.  Very  few  clergymen, 
however,  engaged  actively  in  th(^  anti-Prohibition  work. 
Several  men  alleged  to  be  of  the  clot li  made  speeches  oj)- 
])osing  the  Amendment;  but  in  most  instances  these  in- 
ilividiials  were  of  questionable  reoutatiou. 


most  killed  me.  Besides,  my  business  suffered  greatly, 
for  I  was  nearly  three  years  with  the  burden  of  the  fight  on 
my  shoulders,  and  for  it  all  I  was  paid  only  g.5,000,  and 
some  of  the  trade  kicked  about  that. 

"  When  the  campaign  closed  we  were  in  debt  S50,000  on 
account  of  debts  contracted  with  the  news])apers,  but  the 
Committee  made  an  appeal  and  raised  the  amount  and 
settled  all  claims." 

Immediately  after  the  appearance  of  the 
Crowell  intervieAv.  particulars  of  a  lawsuit  in- 
stituted in  Philadelphia  were  published,  which 
thoroughly  confirmed  the  main  assertions  made 
by  the  anti-Prohibition  manager.  Moore  & 
Sinnott,  whole-;ale  liquor-dtalers  of  Phila- 
delphia, sued  Harry  P.  Crowell  and  the  Penn- 
sylvania State  Brewers'  Association  for  the  snm 
of  $22,800.  In  the  Amendment  campaign 
Moore  &  Sinnott  had  advanced  $88,000  to  tl;e 
anti-Prohibition  fund,  with  the  understand- 
ing that  tliis  amount  would  be  repaid— 40  per 
cent  of  it  by  the  Liquor-Dt airs'  League  and 
60  per  cent,  by  the  State  Brewers'  As.' ociation. 
The  *38,000  "was  advanced  when  the  Anti- 
Prohibition  Committee  was  short  of  money,  and 
was  applied  for  the  following-mentioned  pur- 
poses: .*20,0G0  to  the  newspapers  for  •'  advertis- 
ing" ;  $13,000  "to  the  window-book  men  en- 
gaged to  work  the  poll«,"and  $5,000  as  a  re- 
tainer to  Lewis  C.  Cassidy  (Democratic  poli- 
tician) "  on  account  of  the  *20  000  promised 
him  for  his  work  in  the  campaign. "  Specifica- 
tions of  the  amounts  paid  to  p;irticular  news- 
papers were  also  made  by  Moore  &  Sinnott,  as 
follows: 

May  20,  J)eln?rare  Covnfy  Citizen $.500  00 

Mav  25,  Philadelphia  Inquirer 1,.504  .52 

June  7,  Catholic  Standard. 175  00 

June  15,  Catholic  Standard 1,50  00 

June  1 5,  Co))}  711  errial  IJM 1 87  2.5 

June  17,  Philadelphia  Becord 300  00 

June  17,  Fr"nina  Bvlletin 500  00 

June  17,  Philadelphia /«g!«rer 776  00 

5n\\c\7,  Krmina  Star        225  00 

June  20,  Philadelphia  Ledger  (various  bills) 145  80 

June  24,  Evfiiinr/  Bulletin  250  00 

June  27,  Xorth  American 2,n42  20 

June  27,  Philadelphia  Inquirer 208  10 

June  27,  Philadelphia  Times 3,516  30 

Jul v  2,  Ereii in q  Teleqraph 4,000  00 

July  2,  Ereninn  Bulletin 500  00 

July  H,  Philadelphia  Ifecord 2,182  00 

July  15,  Detective  services 300  00 

July  15,  Extra  work  for  city  papers    575  00 

July  15,  Schuylkill  ^Yavij 2S0  00 

Total $19,216  67' 

1  This  list  represents  only  the  sums  paid  to  Philadelphia 
and  two  other  newspapers  out  of  the  particular  contribution 
jirovided  by  Moore  &  Sinnott — a  single  liquor  firm.  It  is 
merely  a  partial  list  of  sums  expended  for  subsidizing  the 
press.  Throughout  the  State  it  was  the  policy  of  the  liquor 
men  to  buy  the  columns  of  all  newspapers  that  could  be 
induced  to  print  anti-Prohibition  matter.  The  Easton 
IJaih/  Ei-preas,  having  printed,  during  the  campaign,  an 
article  that  created  false  impressions,  a  correction  was  sent 
to  its  editor  from  the  office  of  the  New  York  Voice,  and 
the  following  letter  was  received  in  reply  : 

"  The  Voice,  New  York. — The  reply  to  the  Philadelphia 
Hecord,  which  you  sent  us,  we  will  have  '  the  fairness  "  to 
))ublish  if  you  "will  remit  or  agree  to  pay  00  cents  an  inch 
for  it,  wliich  is  just  the  rate  paid  for  the  article  (with  an 
advt.  mark  to  it),  to  which  yon  refer.  Business  is  busi- 
ness. Th(!  Voic''  is  for  Prohibition — for  revenue,  no  doubt. 
We  are  in  business  to  do  business.     Yours. 

"  The  Express. 

"  Easton,  Pa.,  May  22, 1889." 

The  circumstances  thus  made  clear  by  testi- 
mony from  anti- Prohibition  sources  were  also 
defined  by  other  indisputable  evidence  Chair- 
man Palmer  of  the  State  Amendment  Commit- 


Constitutional  Prohibition.] 


133 


[Constitutional  Prohibition. 


tee,  although  a  Republic.in  in  politics,  on  the 
night  of  tlie  Amendment  election  explained  the 
result  by  saying:  ''The  defeat  of  the  Prohibi- 
tion Ameudmcnt  in  Pennsylvania  was  occa- 
sioned by  the  combined  villainy  of  tlie  Repub- 
lican and  Democratic  machines,  using  every 
practice  known  to  corrupt  politics  "  In  an  in- 
terview in  the  Voice  for  June  20,  1889,  Mr. 
Palmer  used  the  following  graphic  language  in 
speaking  of  the  hostility^and  unfairness  of  the 
press  : 

"The  newspapers  of  the  State,  with  few  exceptions, 
have  been  nothing  but  common  prostitutes.  This  language, 
in  view  of  the  trut'a,  is  not  strong,  but  calm  and  gentle.  I 
do  not  complain  because  thej'  have  opposed  Prohibition, 
but  because  thej'  have  permitted  the  saloons  to  use  their 
coluuins  for  the  most  shameful  purposes— for  systemati- 
cally deceiving  the  people.  They  have  printed  bogus  dis- 
patches and  uahesitatinglv  used  what  they  knew  was  bogus 
'natter  in  a  way  to  mislead  e\'eu  newspaper  men.  If  tlieir 
editors  deny  tliis  charge  they  deliberately  write  themselves 
down  liars.  They  have  printed  articles  manufactured 
rii'ht  here  in  Philadelphia  under  the  guise  of  honest  dis- 
patches from  T>es  Moines,  Topeka,  Atchison  and  other 
places  in  Prohibition  States,  giving  what  pretended  to  be 
facts  and  figures,  and  as.serting  the  failure  of  Prohibitory 
laws  and  tlie  havoc  wrought  by  them.  These  '  dispatches ' 
have  been  printed  in  the  ordinary  way  in  the  news  columns, 
without  any  marks  to  distinguish  them  as  paid  matter:  yet 
thev  have  been  paid  for  from  the  rum  funds  at  so  much 
[K'r'line,  and  this  disgraceful  work  has  been  going  on  all 
over  the  State  right  along  from  the  beginning  of  the  cam- 
pai^^'u, 

'^\Vc  have  sent  to  the  Prohibition  cities  and  obtained 
from  the  highest  authorities  the  most  conclusive  denials 
of  the  statements  mad  '■  in  the  bogus  '  dispatches.'  These 
denials  we  have  carried  to  the  newspapers  that  printed  the 
false  assertions,  hoping  that  motives  of  decency  and  fair- 
ness would  persuade  the  editors  to  make  corrections.  But 
their  charge  for  doing  justice  was  50  cents  a  line,  with  the 
condition  that  each  correction  should  appear  with  an  ad- 
vertising mark.i 

"We  took  some  of  these  denials  to  the  Philadelphia 
Ledger,  George  W.  Childs's  paper,  and  the  best  that  the 
organ  of  that  great  philanthropist  would  do  for  us  was  to 
print  them  in  the  advertising  columns  under  the  head, 
'  Political  Notices.'  On  the  other  hand,  the  Ledger  has 
given  two  columns  of  the  space  on  its  editorial  page  to  matter 
furnished  bv  the  liquor-dealers,  which  was  inserted  in 
such  a  way'that  even  a  newspaper  man  would  not  know 
that  it  was  not  genuine  reading  matter. 

"  When  we  had  our  great  meeting  in  this  city,  at  which 


'  Particulars  might  be  adduced  in  abundance.  We  cite 
a  single  instance: 

The  Voice,  during  the  campaign,  sent  letters  concerning 
the  practical  workings  of  Prohibition  to  all  the  County 
Probate  Judges  in  Kansas.  For  87  of  the  counties  replies 
were  received  from  Probate  Judges,  for  seven  counties 
from  other  county  oflicials,  for  two  counties  from  reliable 
private  citizens  and  for  one  county  from  a  former  Probate 
Judge— making  97  of  the  106  counties  of  Kansas  from 
which  answers  to  highly  practical  questions  were  returned. 
The  Toics  printed  all  the  answers  without  discrimination, 
a  few  of  them  being  more  or  less  unfavorable  to  Prohibi- 
tion in  certain  respects.  The  county  of  Comanche  was  one 
of  the  counties  from  which  no  reply  was  received.  But 
Mr.  Widaman,  the  Probate  Judge  of  that  county,  a  man 
opposed  to  Prohibition,  wrote  out  unfavorable  replies  to 
the  questions  and  had  them  published  in  an  anti-Prohibi- 
tion newspaper.  Judge  Widaman's  report  concerning  Pro- 
hibition, standing  by  itself,  was  from  any  general  point  of 
view  wholly  insignificant.  Comanche  was  a  newly  or- 
ganized county  of  Kansas,  casting  less  than  a  thousand 
votes  at  the  Presidential  election  of  18SS.  Moreover  it  was 
more  than  probable,  from  Judge  Wldaman's  tone,  that  he 
was  not  an  unprejudiced  observer.  Yet  the  report  made 
for  this  insignificant  county  by  a  manifestly  biased  man 
was  eagerly  reprinted  by  the  intelligent  editors  in  Penn- 
sylvania as  consequential  evidence  of  the  failure  of  Pro- 
liibition  to  accomplish  its  objects  in  practice.  Meanwhile 
the  remarkable  replies  produced  by  the  Voice  from  97  of 
the  101)  Kansas  counties  were  wholly  ignored  by  the  Penn- 
svlvania  newspapers,  and  it  was  impossible  to  induce  any 
influential  iournal  to  convey  to  the  public  the  results  of 
this  exceedingly  interesting  and  apposite  Investigation  un- 
til, just  before"  the  election,  the  Chairman  of  the  State 
Amendment  Committee  by  paying  "  advertising  "  charges 
had  them  inserted  in  the  Philadelphia  Press. 


Governor'  Beaver  presided  and  spoke,  we  had  to  pay  the 

Inquirer  $a)0  for  a  two-column  report,  the  other  papers 
givmg  the  affair  only  meagre  notices.  Had  it  been  an 
ortlinary  political  meeting  it  would  have  been  worth  at 
least  two  columns  to  any  paper  as  a  matter  of  news. 

"Money,  money,  was  v.'liat  the  newspapers  greedily 
clamored  for.  I  know  of  one  daily  paper  in  this  city  that 
stood  ready  to  sell  itself  to  ilie  Prohibitionists  for  $10  000 
'  Pay  us  $10,000  and  we  are  vours  ;  otherwise  we  go  in  for 
ruin  and  all  it  is  worth  in  dollars  and  cents.     Come  down 

with  that  $10,000, you,  or  we  will  lie  about  your  cause 

print  all  the  dirty  slanders  that  are  furnished  from  liquor 
headquarters  and  play  the  deuce  generally  \^'ith  Prohibi- 
tion, and  you  shall  have  no  redress  or  fairness  from  us 
you,  except  at  the  rate  of  so  much  per  line  ad- 
vertising rates.'  That  is  what  this  servant  of  the  people 
and  devotee  of  the  noble  art  of  journalism  practicallv 
meant  by  its  attitude."  ^ 

The  campaign  of  the  Pr.^hibitioni.sts  Ava-; 
begun  under  unfortunate  circumstances.  Tliero 
were  disagreements  between  the  Republican 
temperance  people  and  the  party  Prohiliilion- 
ists,  but  the  latter  acted  with  forbearance  and 
made  sacrifices.  The  State  Committee  was 
headed  by  Henry  W.  Palmer,  formerly  Attor- 
ney-General of  the  State.  It  worked  under 
great  disadvantages,  less  than  $5,000  being  sub- 
scribed for  its  use.  Good  service  was  rendered, 
however,  by  county  and  local  organizations.' 
The  only  very  notable  meeting  arranged  by  the 
State  Committee  was  the  one  held  in  th^  Phila- 
delphia Academy  of  Music,  at  which  Governor 
Beaver  presided.  But  much  vigor  and  enthu- 
siasm characterized  the  agitation  in  nearly  all 
parts  of  the  State.  Valuable  assistance  was 
rendered  by  many  of  the  foremost  citizens. 
Especially  noteworthy  were  the  friendly  utter- 
ances of  T.  V.  Powderly,  national  head  of  the 
Knights  of  Labor ;  Judge  John  F.  White,  who 
had  become  famous  throughout  Penn.sylvania 
by  his  rigid  interpretation  of  the  Brooks  law  in 
Allegheny  County ;  ex-Cliief-Justice  Daniel 
Agnew,  who  contributed  numerous  important 
newspaper  articles,  and  Postmaster-General 
John  Wanamaker.  The  Philadelphia  Journal 
of  United  Labor,  national  organ  of  the  Knights 
of  Labor,  emphatically  advocated  the  Amend- 
ment. The  Prohibition  papers  of  the  State,  led 
by  the  Scranton  People  and  Philadelphia 
Quill,  gave  intelligent  .support. 

The  vote  by  counties  was  as  follows  : 

Prohibition. 

Counties.  Yes.       No. 

Adams 2,107    .3,.50.5 

Allegheny 19,611  4.5,799 

Armstrong  ...  3,760    .3,91:3 

Beaver 4,751    3,321 

Bedford 2,829    3,677 

Berks 3,229  22,438 

Blair 6,:i22    4,0:^8 

Bradford 6,903 

Bucks 4,698 

Butler 5,614 

Cambria 2,7'58 

Cameron 51 1 

Carbon 1,.5:30 

Centre 4,.589 

Chester 8,415 

Clarion 3,701 

Clearfield .5,1.52 

Clinton 2,1:^5 

Columbia 2,607 

Crawford 7,518 

Cumberland...  3,779 

Dauphin 5,062 


Delaware. 

Elk 

Erie 

Fayette . . 

Forest 

Franklin 
Fulton . . . 


4,5:^9 
826 

5,163 

7.1.54 
843 

3,605 
543 


3,498 
9,018 
3,191 
4,190 

373 
3,882 
2,6.54 
6,723 
2,241 
3,570 
2,181 
3,848 
4,014 
4,422 
8,7'37 
5,595 
1,579 
8,978 
4,142 

414 
4,914 
1,142 


Prohibition. 

Counties. 

Yes.      No. 

Ureene       

.    3,143    2,S:31 

Huntingdon.. 

.    3,036    2,:i91 

Indiana 

.    4.966    2,067 

Jefferson 

.    4.07<i    2,452 

Juniata 

•     1,3.37    1,431 

Lackawanna . 

7,889    9,896 

Lancaster 

7,290  18,271 

Lawrence 

4,4S6    1,588 

Lebanon    ...  . 

1,460    6,7.52 

Lehigh 

1,779  11,684 

Luzerne 

11,145  14,967 

Lycoming  ... 

4,.5.56    5,681 

McKean 

3,054    2,058 

Mercer 

6,8:38    2,882 

Mifflin 

2,0.34    1,3:35 

Monroe 

970    2,.585 

Montgomery . 

4,6;B8  14,:3.58 

Montour 

1,199    1,621 

Northampton. 

2,986  11,152 

Northumb'rl'd 

5,062    5,609 

Perry 

1,908    3,214 

Philadelphia . 

26,468118,963 

Pike    

260      969 

Potter        

],.575    1,540 

Schuylkill... 

4,180  16,490 

Snyder 

947    S,;i59 

Somerset 

2,(79    3,451 

Sullivan 

667       961 

Susquehanna . 

4,781    2,305 

Constitutional  Prohibition.] 


124 


[Constitutional  Prohibition. 


Prohibition. 

Counties.  Yes.  No. 

Tioga 4,713  3,G37 

Union 1,605  1.4i2 

Venango 5,409  1,908 

Warren 3,.532  2,072 

Washington  ..  6,762  4,757 

Wayne 2,521  2,770 


Prohibition. 


Counties.  Yes. 

Westmoreland  8,292 

Wyoming 2,259 

York    6,841 


No. 

8,184 

1,041 

11,407 


Totals 290,617484,644 

Majority....  188,027 

Tallie  Morgan. 


RJiode  Island's  Repeal. 

The  movement  for  the  repeal  of  the  Rhode 
Island  Prohibition  Amendment  was  begun 
immediately  after  its  adoption.  It  was  made  a 
part  of  the  Constitution  at  the  State  election 
held  April  7,  1886.  The  Legislature  was  to 
meet  at  Newport  in  May,  and  it  was  expected 
that  suitable  statutory  legislation  would  then 
be  passed.  A  bill  was  drawn  up  by  a  commit- 
tee of  Prohibitionists  and  presented  in  their 
behalf  by  Attorney-General  Metcalf.  The 
Republicans  controlled  the  Legislature  by  30  to 
7  in  the  Senate  and  64  to  8  in  the  House.  It  was 
not  expected  that  any  hostility  or  unfairness 
would  be  encountert  d,  and  the  State  w\as  wholly 
unprepared  for  the  complications  that  ensued. 
The  Legislature  enacted  Mr.  Metcalf's  bill, 
adding  to  it  a  provision  for  a  State  Constabulary. 
This  change  was  not  seriously  objected  to  by 
the  temperance  people,  although  they  had  re- 
frained from  asking  for  the  new  machinery  lest 
opposition  should  be  aroused  on  the  score  of 
expense.  But  when,  immediately  afterward, 
Gen.  Charles  R.  Bray  ton,  a  lobbyist  and  a  man 
of  clouded  reputation,  supposed  to  be  on  inti- 
mate terms  with  the  liquor  element,  was  made 
Chief  of  the  Constabulary,  it  was  charged  that 
the  law  was  being  used  for  personal  and  politi- 
cal purposes.  Yet  some  Prohibitionists,  hoping 
that  Gen.  Bray  ton  would  prove  loyal  to  his 
trust,  did  not  join  in  the  demand  for  his  retire- 
ment. Angry  contentions  followed,  and  in  the 
confusion  that  reigned  the  merits  of  the  demand 
for  the  honest  enforcement  of  the  Prohibitory 
act  received  comparatively  little  attention. 

The  public  oflBcials  of  the  city  of  Provi- 
dence, continuing  the  policy  of  comparative 
non-interference  with  the  liquor  traffic  that  they 
had  observed  under  the  license  law,  made  no 
real  effort  to  enforce  Prohibition.  Prohibitory 
law  entered  a  city  whose  Mayor,  Aldermen  and 
even  policemen  of  lowest  grade  recognized  no 
obligation  to  enforce  any  liquor  act.  whatever 
its  conditions.  The  city's  prosecuting  officer 
was  so  related  to  prominent  liquor-dealers,  both 
socially  and  as  professional  counsel  in  civil  bus- 
iness, that,  while  possibly  willing  to  prosecute 
cases  actually  forced  upon  him,  he  found  it  easy 
to  point  out  to  executive  officers  all  risks,  how- 
ever improbable,  that  they  were  liable  to  en- 
counter. Before  the  expiration  of  a  single  year 
the  name  of  this  pro.secutor  was  appended  to  a 
memorial  to  the  Legislature  testifying  that  Pro- 
hibition was  "incapable  of  enforcement.  '  By 
every  me.  US  available  to  him  this  very  influen- 
tial law  officer  did  all  in  his  power  to  discourage 
loyalty.  Attorney-Gerjeral  Metcalf,  though 
honestly  desiring  to  do  his  duty,  wa.'i  delayed  by 
appeals  and  exceptions  and  was  unable,  during 
his  brief  term  of  office,  to  obtain  convictions. 
There  was  at  no  time  an  honest  trial  of  Prohi- 
bition on  its  merits,  except  during  the  admin- 


istration of  Attorney-General  Horatio  Rogers 
(1888-9);  and  Mr.  Rogers  did  not  have  the  co- 
operation of  the  other  officials  or  the  cordial 
support  of  his  party.  Although  Gen.  Brayton 
resigned  as  Chief  of  State  Police  in  1887,  and 
was  succeeded  by  Edward  F.  Curtis  (who  was 
a  more  acceptable  man),  the  new  Chief,  though 
better  sustained  by  the  Prohibitionists  than 
Brayton  had  been,  struggled  against  a  defective 
statute  which  limited  his  powers  and  oppor- 
tunities. Throughout  the  period  of  Constitu- 
tional Prohibition  in  Rhode  Island  the  Pro- 
hibitionists found  themselves  balked  by  the 
politicians  at  every  step.  They  refrained 
from  using  retaliatory  methods;  the  vote 
of  the  Prohibition  party  at  State  elections 
was  suffered  to  decline  from  2  585  in  1886  to 
1.895  in  1887  and  1,326  in  188S;  and  the 
partisan  managers  therefore  found  in  the  elec 
tion  returns  no  sufficient  indication  that  their 
surrender  to  the  liquor  element  would  be 
attended  by  serious  danger.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  earnest  Republican  Prohibitionists 
endeavored  to  persuade  their  party  to  grant 
satisfactory  amendments  to  the  law,  and  much 
work  was  done  by  Ihem  within  party  lines,  at 
limes,  apparently,  with  prospects  of  success; 
but  the  liquor  Republicans  were  able  to 
counteract  their  influence.  The  bitter  and 
unscrupulous  ho.stility  of  the  press  was  another 
important  element  Public  opinion  in  Rhode 
Island  was  practically  controlled  by  two  power- 
ful daily  newspapers,  the  Providence  Journal 
and  Telegram,  which  fought  the  Prohibitory 
law  with  extreme  rancor.  Both  the  Journal 
and  the  Telegram  magnified  the  violations  of  the 
law  and  attributed  them  to  the  Prohibition 
policy  rather  than  to  the  perfidy  of  official  and 
political  conspirators.  Yet  it  was  declared  by 
the  chief  law  officer  of  the  State,  Attorney- 
General  Rogers,  that  Prohibition  could  have 
been  made  a  complete  success  if  the  authorities 
had  shown  any  honest  disposition  to  respect 
their  oaths  of  office. ' 

We  summarize  briefly  the  chief  developments 
following  the  enactment  of  the  statute  and  pre- 
ceding the  repeal  campaign  : 

1887.— At  the  State  election  in  April  the  Re- 
publican party  lost  control  of  the  State  Govern- 
ment for  the  iirst  time  in  30  years  Its  defeat 
was  due  to  the  public  disgust  occasioned  by  con- 
troversies, and  to  other  complications.  Dem- 
ocratic success  did  not,  however,  ."signify  a  vic- 
toiy  for  the  cause  of  enforcement,  since  the 
Democratic  party  was  thoroughly  committed  to 
the  liquor  cause.  The  Democrats  retained  con- 
trol until  April,  1888.  and  durmg  this  year  the 
liquor  dealers  suffered  little  or  no  molestation. 

1888  — The  Legislature,  at  its  January  ses- 
sion, completed  the  preparations  begun  in  1887 
for  submitting  lo  the  people  a  Constitutional 
Amendment  removing  the  restrictions  on  the 
franchise — restrictions  against  male  foreign- 
born  citizens  and  restrictions  establishing  a 
property  qualification  for  voters.  At  the  April 
election  this  Amendment  (known  as  the  Bourne 
Amendment)  was  adopted.  At  the  same  elec- 
tion the  Republican  party  triumphed  on  a  plat- 


^  The  Fozcs,  June 


1889. 


Constitutional  Prohibition.] 


125 


[Constitutional  Prohibition. 


form  containing  the  following  apparently  ag- 
gressive declaration  : 

"  The  people  of  Rhode  Island,  acting  in  their  sovereign 
rapacit.v,  have,  hy  a  Constitutional  majority,  added  to 
their  fuudamentallaw  Article  5,  known  as  the  Prohibitory 
Amendment.  The  Constitution  which  at  any  time  existg, 
till  chani.'('d  by  an  explicit  and  authentic  act  of  the  whole 
people,  is  sacredly  obligatory  upon  all.  For  the  mainte- 
nance of  the  integrity  of  the  State  and  the  pre.'servation  of 
good  order,  we  recognize  and  emphasize  that  it  is  the  duty 
of  the  General  Assembly  to  make  all  needful  laws  for  giv- 
ing effectiveness  to  Constitutional  provisions;  and  it  is 
the  imperative  duty  of  all  State,  municipal  and  town 
executive  ofiicers  faithfully,  impartially,  persistently  and 
effectively  to  enfiiree  said  laws.  To  the  making  and 
enforcing  of  such  laws  we  pledge  ourselves  as  a  party, 
and  we  denounce  as  hurtful  to  the  best  interests  of  the 
State  all  attempts  to  evade  the  laws  and  all  compromise 
with  law-breakers." 

This  was  regarded  as  a  pledge  by  the  Repub- 
licans to  enfoi  ce  the  law  and  to  strengthen  the 
statute  by  adding  to  it  the  features  of  the  Kan- 
sas Injunction  act ;  and  the  party  managers,  in 
consideration  of  continued  support,  made 
promises  that  were  satisfactory  to  the  temper- 
ance Republican  leader,  Henry  B.  Metcalf. 
The  Legislature  (Republican  by  81  to  6  in  the 
Senate  and  61  to  11  in  the  House)  met  at  New- 
port in  May  and  refused  to  act  upon  the  In- 
junction bill  after  it  had  been  practically  killed 
in  the  House  (34  yeas  to  31  nays)  by  the  addi- 
tion of  an  amendment  providing  for  jury  trials 
in  all  cases  where  questions  of  fact  should  be 
raised.  At  this  session  the  bill  authorizing  the 
Chief  of  State  Police  to  employ  counsel  in  seiz- 
ure cases  was  defeated,  and  a  resolution  for  the 
resubmission  of  the  Prohibitory  Amendment 
was  introduced.  It  was  afterwards  learned 
that  the  Legislature's  behavior  was  due  chiefly 
to  the  corrupt  influences  brought  to  bear  by 
Gen.  Brayton,  whose  services  as  a  lobbyist  had 
been  secretly  retained  by  the  liquor  men.  In 
this  year,  as  before  stated,  Attorney-General 
Rogers  made  his  commendable  efforts  in  behalf 
of  enforcement. 

1889. — The  Injunction  bill,  with  the  damag- 
ing Amendment  added  in  1888,  came  up  for 
final  consideration  in  the  Legislature  in  Jan- 
uary. Although  its  virtue  was  practically  de- 
stroyed, the  temperance  people  thought  it  was 
worth  fighting  for.  But  it  was  indefinitely 
postponed  in  the  House  (Feb.  13),  the  vote 
standing :  Yeas.  46  (39  Republicans  and  7 
Democrats) ;  nays,  25  (23  Republicans,  2 
Democrats  and  1  Prohibitionist);  absent,  1 
(a  Democrat).  The  Legislature  next  voted 
to  resubmit  the  Prohibitory  Amendment. 
In  the  Hou.se  the  vote  stood  (March  8): 
Yeas,  41  i35  Republicans  and  6  Democrats); 
nays,  25(21  Republicans,  3  Democrats  and  1 
Prohibitionist);  not  voting,  6  (5  Republicans 
and  1  Democrat).  The  vote  on  resubmission 
in  the  Senate  (March  13)  was  as  follows  :  Yeas, 
21  (16  Republicans  and  5  Democrats)  ;  nays,  15 
(13  Republicans,  1  Prohibitionist  and  1  Inde- 
pendents At  the  April  election  there  was  an 
independent  movement  of  Republicans,  known 
as  the  "'Law  Enforcement  party,"  which 
polled  3,597  votes  and  left  the  regulars  in  a 
minority,  although  all  but  one  of  their  candi- 
dates were  afterwards  elected  by  the  Legisla- 
ture. The  single  Republican  whose  election  was 
prevented  was  the  courageous  Attorney-Gene- 
eral,  Horatio   Rogers,     Although  he  was  nomi- 


nated by  the  Republican,  Prohibition  and 
Fourth  parties,  enough  Republicans  turned 
against  him,  at  the  dictation  of  the  saloon  ele- 
ment, to  elect  his  Democratic  opponent.  At 
the  next  session  of  the  Legislature,  in  May,  the 
work  of  resubmiission  was  promptly  finished,  the 
final  vote  standing :  in  the  Senate — yeas,  23 
(13  Republicans,  9  Democrats  and  1  Independ- 
ent); nays,  11  (10  Republicans  and  1  Prohibi- 
tionist);  not  voting,  4  (3  Republicans  and  1 
Democrat) ;  in  the  House — yeas  56  (20  Repub- 
licans and  3G  Democrats);  nays,  13  (10  Repub- 
licans, 2  Prohibitionists  and  1  Democrat);  not 
voting.  3  (2  Republicans  and  1  Democrat).  It 
was  arranged  that  the  popular  vote  should  be 
taken  on  June  20,  1889.  leaving  only  20  days 
for  the  campaign.  Moreover,  Pennsylvania 
was  to  vote  on  a  Prohibitory  Amendment  on 
June  18,  and  all  the  leading  Prohibition  speak- 
ers were  engaged  in  that  State.  The  time  for 
the  election  was  deliberately  chosen  for  the  pur- 
pose of  insuring  repeal  ;  it  was  expected  that 
Pennsylvania  would  give  a  heavy  anti-Prohibi- 
tion majority  on  the  18th,  which  would  be  de- 
moralizing to  the  Prohibitionists  in  Rhode  Is- 
land on  the  20th.  In  order  to  remove  all  doubt 
of  the  result,  the  Legislature  pas  ed  a  special 
act  providing  that  the  new  Ballot  Reform  law, 
which  was  to  have  taken  effect  on  the  1st  of 
June,  1889,  should  not  take  effect  until  theSOth 
of  June;  and  thus  it  was  arranged  that  tlie  Pro- 
hibition election  should  occur  under  the  old 
law,  a  measure  that  facilitated  bribery  and 
frauds. 

In  the  campaign  and  at  the  polls  the  advan- 
tage was  wholly  with  the  anti-Prohibitionists. 
It  is  true  intelligent  argument  and  fair  discus- 
sion were  not  used  by  the  repealers,  their 
appeals  were  addressed  to  prejudice,  and  while 
their  whole  case  rested  on  the  supposed  supe- 
riority of  High  License  to  Prohibition  they 
could  offer  no  evidence  in  favor  of  High 
License.  But  they  had  almost  exclusive  con- 
trol of  the  agencies  for  influencing  voters.  The 
two  leading  political  organizations  worked  for 
repeal  openly.  Even  the  New  York  Tribune 
made  this  admission  in  its  Rhode  Island  cor- 
respondence, June  21: 

"The  reasons  for  this  great  Prohibition  repulse  are 
many,  outside  of  the  merits  of  the  quesiion.  The  re- 
pealers were  abundantly  supplied  with  money.  The 
money  was  raised  by  the'Liquor-Dealers'  Protective  Trade 
Association.  They  had  the  use  of  the  ward  workers  of 
both  the  Democratic  and  Republican  parties." 

The  chief  newspapers  refused  to  permit  the 
Prohibitionists  to  present  the  reasons  against 
repeal  in  their  columns.  An  application  to  the 
Providence  Journal  for  fair  treatment  drew  the 
following  answer: 

"  Dear  Sir :  In  reply  to  your  note  I  would  say  that  the 
terms  for  the  advertising   columns  of   the  Journal  and 
Bvlletm.  can  be  obtained  at  this  office,  with  the  condition 
that  the  matter  be  of  unobjectionable  character. 
"  Yours  very  truly, 

"Albert  M.  Williams,  Editor." 

In  confidential  letters  to  William  E.  Johnson 

of  Lincoln.  Neb.,  in   1890,   several  prominent 

liquor-yellers  of    Rhode    Island     related     the 

secrets  of  the  campaign.      Thomas  Grimes,  a 

wholesale  liquor-dealer  of  Providence,  wrote: 

"  The  way  we  handled  our  campaign  here  was,  we  got 
the  Chairman  of  the  Democratic  State  Central  Committee 


Constitutional  Prohibition.] 


12G 


[Constitutional  Prohibition. 


and  the  Chairman  of  the  City  Committee  interested  in  onr 
l)elialf,  also  Gen.  C.  R.  Brayton,  the  head-piin  Republican 
worker  in  the  State,  who  is  well  up  in  all  things  pertaining 
to  politics;  he  toolv  care  of  the  Republican  State  and  City 
Committees  which  we  paid  him  $6,000  for  his  services; 
in  addition  it  cost  us  through  the  newspapers,  pamphlets 
and  circulars.  ,$31,000  to  do  away  with  Prohibition  in  (his 
Slate.  I  should  recommend  you  to  get  the  newspapers 
interested  iu  your  behalf;  it  is  the  strongest  point  you  can 
use." 

Gen.  Brayton  himself  wrote  as  follows: 

"William  E.  Johnson,  Dear  f'Hr ;  I  have  had  experi- 
ence in  opposing  Prohibition.  I  managed  the  repeal  of 
our  Slate  Prohib.  Amendment  last  June.  It  is  too  early  to 
comnience  your  campaign  as  you  do  not  vote  until  next 
November. 

"For  a  fair  remuneration  I  will  come  to  Nebraska  in 
September,  organize  your  campaign  and  start  you  all 
right. 

"  I  would  like  to  know  before  July  1st  if  I  am  to  come, 
so  that  I  may  bring  with  me  such  documents  as  we  used. — 
Yours  truly,  Chas.  R.  Buavton,  Box  LW. 

"Providence,  R.  I.,  March  12.  1890. 

"1  refer  you  to  Hon.  Prank  Jones  of  Portsmouth,  N.  H.; 
Mr.  Weld,  Secretary  of  Mass.  Anti-Prohib.  Com.,  I3ostoii, 
Mass.;  Mr.  James  Ilanley,  Mr.  Thomas  Grimes  and  Molter 
Bros.,  of  Providence,  R.  I." 

Jesse  P.  Eddy,  a  very  well-known  Providence 
rumscUer.  in  giving  advice  to  the  Nebraska 
anti- Prohibitionists,  based  on  the  experience 
gained  in  Rhode  Island,  wrote: 

"Don't  have  any  joint  discussions;  don't  have  any 
speeches  unless  you  can  get  minister  to  meet  minister.  .  .  . 
Have  four  or  live  good  writers,  and  have  their  articles 
published  in  your  papers — if  notgratis,  pay  for  them  —and 
send  the  papers  with  the  articles  in  to  all  the  voters,  far  and 
near.  Secure  the  politicians  and  wire-pullers  to  talk 
against  it  in  every  town,  dwelling  on  the  expense,  in- 
crease of  taxes,  kitchen  bar-rooms,  attic  slums  and  cellar 
dives,  and  the  increase  of  drunkenness  caused  by  Prohibi- 
tion. .  .  .  Hire  politicians  to  talk  privately  against 
this  measure.  The  newspaper  is  your  greatest  lever.  .  .  Cjet 
correspondents  from  Kansas,  Rhode  Island,  Massachu- 
setts, Maine  (iu  fact  from  every  State  where  it  has  lieen 
tried)  to  write  up  its  failure.  Have  this  correspondence 
published  in  your  newspaper  (not  all  in  one  paper,  but 
from  different  States  in  different  papers),  paying  for  the 
publishing  of  them  if  required.  .  .  .  Gf  course  in  pub- 
lishing these  letters,  don't  give  the  name  of  the  writer. 
Use  !i7umi  (le 2}l'unie.  .  .  .  Hire  all  the  ward  and  town 
politicians  and  workers  to  work  for  you." 

The  vote  by  counties  stood: 

Repeal  of  Prohibition. 

Counties.                                              Yes.  No. 

Bristol 1,08:1  nr>3 

Kent 2,146  1,061 

Newport 2,426  744 

Providence 21,:32r  C,090 

Washington 1,333  1,708 

Totals 28,:^1.5    9,956 

Majority 18,a59 

Majority  in  excess  of  three-fifths    5,3.52 

South  Dakota  '  and  Worth  Dakota 

These  two  States  adopted  Prohibitory  articles 
as  features  of  their  original  Constitutions — not 
as  Amendments.  They  entered  the  Union  fully 
committed  to  Prohibition.  As  in  other  States, 
however,  the  question  of  Constitutional  Prohib 
ition  was  decided  in  them  by  separate  votes  of 
the  people.  The  triumphs  in  the  two  Dakotas, 
woii  iu  the  fall  of  1889,  were  the  first  victories 
for  Constitutional  Prohibition  f-ince  Rhode  Is- 
land was  carried  iu  the  spring  of  1886.  Mean- 
while nine  States  successively  had  voted  against 
tlie  policy. 

Although  the  southern  part  of  Dakota  Terri- 
tory gave  a  majority  for  C^onstitutional  Prohib- 
ition in  1885,  the  action  taken  iu  that  year  was 

'  The  editor  is  indebted  to  S.  H.  Cranmer  of  Aberdeen, 
S.  D. 


without  effect,  since  Congress  refused  to  pro- 
vide for  the  erection  of  a  State  Government  in 
any  part  of  Dakota.  The  Territorial  Legislature 
instead  of  enacting  a  Prohibitory  statute,  passed 
a  JLocal  Option  and  High  License  law  in  1887 
Under  this  measure  the  majority  of  thccouutiis 
voted  for  local  Prohibition,  and  it  was  seen  that 
tliere  was  a  very  strong  balance  of  sentiment 
agaiu.st  license  throughout  the  Territory.  On 
Feb.  23,  1889,  Congress  passed  an  Enabling  act, 
providing  for  the  admission  of  South  Dakota, 
North  Dakota.  Washington  and  Montana  as 
States,  each  of  the  proposed  States  being  re- 
quired to  frame  a  Constitution  and,  on  the  1st 
of  October  1889,  to  hold  an  election  to  ratify 
its  Constitution  and  elect  State  officers.  The 
South  Dakota  Prohibitionists  had  been  active 
since  18S5.  The  Local  Option  campaigns  had 
aroused  much  interest.  In  March,  1888.  the 
Prohibition  party  was  organized,  and  at  the 
election  in  November  of  that  year  its  candidate 
for  ConL!;ress  polled  1,336  votes  (including  418 
secured  for  him  in  North  Dakota)  Immediately 
after  the  1888  election  the  Prohibition  party  be- 
gan an  active  agitation  in  behalf  of  Constitu- 
tional Prohibition.  The  work  was  broadened  in 
the  spring  of  1889,  when  anon  partisan  Conven- 
tion was  iield  at  Huron,  and  a  non-partisan  Exec- 
utive Committee  was  selected,  witli  V.  V.  Barnes 
as  Chairman.  Soon  afterwards  the  South  Da- 
kota Farmers'  Alliance,  in  State  Convention, 
declared  emphatically  for  Constitutional  Pro- 
hibition. The  Methodist  Episcopal  Conference 
also  adopted  very  radical  resolutions,  intimating 
plainly  that  the  Republicans  would  be  held  re- 
sponsible if  the  movement  should  fail  in  South 
Dakota.  The  campaign  opened  early  and  ex- 
tended to  all  the  counties,  many  well-known 
speakers  from  other  Stites  being  employed. 
In  August  the  South  Dakota  Republican  Con- 
vention met  at  Huron,  and  at  the  dictation  of 
the  farmers  inserted  the  following  plank  in  its 
platform  by  a  nearly  unanimous  vote: 

"Recognizing  the  pernicious  influence  of  the  traffic  in 
intoxicating  liquors  upon  every  interest  of  our  Common- 
wealth, we  favor  national  and  State  Prohibition  of  such 
traflic  and  the  adoption  of  the  article  of  our  Constitution 
relating  thereto,  and  the  enactment  and  enforcement  of 
Bucli  laws  as  the  vv'isdom  of  the  people  may  enact." 

The  Republicans  adhered  to  the  spirit  of  this 
declaration  with  reasonable  faithfulness.  The 
Democrats  pronounced  for  High  License  ;  but 
even  in  the  Democratic  party  Prohibition  senti- 
ment was  so  strong  that  a  Prohibitory  resolu- 
tion received  more  than  50  votes  in  the  State 
Convention. 

The  liquor  men  of  South  Dakota  had  a  very 
large  fund  at  their  disposal,  sent  from  the  East. 
It  was  currently  reported  that  in  addition  to 
this  fund  they'  received  $80,000,  transferred 
from  North  Dakota,  where  it  was  thought  there 
was  no  danger  of  the  adoption  of  Prohibition. 
A  considerable  part  of  this  money  was  ex- 
pended in  buying  the  favor  or  the  silence  of 
the  press.  "High  License"  was  the  watch- 
word of  the  opposition,  and  many  thousands  of 
silk  badges  with  "High  License"  printed  on 
them  were  distributed  just  before  the  election 
by  the  saloon  managers. 

The  South  Dakota  vote  by  counties  was  as 
follows : 


Constitutional  Prohibition.] 


1-27 


[Constitutional  Prohibition. 


Prohibition. 

OotTNTiES.  Yes.    No. 

Aurora 690 

Beadle 1,C23 

Hrown 2,8(il 


Brookings  . 

Bnile  

Jliiffalo 

l;oii  Homme. . 

!!iiUe 

( 'uster 

('anit)bell 


1,422 
118 
773 
024 
143 
342 
397 

Clark 1,214 

Coddingtoii. .  .        978 
Charles  Slix...        575 

Clav 9lM 

Day 1,082 

Douglass 425 

Ducll 5(12 

Davison 837 

Edmons 007 

Fall  Kiver....       301 

Faulk  020 

Grant, 834 

Hamlin 749 

Hand 1,147 

Hanson 515 

Hughes 545 

Hutchinson...        401 


605 
1,179 
1,.576 
714 
134 
744 
1,005 
1.54 
527 
2()8 
500 
1,020 
45S 
50',( 
771 
599 
418 
621 
574 
33! 
459 
582 
328 
077 
539 
710 
1,188 


Prohibition. 


Counties.  Yes. 

Hyde 320 

Jerauld  ...      .  598 

Kingbury 1,305 

Lake     828 

Laurence 1,223 

Lincoln 1,07'2 


McC'ook  , 

McPherson.. 

Marshall.... 

Mead 

Miner  

■Minnehaha.. 

;\Ioody   

i'ennington.. 

Potter 

Roberts 

Sanborn  . . . . 


055 
290 
857 
445 
725 
2,265 
910 
701 
438 
207 
828 
Spink   1,855 


Sully, 
Turner. ... 
Union     . . 
Walworth. 
Yankton . . 


441 

845 
817 
433 
767 


No. 
191 
315 
019 
7s;i 

2,103 
W2 
,S04 
(530 
355 
022 
454 

2,.515 
426 
855 
418 
129 
301 
997 
279 

1,106 
952 
120 

1,251 


Totals 39,,509  33,456 

Majority 0,053 


In  North  Dakota  the  victory  for  Prohibition 
was  a  surprise  to  all.  The  Prohibitionists  liad 
practically  admitted  that  it  would  be  impossible 
to  carry  both  of  the  Dakotas.  and,  believing  that 
conditions  were  most  promising  in  South  Da- 
kota, they  had  decided  to  concentrate  tliere. 
Local  efforts  were  made  in  North  Dakota  by  a 
few  devoted  persons,  but  no  outside  help  of 
importance  was  received.  The  Republican 
party  treated  the  question  with  more  caution 
than  was  shown  in  South  Dakoln.  One  of  the 
most  notable  influences  contributing  to  the  suc- 
cessful result  was  the  support  of  Prohibition  by 
the  Scandinavian  element.  In  some  localities 
settled  almo.st  exclusively  by  Scandinavian;?, 
the  vote  was  nearly  unanimous  for  Prohibition. 

The  following  table  shows  the  North  Dakota 
vote  in  detail: 


Prohibition. 


Counties.  Yea. 

Barnes 801 

Burleigh 269 


Benson . 

Bottineau 

Billings 

Cass 

Cavalier 

Dickey 

Eddy   

Emmons 

Fo.ster    ...... 

<irand  Forks  .. 

<;"i?gs 

Kidder 

Lamoure 

Logan  

Morton 

^IcHenry 

McLean 

-Mcintosh 

Mercer 


292 

365 

4 

1,739 

634 

966 

212 

100 

148 

1,534 

345 

186 

414 

20 
358 
103 

69 
100 

2-> 


No. 
745 

799 

228 

53 

2,1.50 

439 

537 

1.58 

347 

ISO 

1,432 

180 

151 

395 

01 

044 

101 

170 

199 

03 


COITNTIES. 

Nelson 

Oliver 

Pembina  . 


Prohibition. 


Yes. 

540 

29 

1,483 


Richland 1,011 

Pierce 124 

Ransom 670 

Ramsey 591 

Rolette 112 

Stark 171 

Stutsman 509 

Steel 44-1 

Sargent 620 

Traill  1,117 

Towner ..  148 

Walsh.   1,760 

Wells 124 

Ward 220 


No. 

270 

40 

1,137 
885 
70 
557 
410 
304 
391 
800 
172 
577 
824 
210 

1,132 
190 
138 


Totals 18,552  17,393 

Majority 1,159 


Washington. 

This  State  came  into  the  Union  simultane- 
ously with  the  Dakotas.  Considerable  interest 
in  the  Prohibition  question  had  been  displayed 
for  some  years.  In  1881}  a  Local  Option  law  was 
passed,  under  which  many  counties  were  car- 
ried against  license.  The  Prohibition  party  was 
organized  in  1888,  polling  1  137  votes  for  its 
candidate  for  Congress.  The  Washington  Tem- 
perance Alliance,  vVoman's  Christian  Temper- 
ance Union  and  other  organizations  agitated  for 
the  principle  of  Prohibition.     In  the  Constitu- 


tional Prohibition  campaign  of  1889  the  move- 
ment was  directed  by  the  Temperance  Alliance 
(under  the  management  of  Rev.  E.  B.  Sutton). 
No  help  of  consequence  was  received  from 
other  States.  The  lifpior-dealers  made  a  deter- 
mined tight.  They  commanded  the  co-operation 
of  the  Democratic  and  Republican  parties.  In 
King  County,  th3  most  popidous  county  of 
Washington,  the  Chairman  of  the  Republican 
Committee  had  ballots  })repared  from  which  the 
words  "For  Prohibition"  and  '•For  Woman 
Sulfrage"  were  erased,  leaving  the  words, 
"Against  Prohibition"  and  '■  Against  Woman 
Suffrage."  The  farmers  did  not  support  Pro- 
hibition with  the  usual  alacrity.  They  betrayed 
considerable  susceptibility  to  the  liquor-selfers' 
tracts,  and  the  intluence  of  the  hop-growers 
(who  form  an  important  factor  of  the  agricul- 
tural population  of  Washinutou)  was  seriously 
felt.  The  Scandinavians,  as  in  the  Dakotas,  ex- 
hibited a  decided  preferrnice  for  Prohibition. 
The  vote  on  the  Prohibitory  article  stood  : 


Counties. 

Adams 

A.sotin   ...  . 
Chehalis. . . 

Clalam 

Clarke  . 
Columbia.. 
Cowlitz.. . . 
Douglas  . . . 
Franklin. .. 
Garfield  ... 
Island.  . . 
Jtifferson . . 

King 

Kitsap    . . . 

Kittitas 

Klickitat  .. 
Lewis  .... 

Lincoln 

Mason 


Prohibition. 


Yes. 
1.57 
123 
517 
210 
COO 
484 
402 
251 
38 
392 
99 
384 

2,.580 
284 
609 
554 
802 
674 
169 


No. 
210 
147 
794 
173 

1,105 
745 
503 
299 
72 
440 
142 
945 

3,91:5 
520 

1,.599 
448 

1,0.50 

1,082 
329 


I'rohibition. 
Counties.  Yes.      No. 

Okanogan 99 

Pacific 200 

Pierce 2.110 


San  Juan 154 

Skagit          499 

Skamania  31 

Snohomish       .  404 

Spokane 1,994 

Stevens  184 

Thurston 624 

Walihiakum....  65 

Walla  Walla...  788 

Whatcom 836 

Whitman 1,822 

Yakima 341 


3:30 
3.55 

4.()05 

176 

846 

89 

821 

2,827 

400 

902 

308 

1,534 

1,109 

1,878 

589 


Totals 19,546  31,489 

Majority 11,94;^ 


GonnecUeut.^ 

Connecticut's  "  Maine  law,"  enacted  in  1854, 
was  gradually  weakened  by  amendments,  until 
in  1872  it  was  repialed  by  the  Republicans. 
The  license  and  Local  Option  system  that  suc- 
ceeded it  was  never  satisfactory  to  the  temper- 
ance people,  and  their  discontent  was  expressed 
in  various  ways,  but  never  very  effectively  until 
the  Prohibition  party  movement  was  revived  at 
the  election  of  1884  and  became  a  menacing 
force.  In  1882  the  Republicans  proposed  a  Pro- 
hibitory Amendment  for  submission  to  the  peo- 
ple, only  to  repudiate  it  in  1883.  The  2,305 
votes  for  St.  John  in  1884  and  4,692  for  Forbes 
in  1886  alarmed  the  politicians,  and  the  submis 
sion  plan  was  again  brought  forward  in  1887, 
when  the  House  decided  to  submit  by  147  yeas 
to  41  nays  (104  Republicans  and  43  Democrats 
voting  in  the  affirmative  and  14  Republicans  and 
27  Democrats  in  the  negative).  This  action  was 
considered  insincere,  but  when  the  Legislature 
of  1889  assembled  prominent  temperance 
leaders  urged  the  completion  of  the  work,  ar.d 
petitions  signed  by  30,000  persons  were  pre- 
sented by  the  Connecticut  Temperance  Union. 
Representatives  of  the  liquor  traftic  appeared 
before  the  legislative  committee  and  opposed 
submission;  and  on  the  17th  of  April  the  prop- 
osition was  defeated  in    the   House.     But  live 


'  The  editor  is  indebted  to  Allen  B.  Lincoln,  editor  of 
the  Vonntclicul  Hwiu:. 


Constitutional  Prohibition.] 


1:^8 


[Consumption  of  Liquors. 


days  later  came  the  news  of  the  rejection  of 
Constitutional  Prohibition  in  Massachusetts  ny 
45,000  majority;  and  the  Connecticut  political 
managers  felt  that  it  would  be  safe  to  permit  the 
people  to  vote  on  the  question,  and  the  Amenii- 
ment  was  accordingly  submitted. 

The  Democratic  press  and  leaders  showed  no 
sympa:hy  for  the  measure  but  the  most  influ- 
ential opposi'ion  came  from  tlie  Republican 
newspapers  and  workers.  In  June  there  was  a 
conference  of  representative  Republicans  al 
Hartford,  audit  was  decided  that  the  best  policy 
would  be  to  ignore  the  Amendment  during  the 
campaign  aid  to  make  a  general  and  vigorous 
attack  upon  it  ju.st  bc^fore  the  election.  Tlie 
liquor  men  made  unscrupulous  use  of  aJl  the 
methods  employed  by  them  in  Massachusetts 
and  Pennsylvania.  They  took  care  to  cultivate 
tlie  favor  of  the  High  License  people.  In  May 
Edwin  B.  Grave?,  a  Democratic  editor,  started 
in  Hartford  an  avowed  liquor  organ  called  the 
Connecticut  Herald.  He  not  only  fought  the 
Amendment,  but  opposed  High  License.  His 
injudicious  course  was  disapproved  of  by  the 
liquor  leaders,  and  in  August  his  paper  expired 
from  want  of  support.  Much  was  made  of  the 
cider  argument ;  and  anti-Prohibition  editorials 
from  the  Congrcgntionalist  and  Christian  Union, 
as  well  as  tracts  written  and  opinions  given  by 
various  clergymen,  were  placed  in  the  hands  of 
nearly  every  voter. 

There  was  no  general  organization  of  Pro- 
hibitionists effected  for  conducting  the  cam- 
paign. The  Prohibition  party.  Woman's  Chris- 
tian Temperance  Union,  Connecticut  Temper- 
ance Union  and  other  forces  worked  independ- 
ently of  one  another,  though  there  was  no  an- 
tagonism. The  Connecticut  Temperance  Union 
was  ba=ied  on  the  "non-partisan  "  idea,  and  was 
understood  to  have  Republican  tendencies  ;  but 
its  Secretary,  Rev.  Alpheus  Winter,  though 
making  earnest  appeals  to  the  Republican  tem- 
perance element,  found  it  impossible  to  secure 
efficient  coo;)eration.  United  States  Senator 
Orville  H.  Piatt,  though  known  as  a  professed 
believer  in  Prohibition  and  as  the  author  of 
Prohibitory  bills  at  Washington,  declined  to 
take  any  part  in  the  canvass  or  to  give  any  en- 
couraiiement  to  the  cause.  United  States  Sen- 
ator Joseph  R.  Hawhy.  the  most  prominent 
Republican  of  Connecticut,  in  a  letter  to  his 
personal  organ,  the  Hartford  Cotirant,  declared 
his  opposition  to  the  Amendment.  All  the  27 
dady  papers  of  the  State  were  hostile,  and  not 
more  than  half  a  dozen  of  the  weeklies  sup- 
ported the  agitation  with  any  earnestness,  so 
successful  h'icl  the  liquor  managers  been  in  their 
attempts  to  buy  up  the  press.  Able  service  was 
rendered,  however,  by  the  Connecticut  Home, 
the  State  Prohibition  organ. 

The  vote  on  the  Amendment  was  as  follows  : 


Prohibition. 

Counties.  Yes.      No. 

Fairfield 3,810    9,.5.'j8 

Hartford 4,.^0S  10,073 

Litchfield -Z:i?,-i    3,94.'') 

Middlesex l.J.-)t    2,120 

New  Haven..  ..  .5,30114,418 

New  London  . .  2,3i)l    5,392 


Prohibition. 

CODNTIES.  Yes.        No. 

Tolland 1,020    2.000 

Windliam l,Wi2    1,038 

Totals   22,379  49,974 

Majority 2i',595 


[For  particulars  about  the  work  so  far  done 
in  behalf  of  National   Constitutional  Prohibi- 


tion, see  th  >  article  by  Senator  Henry  W.  Blair. 
NATlo^■AL  Prohibitiox. 

Consumption  of  Liqu'^rs. — In  esti- 
mating the  annual  consumption  of  liquors 
in  a  country  an  approximation  is  all  that 
is  possible.  The  total  quantity  produced, 
added  to  the  total  quantity  imported 
during  a  given  year,  less  the  total  quan- 
tity exjiorted,  will  not  necessarily  repre- 
sent the  exact  quantity  consumed  ;  for  a 
portion  of  each  year's  product  and  im- 
portations will  naturally  remain  as  stock 
in  the  hands  of  manufacturers,  importers 
and  btiyers.  But  the  aggregate  year's 
supply  may  bo  assumed  to  represent  the 
year's  demand;  and  when  comparisons 
for  a  series  of  years  are  to  be  made,  the 
factor  of  annual  supply  may,  for  the 
purpose  in  view,  be  regarded  as  coinci- 
dent with  the  factor  of  consumption. 

The  consumption  of  intoxicating 
liquors  in  the  United  States,  for  beverage 
purposes,  has  steadily  increased  since 
1840.  Not  only  was  the  total  amount 
constimed  during  the  year  ending  June 
30,  1888,  more  than  eleven  times  the 
amount  consumed  in  1840,  but  the  aver- 
age annual  consumption  of  all  kinds  of 
liquors  for  each  individual  has  increased 
during  the  same  period  from  4.17  gal- 
lons to  14.30  gallons.  The  table  on  the 
opposite  page,  from  the  Quarterly  Report 
of  the  Chief  of  the  United  States  Bureau 
of  Statistics  for  the  three  months  ending 
March  31,  1889,  presents  in  detail  the 
consumption  of  intoxicating  liquors  in 
the  United  States  since  1840. 

These  figures  show  that  the  quantity 
of  drink  consumed  p(!r  inhabitant  has 
enormoitsly  increased  during  the  period 
covered.  The  increased  consumption  of 
malt  liquors  is  especially  noticeable,  the 
average  annual  per  capita  consumption 
having  advanced  from  1.3G  gallon  in 
1840  "to  12.48  gallons  during  the  year 
ending  June  30,  1888.  The  per  capita 
consumption  of  Avine  has  nearly  doubled 
since  1840,  while  the  aggregate  consump- 
tion shows  an  increase  from  4.873,090 
gallons  in  1840  to  3G,335,CK)8  gallons  for 
the  year  ending  June  30,  1888.  More 
than' one-third  of  this  increase  in  the  con- 
sumption of  wine,  it  will  be  noted,  has 
been  brought  about  since  1880,  and  the 
increase  is  confined  entirely  to  the  con- 
sumptioTi  of  wines  of  domestic  produc- 
tion. The  active  efforts  made  by  the 
California  wine  men  to  popularize  their 


Consumption  of  Liquors.] 


129 


[Consumption  of  Liquors. 


C5   p    S 


-?  2 


rt>    ^    a    3    -J 


re 

<»    P    ^ 


5"  5 


s 


>J    o 


n'   ^ 

'       O 
00    2 

CI   1^ 
o  «> 

§1 

t— 1 
^-    ^ 


O 


|9 

2.  o 


o 
p 

P 

P 


•o'  5" 

3.-  3 

■^  re 

H  r. 

3  3 

re  o 

3  T 


as 


o  (^  i: 


IX 


p 

re    M 


2.  ^  -1 
">  re  ^ 


??  ^ 


1*1       Q 

■    B 

r-~  re 
OS   ro 

D-    -• 

re  tO 
C 
o 

•-i 

P 


P-  re 


?;-  5' 


p- 
re    o 

£  cc 
o    " 

p 


a 
o 

?  w  §  °  i 

re    <  _  Gj  H+ 

f=    2  S-  o  o 

■    -  p-  q  -I 

re  S  "-i 


P    ^ 


S-  a 


o-  o 


-5  CB 

3  O 

-  re  „ 

o    »  c 

;•  S    2  -'    5 


s 


o 
(i  3 

re    00 


g  3  ? 


to  w 

p       O^     t-^ 


O  c, 

i-i  re 

00  3. 

ex  ^ 


O    3 

§  S  2 


<  re 

p-  & 

p"  S 

re  S 

re  ""^ 

P  ^* 

re  re 


O     4. 

o   or 

•c  -p 


d 


o 

o 


r^  re 
re  Cj 
P- 


*P 
P 

P' 

09 

r+ 
P- 

re 

•P 
P 
p 

P 


g  '*  o 
■  I  o  § 

■  ^    re    P 


•ODOODOX'OOOOaDOO'ODXaOaDOOCKX'a-OO'XQDOOOOC 


!^  O  t?j 
t?J  '-'  > 

8o« 


'T3 


oo^i:JI*.•-.Jilo-^QO"0^c^-l-!ooa-^o_^_.•' 

00  >-»  CI  o  oi  oi  ■-.  o  o  io  o  JO  -I  O"  3-.  C-.  iX  -1  io  j;  s;'^ 
aoM.ijipo-)MC".  _►-' wij-'co-!  jw-ijT.  otj-|io:^Si  ^ 

^  Cji"o->  o^o  00  <o -J -i"co^^  (0  jo  c:lr^/obo  a 

O  •'■'  -.O  -T  Oi  ~I  CI  O  >X  O  CI  n-  to  O  00  X  CO  ^  03  £:- 

-.JfO  *.0I03  GOO  CS^X '-'■-'►-' JO-)-!  Xi-kO  5^ 


p  d 


tC  Ot  02 
itO  rfi'  ►-* 


fefe 


'  o  a:  o  X  J-  CI 


fO  X 

CI  »4- 

OOi 


-1CIOOi4--X*Ori 
OC4*OWOtCC4*- 
OiXO*^-}XOOi 


!X  ^ 

^-i  CI 

3  CI  4. 


—  X 

CI  JO 

00  05 


OS  JO 

OCT 
XOD 


oo« 

05O. 


O 
P- 


CO 

•p 


o  o 


^  i_i  i_i  Mij_i  Ml  Mi^t-ij->  fc-ij-'_h-i_j-i  ►-'j-'^jo  joj-'j-' pa  oi  JO  'T3 
05  j-'^^'tt- CI  C5  CI  4^  wlo'jo  w'nC^  o  o"^  Mi^}^  o'o'o  r^ 

It-  C:  ^  4-  Ml  o  X  -7  to  CI  JO  -1  -!  »  CI  JO  X  *-  O  O  C-^  X 

oo->  c  JO  — '  o  o  o jt-oo -I  a:jM^4^x  CI  ct  CI  ciju  cuoq^ 
^is*—  JO  —  n  c.  CI  x^o  CO  ->  -J  "-^  a:  CI  :o  -i  o'ci  Co  Co -1  a" 

c:  -^  c  ~.  X  JO  -1  -"*  -I  o  CI  JO  to  4-  JO  -o  o  CO  Ml  '^  :o  o  ?^ 

0-!0-}0*^QDCIOOJO;D-i-!XXJOCOOC0  0  4-g- 


Imported  spirits 

entered  for 

consumption. 


-I  -I  -1  -1  X  ^f  -1  -"!  O:  CI  C;t  OI  Ol  05  OS  O  C5  05  -J  X  CT  *-  >>< 
CI  jM  JO  O  Ml  jX' CO  O  CO  *»  Ml  |o^  03^^  X  X  4- O  «3^Mi  5S  .J3 

GO  O'JO  3;  Mi^  CI  C:  Cllolo^O  4- Ml  Cl  O  4-  O  bc  O  00  O  "' 
4-C5C:OJOCiCIOJO-JCOJOXJ04-COJOC;iOC^C005-.. 
CT  4-  — 1  OJX  JO  JT: -i  a:  X^JP  CO  O  O -J  JO  JO  CI  00  CO  O  H^ 

CO-}OOCIff.0003Vo'MixClO"Mi  J0O-J03  4- x§. 
ClCOMi?OX>X-}XO-14-Mi:OOitOCOXCSOCI-"iOoS^ 
JOC04^JOi-i-J05Mi4.ciMixOXOOO>-iXi-'CO*.'-' 


o 


COiO^-l'-lMlMlM*Ml^OMlMlMlMlMlMl 

•M  ~l  -J  -J -.J -}  O  X  CO  O -I  CSjt^JO  O  00  CJjfc  CO  H-i  !;5 

OS -1  Co'*-'4i  *- O'^M  XO^oloto'tOo'-O  O  O  00  to  Ml  g 

coo:7;wOOCoco:04-ciit*.cr.cicicic:xci05JOJOI> 

OOC54-.J0a:jt-J-'XCIC0J0X4-_^C0  0COOO^4-o 

" "» CO  a:  o  o  X  x"to^Mi  CO  CI  o  to  X  JO -} 


Ci- 


JO  -}  to  O  CO  JO  CI  ^  t 

CO^-COXXXOiCOO 


coaijoci»-i:oci-icoooxo 


JS? 


.3"  P   o 

B   p 

1 1 1  s  i 

E  «>  P  p  -P 

t-i-  i»    o 

—  p 

S  p  ■* 

re    o  a   =■ 

^-.  ■     "p 


53      M. 

oi;  p 

p 
p. 


0<3   (TQ 

£.  £. 

o  o" 

p  p 

o  o 

Ms      M» 

°  2 

re  S 


re    2 

11 

Pi  ^ 

Pi  «^ 

p-  ? 


o 

2."*  2  P 

■    2  3  « 

a  9  re  '» 


P    O  2    Pig 

3  "^  S-  »■  p 

>C  re  re  2."2 

-  3  re  M  T 


C005J0J0t0I0t0J0J0J0J0J0J0i-iJ0t-i-i"i-ii-'_ 

c;  JO  JO^  o  CI  cijt^x^jo^  o^  o^x  cijjijo^  05  *i-^ 

CO  CO  O^lji ->  CI^^  CO^O  X^to  4-  X  CTv  'X'^O  O  CO  X  Si 

Oijoc:;oo-jc;c:jo-ioa-i05too4-xcojoc'^-i2> 

CI  CI-lOX  XJOJOtO-!COC:MiMiX-lJO*-Ci 50CICOg■ 
0  O  JO^  C0^":0^  Ci'mi^  OS  X CO -7  0000MIX0?; 
C:aCiJOCI4-.XJ0J0  4-C04-C0OC0MiC0C0a:Ca4*-Jt0x 
X  Ml  O  M  Cri  O  -i  CI  H-  O  to  O  X  O  **•  t-i  - 1  CO  ^I  Ml  ^  05  ■ 


o 


02M1  4_  ■ 

Cl  CI  o . 

X*.4-; 
a^cna-.  c 

-!0  JO  J 

X  CO  X  t 

to  XX  c 


lOiOi  c 
;X4- J 

-OOtC'^' 
o"~'c-:  x'to'i 


*..co 

Ml  4-. 
CO  OS 


CO  OS 
-)CO 


CO  JO 

OtD 
OS  JO 


JO  JO 

to  to 

-JGD 


-!  X  4-C-.  4-  JO 


-.  X  10 
-.  X-! 

>  CI  Ml 


c;i  o  4 
to  xc 

-!X- 


;  toct 

.  X-J 

JMICI 


JO  JO  JO  "  I 

o:CO  O  OCO  JO^ 
X  O  CO  O  Oa  OS  « 
COOO -TM  Co''mi  g^ 
Ct@4- JOOSOsS 
-i  00  CO  CI^JO  o 

'to^Mi  Voo -JCl  S 

X  CO  O  -}  O  »!  . 
CO  — I  Ml  to  X  >-i 


■^  -  P  s 
^  re       ^ 

C   K   O  ^ 


2  '-*re  — 2  "-I 

3  0  2—^-3 

s-pas£ir 


-1  -}  ?^  cr.  o  "—  o;  *''  4-  iC  -i  -^  X  ■*-  —  r  — ■  I-*  4-  —  cr-  CO  ^J 


c;!  -1  '-0  '-'  O  »^  CO  »-i  ti  ct'  -^  :£■  >-*.'  —  wi  _.  (-.^  •-'  - !  ..0  J»  uk^  i^- 
00  4-  05  CO  ^  c£>  -t  )-*  iw  o  ^  ii  CO  w'  <^  -j:  —  ^  ?J '  i*  Oi  •:::|-  S* 

-I  X  -^  •— ^  Oi  -i  O  ti  O  O'  O  C-  C:  CO  I— '  -f  J",  JO  C;  O  vX*  O  ^ 


OX-tXCii'COCC'— !.»— i^OOCiCOi— 'OiC'^i— '•— ^C:OX'>5 
0»  O'  to  Oi  <--.  +-  X  Oi  a:  X  ly  Ci  X  en  en  c:  —  ti-  Oi  O  O  4-  ■ 

OS  (^  o  C5  -i  o  O  ^  w  Cji  twi  -i  -I  -i  wT  to  Ci  -»  o:  <:.:;  <w  CO 


1^ 

o 


f 

M 
0 

3 

o 

o 

w 

p 

K 
M 

o 


M 

o 

o 
p 

M 
0 


a 

p 
o 

p 

o 
o 

2! 


p 


p 

re 

CO 

p    Pi 


Ml  re*  P". 

00    »    jp 

p 


p-S.  = 

^   p  ^ 

;;    re  <x 

2   cfi  X 

M  00 

5   "^  -i 

P    o  < 

n.  P  e 


JOfOJOfO'j 

jo'MiJoJoit-it-cowJo'Miojobsc^bicicibtoxJocilP 

OSX4-4-05CItO-lCi^-tOtOJOOMik.OXJv-iCtcOJ^5^ 


re   rji 

p. ' 


oooooooooooopppopppppp§. 

CI  CI  OS  CO  OS  4-  4-  4-  CI  CI  4*  "iM  *4-  4-  ip*  Iti-  iu  iu  CO  CO  JO  JO  O 

tOit-xoo-}XX-}C50^i-!aicixc;iH-OJOci~it05! 


^M.M.^.M^^  '^ 

Jo^tlloootoODOo-ioc5pc;p-ipppicoj-ij-i^  I 

4-  to  Ml  4-  OS  ^  to  OS  jO  O  C-.  CI  X  -1  to  io  (35  O  CO  to  CI  CO  O"  I 

X'  C:  X  4-  JO  X  ^7  OS  wi  CI  X  X  CO  Ml  to  -i  C;i  to  O  tw  X  CS  5; 


p  t? 

o  p. 


4-OSJOJOJOtiMippOOXOoacOOXpOOOO-lp^ifcS. 
Cob:C50*i->-iGDiti-OOStOC0^7MrstOJO-IMi054*0^^0 
OX?OOC;^^it-5QOO*-4-0  0-.Xt0  4-"tOOSOO-JS 


^  S  ^  'Z. 

3      » 


H 
o 

1-3 
K- 

p 

o 

o  o 


o 

p 

p 
(► 

H 

o    ►t) 

•    » 
o 

M 

H 


cc 

H 

k 

H 

trJ 

K 

W 

t?J 

H 

c» 

W 

CO  o 

t:^  ^ 

f^       M 

^       ^ 
S      P 

va 

H 

h  w 

1^1     H 

t^  a  p 

w   ^  a 

>-     <!     H 

sgi 

ffl   td    " 

!r"  ^   c« 

<p  >4   ^ 

^      ><*    f 

^      tH        rt 

00    -,  O 

O    O     GO 

^     "y-i   'TS 

b  o  3 

g     §     H 

C       ►t3       O! 

W    o    ^ 

2       ^       M 

^           M.           ^ 

^     H 

*-'    W     c« 

CO    ^ 

::^        k 

o  o   5 

§  2  ^ 

^    o  ^ 

UORS 
PULA 

CLUSI 

<     H 

2        ^ 

!2i    O 

Q       M 

'^ 

H 

W 

M 

d 

^ 

M 

H 

W 

O 

Consumption  of  Liquors.] 


130 


[Consumption  of  Liquors. 


wares,  with  the  co-operation  of  the 
State  Government,  are  no  doubt  respon- 
sible for  a  very  large  percentage  of  the 
increase. 

In  the  consumption  of  distilled  spirits 
there  has  been  little  change  since  1870, 
though  previously  to  that  year  there  was 
an  apparent  average  annual  per  capita 
consumption  of  nearly  double  the  pres- 
ent amount.  The  apparent  decline  is 
not  due  to  any  marked  discrimination  by 
the  drinking  public  against  distilled 
liquor  as  a  beverage,  but  to  the  effects  of 
the  heavy  Internal  Eevenue  tax  on  alco- 
hol, which  by  vastly  increasing  the  cost  of 
alcohol  has  caused  many  manufactur- 
ers and  others  wlio  formerly  used  the 
article  extensively  in  their  business,  to 
practically  abandon  it.  For  the  five 
years  1858-63  inclusive,  just  before  the 
Internal  Revenue  tax  became  operative, 
the  average  price  of  a  gallon  of  whiskey 
in  the  New  York  market  was  34  cents. 
July  1,  1863,  a  tax  of  30  cents  on  each 
gallon  of  distilled  spirits  produced  was 
imposed  by  the  Government;  and  this 
tax  continued  in  force  till  March  7, 1864, 
when  the  rate  was  advanced  to  60  cents  a 
gallon.  July  1,  1864,  the  tax  was  raised 
to  $1.50  on  every  proof  gallon  of  distilled 
spirits;  and  again,  Jan.  1,  1865,  it  was 
advanced  to  |3  a  proof  gallon.  As  a 
result  of  this  tax  the  average  price  of 
alcohol  rose  from  54^  cents  a  gallon  in 
1863  to  13.464  in  1864  and  $4,355  in 
1865.  One  effect  of  the  great  increase 
in  the  price  of  alcohol  was  to  reduce  at 
once  to  a  minimum  the  quantity  of  dis- 
tilled spirits  used  in  the  mechanic  arts. 

A  United  States  Revenue  Commission, 
appointed  in  1865  to  revise  the  whole 
Internal  Revenue  system  (David  A.  Wells, 
Chairman),  made  a  report  in  1866  in 
which  the  following  interesting  explana- 
tions were  made  (p.  161) : 

"Tlje  first  and  uncloubtpdly  the  largest  ele- 
moDt  in  such  reduction  [in  the  amount  of  alco- 
hol consumed  in  the  arts,  etc.],  has  been  the 
disuse  of  alcohol  for  the  preparation  of  burning 
fluid,  vvl.ich  is  commonly  prepared  by  mixing 
one  gallon  of  reclified  spirits  of  turpentine 
(camphene)  with  from  four  to  five  gallons  of 
alcohol It  would  appear  by  inves- 
tigations made  into  this  subject  by  the  Commis- 
sion that  the  amount  of  alcohol  converted  into 
burning  Huid  by  mixing  with  rectified  spirits 
of  turpentine  (cumphene)  and  consumed  during 
the  year  1860,  could  not  have  been  less  than 
12,000,000  gallons,  which  must  have  necessi- 
tated the  use  of  upw.irds  of  19,000.000  gallons 
of  proof  spirits.     At  the  South  and  West,  how- 


ever, large  quantities  of  burning  fluid  were 
prepared  l)y  mixing  the  alcohol  directly  with 
the  crude  or  commercial  spirits  of  turpentine 
without  subjecting  the  latter  constituent  to  rec- 
tification, which  amount  being  allowed  for 
would  probably  increase  the  figures  above  given 
b3'  one-third,  and  make  the  total  consumptioi 
of  alcohol,  for  the  preparation  of  burning  fluid 
during  ]8o0,  16,000,000  gallons,  requiring  over 
25,000.000  gallons  of  proof  spirits. 

"  Since  186-  the  production  and  consumption 
of  burning  fluid  in  the  United  States  have 
almost  entirely  ceased." 

Thus  was  destroyed  in  one  branch  of 
business  alone,  independently  of  bever- 
age consumption,  an  annual  market  for 
over  35,000,000  gallons  of  proof  spirits. 

On  page  163  of  the  report  the  following 
is  said : 

"  Another  important  element  in  the  reduc- 
tion of  the  production  of  distilled  spirits  in  the 
United  States  in  1864-5,  as  compared  with  the 
production  of  1860,  has  been  th.'  extensive  dis- 
use of  alcohol  for  a  multitude  of  industrial  pur- 
poses other  than  the  manufacture  of  burnina; 
fluid.  From  1856  to  1862  the  price  of  alcohol 
in  the  New  York  market  ranged  from  30  to  60 
c?nts  per  gallon,  and  this  excessive  cheapness 
induced  a  most  extensive  use  of  it  in  the  manu- 
facture of  varnishes,  hat  stifl'ening,  furniture 
polish,  perfumery,  tinctures,  patent  medicines, 
imitation  wines,  transparent  soaps,  percussion 
cans,  picture  frames,  and  in  dying,  cleaning, 
lacquering,  bathing  and  for  fuel.  "With  the 
increase  of  the  price  since  July,  1862,  to  M  and 
upwards  per  gallon,  the  use  of  alcohol  for  all 
the  above-named  purposes  has  largely  dimin- 
ished or  entirely  censed 

"  In  some  in.stances  entire  branches  of  busi- 
iness  have  been  destroyed  in  consequence  of 
the  great  advance  in  the  price  of  alcohol.  An 
Instance  in  illustration  of  this  may  be  mention- 
ed in  the  manufacture  of  an  article  known  as 
'wallosin,'  a  good    substitute   for  whalebone 

in  umbrellas Another  bu.siness  that 

has  been  more  seriously  affected  by  the  increas- 
ed price  of  alcohol  in  consequence  of  the  tax  is 
the  manufacture  of  iron  utensils — pots,  kettles 
and  pans — enameled  upon  their  interior  sur- 
faces  The  manufacture  of  vinegar 

from  whiskey  has  also  been  largely  diminished 
by  reason  of  the  great  advance  in  price  of  the 
distilled  spirits  used.  .  .  .  Druggists  and 
pharmaceutists  have  estimated  the  reduction  in 
the  use  of  alcohol  in  their  general  business  as 
one-third  to  one-lialf Manufactur- 
ers of  medical  tinctures  and  proprietary  medi- 
cines almost  universally  represent  to  the  Com- 
mission that  the  domestic  demand  for  their 
preparations  has  fallen  off  in  consequence  of  the 
high  price  of  alcohol,  to  the  extent  in  some  in- 
stances of  more  than  two-thirds.  .  .  .  The 
business  of  manufacturing  fluid  or  solid  ex- 
tracts, or  the  concentrated  medical  principle  of 
plant'',  also  suffers  greatly  by  reason  of  the  in- 
creased   cost    of     alcohol In    all 

branches  of  the  industrial  arts  where  the  contin- 
ued use  of  distilled  spirits  is  indispensable,  and 
no    cheaper    substitute  can  be  provided,    the 


Consumption  of  Liquors.] 


131 


[Consumption  of  Liquors. 


utmost  economy  in  its  employment  is  every- 
where reporte(i." 

Of  the  consumption  of  distilled  spirits 
at  that  time  for  beverage  purposes  the 
Commission  declared  that  "  through  the 
absence  of  all  positive  data  any  conclu- 
sions which  may  be  arrived  at  must  nec- 
essarily be  regarded  as  only  approximate;" 
and  on  page  168  the  Commission  said: 
'*  We  are  inclined  to  consider  the  esti- 
mate of  a  gallon  and  a  half  per  head  for 
the  consumption  of  the  United  States  as 
somewhat  exaggerated." 

In  1869  tlie  average  tax  per  gallon  of 
distilled  spirits  was  reduced  from  11.97 
to  $0.54,  and  in  18T0  it  was  still  further 
reduced  to  ^0.50.  Under  these  reduc- 
tions the  per  capita  consumption  in- 
creased from  1.64  gallon  in  1869  to  2.07 
gallons  ill  1870,  but  in  the  next  year 
another  decrease  was  witnessed.  In  1874 
the  average  tax  was  again  raised  to  $0.65 
per  gallon,  and  since  1876  it  has  stood  at 
about  the  present  rate  of  90  cents  a  gal- 
lon. From  the  facts  above  given  it  is 
safe  to  assume  that  the  consumption  of 
distilled  spirits  for  beverage  purposes  has 
been  diminished  very  little,  if  any,  in 
the  United  States  during  the  period  cov- 
ered by  the  foregoing  table,  notwithstand- 
ing the  enormous  increase  in  the  per 
capita  consumption  of  wine  and  malt 
liquors. 

The  report  of  Hon.  John  W.  Mason, 
Commissioner  of  Internal  Revenue,  for 
the  year  ending  June  30,  1889,  shows  a 
still  further  increase  over  the  preceding 
years  in  the  consumption  of  malt  liquors 
and  distilled  spirits.  The  following  table 
gives  in  detail  the  quantities  of  liquors, 
malt  and  distilled,  withdrawn  for  con- 
sumption in  the  United  States  during  the 
fiscal  years  1888  and  1889 : 


Aeticles  Taxed. 

Fiscal  Year  End- 
ing June  30. 

IN- 

OREASE. 

De- 
crease. 

1888. 

1889. 

Spirits  distilled 
from  apples, 
peaches  and 
grapes  .   .  .gall's 

Spirits  distilled 
from  materials 
other  than  ap- 
ples, peaches 
and  grapes.  galV 

Fermented  1  i  q  - 
uors bbl's 

888,107 

70,677,379 
24,680,204 

1,249,593 

75,915,047 
25,119,853 

361,486 

5,237,668 
439,634 

THE   UNITED    KINGDOM. 

The  consumption  of  liquors  in  Great 
Britain  and  Ireland  is  shown  in  the  fol- 
lowing table,  compiled  from  the  "  Sta- 


tistical Abstract  for  the  United  King- 
dom "  (1887),  and  the  accounts  relating 
to  the  trade  and  navigation  of  the  United 


Kingdom: 


statement  showing  the  Annual  Consumption  of  Do- 
mestic and  Foreign  Distilled  Spirits,  Wine,  Domestic 
and  F'oREiGN  Beer,  and  the  Average  Consumption  of 
each  I'ER  CAPITA  of  population,  in  the  United  Kingdom, 
during  each  year  for  a  series  of  years: 


a  o 
tan 
S  2 
£S 

ft'    S" 

-I  2 

P  o 


ooooac'GcoooooC'OoQoaC'OOODacooaoocoo 

00  QC  00  00  00  ex  aoO0~}-J.-}-}-l-!-l-J-J 

-}C.  U»*..COlO'-*O^OD*iC5C;irfi.COtCH- 


FISCAL 
YEARS. 


.  <- ; 


—  oj  i'^  ^  y/  »•  Co  cc  ii  C.T  si. 


^  "  or  X  -»  - ;  —  CO  OC  'O  —  *i  O  —  O  w'  '.^ 

(i  O'  o  -.^  ■-!  ci  — .  o  cj>  OT  C-.  c.  .t.  ii  X  — '  --; 

i-';i-icoO(*-^-050  —  cocicox-j«;co 


o 

q 


—  < 

cr5' 
t;  a 
a-  ^ 

re  ^ 
re  cr 
P  re 


•a  5 

as 


TO 

£. 

o* 

s 

P 
&. 

p- 
re 

re* 

E. 

o" 
s 


O  00  055 -!  00  Or  p:  p_p  p -)^i  O  _-^  X  O  J 

4*.  U'  iC  ■— '  tC-  CO  Ot  tj^  it-  CO  +*  -1  —  CC  X   ~'  -  t  ^ 
C:  -'  X  O'  ^  OC  *.  -I  01  "-'  O  CC  C  CO  --•  X  (C  5 

tc-  c:  *i^' *i  K- ccpp  c:  j^i-jU  jT-^cjc^— X  o 

S"^}^  O  O^  O  rfi.^J  01 ->^^X^>^— CO "bi  5^ 
,  .  -x>  CI  oj  cr.  CO  o  -o  o:  ^s  O'  -.1  CO  c:  to  o  4^  •■^ 
iocOH^>--iooGcuia::ooo;-.co:co^c:coc;i 


tC'(ic;:DOO;ooooM'Xco 
0^coococc->»-^o:oc;t^s 
jtcoT__^__"_ccji-.a)-3jx^^co__x 
'— > 'cc  "-}  "x't^ 'c:  o  cc  m  "*.  Id  - ! ' 

O  O'  CI  *}  Ui  0  C;  O  '-^  ^i  i*  c: 
—  to  C-.  it'  -O  JO  O  J4  00  -J  «0  H- 


4:.  ^  .(..  CO  CO  ^ 
CO  0  —  OT  o-i  ^ 

H 

0-.  C:  ^-  CO  <i  =^. 

0 

>--  oi  cc  c;  •-:^  5: 

OTjti.j(i.pj-  2 

P 

X  OitO  GO  o»  ^ 
-■!  -.0  00  Ji  CO  . - 

C-.  01  CO  iO  00 

o 


.C5 


P 


P 


*tt^c;Ttc»o:cocnao^iC/Q5' 


P 
f 
M 

o 

CO 

►0 

» 

o 
o 

•A 
w 
c| 

s. 

w 
u 


■t..  <10  CO  CO  4^  rt'  h;^ 


00  CT  to  C:  JO  CO  o 

X  -^J  X  o  o  to  o» 

OT  -}  -'^  O  to  «  Ul 


o 


to  ►-'-'  to  ^  >-;►-; . 

t-i  o  ^  ^  *>  00  00  . 
-}_►.»  Oj-1  00  05j(>. 
-"! -I'tOttlo  00  CO  • 

CO  CO  'X  Q  00  <i  c:5 ; 
^"p  c:p -I ->  to  . 

O  tOCOtS  Cnto  O  ■ 
CJ>  (X  -}  to  ►-  I-"  *;  • 
O  -3  CO  to  -J  *-  00  • 


3^ 
i.  re 


2  V, 


o 

o 


4*  »u  00  to  ^-'  a:  ^} 
-.ojC  CO  00  00  Oi  to  ; 

CIT  01  CO  CO  ^—  I--1  00  • 

~j  *»  to  X  I-'  to  w  • 


o 


'§ 


OD  -">  to  c:  to  cr.  CD 

CD  -5  -1  to  O  *<■  CO  • 
H^  »C..  O  00  or  CO  hfi- 


o 

p 


S5 


ii.re 

c-»-  -» 

p 


W 
w 

M 

a 

o 
o 

w 

d 
S 
PI 
o 


The  per  capita  consumption  of  distilled 
spirits  and  wine  in  the  United  Kingdom 
is  slightly  less  than  in  the  United  States, 
the  quantities  of  distilled  spirits  per  capi- 
ta being  respectively  in  1887  0.93  and  0.38 
gallons  in  the  United  Kingdom  as  against 
1.18  and  0.54  gallons  in  the  United  States. 
The  per  capita  consumption  of  beer  in 
the  United  Kingdom  is,  however,  almost 
three  times  as  great  as  in  the  United 
States,  being  for  1887  in  the  ratio  of  32.88 


Consumption  of  Liquors.] 


133 


[Consumption  of  Liquors. 


to  11.96.  Owing  to  the  enormous  quan- 
tity of  beer  consumed,  the  total  per  capita 
consumption  of  intoxicating  liquors  in 
the  United  Kingdom  is  more  than  double 
that  in  the  United  States,  being  for  the 
two  nations  in  1887  33.14  gallons  and 
13.68  gallons. 

FRANCE. 

In  France  the  consumption  of  wine  is 
almost  equal  to  the  consumption  of  beer 
in  the  United  Kingdom,  while  the  quan- 
tity of  distilled  liquors  consumed  for  each 
individual  does  not  differ  materially  from 
that  drank  in  the  United  States. 

statement  showing  the  Annuai,  Production,  Impor- 
tation, Exportation,  and  Consumption  of  Distilled 
Spirits,  and  the  Average  Consumption  per  capita  of 
population,  in  France,  during  each  year  from  1870  to 
18H5,  inclusive: 

[From  "  Annuaire  Statistique  de  la  France,"  1888.] 


o 


O 
O 


-! 

B 

p- 
w 


P 


(XX00a)CX(Xa}3;0CiXQCQ000QD00aD 


CO 


•^1  oi  r:  o  c 

00  ►-  Oi  X  i 


IOC  -1 


.  X  X 

!X  in 


*  Of  00  O^?  O  JO  Ji  55 

I  0-  4-  -1  '-'  or  O  -I  O 

;  ct  c;f  o -I  4^  cc  ~i  is 

^.  o  oobob' oiOD  .^■■ 
in  io  +-  o  *-  '-'  io 

OJ  Oi  S  CD  -}  -}  a 


o 

b 

d 
o 

o 

2! 


pt  CI-  '^^'J  C5  05  0»  CO  tO^J-*^^^  K)^  ^ 
"t-i  o  A  in  00^010  in  Or --7  *J  OS  tS  W  *C  05  g. 
00  Oi^J  OO^^  ~J  CO  JOJ-*  jO^  O^l  C:  in  ^ 

^  o  in^  in  CO  io^^ -1^  X  **  **.  Oi  :o  ^ 

rfi-cTirf^cD^wC;  --i^*-CT!^ooi3lQO'?in• 
inc5^0-ICooo^->C5-^!yT^DOoocD 


OTtnaic;*OT*k***».cc4^OT>AC0c;Tj^cc^ 
**  a5j->jC*jCi.  00  4^  oj-?  05  o  ji.  OD^^jt^jt^  R 
*  in  ^o^  c^  into^  GO  en  o  00^  in  CO  ^ 


X  O"  o  X  «i  in  i—  - - 
I  *-  ^  00  to  ^1  a:  C^ 
^    '     "  -i  to  oco  ^ 


OO  t0^>CO  Oiin  C^JOj30j-Jj^i-iJO 

"^>X"^  Coio  CJJQpOO^^---?^0  0 
COOtOCOCDCOO't-O'-'^O-JOS 
CO^-*OC5^1*I050        '" 


—  a:  o  -J  03CXX 

CO  O  03  ~}  OI  -J  X 


I^J 


°  2  S-o 
p  S-o  r? 

o'     o'^ 
a     3 


-J  -1 -■• -1  00  00  OS  OOj-?  CO  W  O  jU- O  J— to  a 
-} -jx  o  m'''-''35  cats  CO  oito  »j  to  in  X  §: 

OT-lii.CDt0^^i)TCOCOtO*?^-^?^?tO'~^o 

?0  in  CO  '-^  O  iO  O:  CO  X  CO  CO  X  CO  Of^^  X  ^. 
"Ct'^  O^  05  in^O  CO^^O  Cs'^X;  to  -!  Ci  O  ■'■' 

'iO'K[£^'-^too>i-~}Oto^Xrt**.*o 
o  .ji  CO  to  o>  CD  o;  ^  CO  ■-•  O  to  CT  X  -J  o 


o 
H 
H 

o 


Ai^,^A4U.>^COCOtOCOCOCOtOCOCOtO?^ 

o^xco^"!Cco■t*tocoto*J^^»u^'t»-col-*;^ 

Os"^ -I't-t-iOT  O  Co'to'cDO  w-i'^'cD  O  in  ^ 

C5»-*ointo->cooOin^*}'-'>*.-*^+^'^ 

J^l  OTjO^^O^JO^tO  0_in  COQOpO  O:  O jU  ^ 

o^i  o^  cc^  c:  o^"^^^-j^^o  oc  X  ?* 


o 


1^ 


^.:? 


tOtOCOtOtOi-'CDX-lXO-QOOSCOCDOI-^ 

AOotoOitoOinxcocotoos-j-ii-^  X- 


o 

o 

21 


o 
2; 


statement  showing  the  Annual  Production,  Impor- 
tation, Exportation,  and  Consumption  of  Wine,  and 
the  Average  Consumption  per  capita  of  population,  in 
France,  during  each  year  from  1870  to  188(J,  inclusive. 
[From  "Annuaire  Statistique  de  la  France,"  1888.1 


CD 
(X3- 


2" 


o  P 

o 
?£  = 

•x  ^ 

o^ 
-    o 

C03 

^v 

tOn 
I— »  ^ 


n 
Oi 
O) 

<n- 
P 
(-.- 

O 

E 
o 

B 


o 
•a 
B 


XXQOXJOXXXXXXXXXXXX 
XXX  XXX  X-! -(-!-!-}->-> ->-i~l 

C5i;i4-coio^^ocox^jc^ijiht^coto^o 


k— Ik— LI— I.  I— Lt— LI— itO*— ^  I— LI-LI— L 


XX 
O  CO 

to  — 


tiJt 
CO 


too 

-L   to 

^CO  in 
inac"' 

o  X  ; 


OX- 
^  CO  c 
CO  Ol  c 


5  c;:  3:  -L  4-  "x  Ol  O  X  (1  re  S 
»  iT  -?  iT  CO  Ce  CO  ^  to  X  in  ^ 

>  X  p  _^  ~  *- JO  jo_c-.  J—  —L  a 

.  CO  CO  co"^  CT '1  o"tu  coo  y^ 
J  o  go  CO  *.  oi  in  Q  (o  X  CO 

;i0i-Oinc0C5O^c0UT 


w 
o 
o 


tOtOtOlOl-LtOl-L  _ 

cOH-L>.-Cocooco*>a:».i-Lk-L      i-Li-L^^  o 

p  jX  4i -!  CO  »jpj-1  to  X-1-7J-} -3  CO  05  CjO  jC 

x"— ^j'tooo-jc;  ooV.oc -ilo  to'^AoccSs 

-!  X  3;  »-  CO  -!  4-  "  4-  X  OC  O  X'  -!  CO  O  4-  O 

4L.-"fpj:.n  xp  inp  copxppj-'^' CO  **^ 
X  X  x^  o  4*"co  O  CO^tt^  4i."tO  co'tt..  c:'4- crs  ?= 
►-L-^xocoit.o-!OCOin»-ooc:fOOln 
coxi-*co4--ii*cox-ii;Tco^jink-.Lotoo 


o 
a 

> 

o 
2; 


0  Oh-4 
c5  4*  in  :^ 


CO  J- J 
in~x 

CO-?'i 

c;ico: 

-Jl-L.( 


to  o 
tox 

pp 

O-l-l'-Lol 


0;  t^  to  X 


;  toco; 

.  in  CO  c 
'  *".cnc 


-lC0*.i-»OXO4-in*-^ 

X  O  X  X  CO  0>  jK  *.  CO  CO  a 

>''x  CO  oi  iJT^to  in  — '"co  ?^ 

:  CO  o  -i  ^  X  to  X  CO  o 

^j  X  4-  CO  CO  CO'  to  4-  in  ^ 

;  CO  cc'x  O  4- O -! -!  .^ 
:  *J  O  O  CO  a:  in  CO  in 

*lfc.4^0il-LH.*0'-*'-^ 


5  y 

O  2D  civ 

o'  o  ^ 

3  S 


.'^  J^  5^' j"^  j^  r' i^^^ 

cii  - 1 1si,  "Li  "t-i  "^  "t  >  ^ 

_p  *  J  c:  O  c:  ^:s +- _C;i 
"«>  en  cr:  ""►-- ":0  *  5  *^  "b: 


'"!  00  00  :£)  GC  O 
W-* '■»  00  01  CTT 


cccc 


iCioo 


03  i-i 

10  w 


:oOD 

in  -1 

"X 


"■'55 
"io5 

in- 

4.. 


o 

H 
!>- 
H 

3 


OCO 
iO-! 

toco 


05    l-L 

CO  CO 

tox 


O  CO  I- 

xxc 
pp_c 

i  CO  in 

I  cop 

X  *- 
OC  CO 

xto 


into 
-}C0 

CO  CO 

o:  iJfl 
4-  OT : 

xtoc 


L005 

I  toco 

jOj-l 

■Jo-i 

XX 

^  X 


COClJi— L'TJ^-J'^^^; 

O  CD  Q -J  X  —  -7 -1  ; 
ppppp  CO  cop  j 

t-i  "co  CO  o  "^  "^  ^  in  ^ 
oco>-Li-Lioo^-»o: 

4- JO  ^-LpippJOp  ■• 

CD^  CO  CO  inio  in  o^ 
^-LOtOOlOiCOCoOc 
CDCOOOI-Li-'XCOOT- 


H 
o 


tOtOtOCOCOCOtOi-LCOC<5tOp*LtOCOi^CoS 

05pxppp-JXppp*-pcoxp;-iS 
-1  to  CO  X  05  -}  b:  CO  CO  ^  X  -1  CO  CO  o  X  CO  5' 

4-i;TC0X"?inCC-?CO4-^ini-L^^-f^.- 


o 

5°  1-1 


It  will  be  noticed  from  these  tables 
that  the  annual  per  capita  consumption 
of  distilled  spirits  in  France  seems  to  be 
on  the  increase,  while  the  per  capita  con- 
sumption of  wines  is  decreasing.  The 
"  Exportation  "  column  is  particularly  in- 
teresting. Despite  the  destructive  work 
of  the  phylloxera,  France  exports  nearly 
as  much  wine  now  as  she  did  in  1870. 
The  United  States  imports  annually 
more  than  $6,000,000  worth  of  French 
wines  and  brandies.  Little  attempt  is 
made  to  deny  that  practically  all  the 
wines  and  spirits  intended  for  export  are 
adulterated.  A  Paris  dispatch  to  the 
American  newspapers,  dated  Aug.  28, 
1890,  said: 


Consumption  of  Liquors.] 


133 


[Consumption  of  Liquors. 


"  The  French  papers  are  very  much  exercised 
over  the  McKinley  bill  as  well  as  the  Customs 
Ad  iiinistrative  bill  [high  tariff  measure -s  then 
ppuding- iu  the  United  States  Congress. — Ed.]. 
La  France,  commenting  on  the  rumor  that  the 
measure  is  one  of  retaliation,  and  that  tho 
United  States  seriously  contemplates  the  pro- 
hibition of  all  adulterated  French  wines,  says 
that  as  there  is  scarcely  a  single  bottle  of  wine 
produced  in  France  which  is  not  manipulated 
with  plaster  of  Paris  or  other  extraneous  sub- 
stances, such  a  measure  will  exclude  all  French 
wines  from  the  market  of  the  States,  and  warns 
the  French  that  they  had  better  come  to  terms 
with  America,  since  it  offers  reciprocity." 

GERMANY. 

In  Germany  beer,  again,  is  the  great 
national  drink. 

statement  showing  the  Annual  Production,  Impor- 
tation, Exportation,  and  Consumption  of  Distilled 
Spirits,  and  the  Average  Consumption  per  capita  of 
population,  in  Germany,  during  each  year  from  1870  to 

3887,  inclusive: 

[From  "  Statistisches  Jahrbuch  fur  das  Deutsche  Reich."] 


•a 
c 

&!^ 

Is  I 

C-.  =r 

O  S" 

c  ^ 

w  — 

P  o 
3  1 

c:» 

S  3 
&■« 

I— I  !i 

o  Cj 
C  a 


o  t: 


a.  2 

F  E. 

B 


O 

o 


1^ 


o 


^J^J  ^^j   ,*j  v.*^  '.^j  ',^^  \,F^  — c— i— ^li:         .        c        (   —  ) 

iiTiiiiiii 


;  :o  or  -3  io  Clt  to  CO  -•}  4-  O  lit  CO  a»  ^ 


;  or  3D  " 


tic:  ; 


>  4-  O  14  CO  -1  3!J  32  -1  ■ 


It) 

w 
o 
0 

d 
o 

o 

2! 


C5 
Vb'''^-' tn  o".  o>  -.o'ti''-''''-' CO  co't-"  as  30  to  ^f  5s: 

COC20tS'-'0-3C:COCO^tC'XCJ»— 'too:© 
-I  ■--  4-  or  OT  CO  ^>  GO  en  O'J-3  C.  JX^  00  jUp;  i3 

tT"b -! -JOT '--■"*. o':o to  i4a0-!O  OOiO ^^ 
Oi  to  C:  W  O  tc  ^w  —^  CO  CO  C:  OT  C".  *-*  tS  :o  ".o 

O  CO  O  Co  ^I  I-*  O  Ci  t-^  ►-»  ^1  O  Ol  tS  -I  OT  CO 


OSOSOJffimUTC^ItllCTlCTOIOlOt*^*.*^ 

^^ 

--»  CJT  CO  O  -3  OD  en  CS  4-  OT  00  o: 

►■■CI  coos 

'^ 

■jD  O  to  ffl  o 

-1  ■-' 

to  .^  to  a  i-> 

-'  to  CO  -! 

oi  c;»  o  to  CO 

Siy 

^  O  ■—  -!  C-. 

"  xxo 

X  -)  '.O  -!  Ol 

in  to  ^  to  to  O:  to  4-  CT 

:s 

ox 

ji-lOO'-' 

■XI  CR 

-}  "  CO  cn  J- 

Sv  ct  o-^  to 

OXOCn 

-!  00  -}  OJ  O 

i-'tO 

UT  4*OT  05 

s    2 


>-'>otoMtocoi-'i-'i-'>-'i;'-'^'-'      ""C^ 

CD.JltOCJT'-^OXCt't-**.  O^  COyi -l^tO  Ci  ^ 

co'^c.V. '~  V.  V'o'r:'wT -"!  4- ut ->  x'^'rt^to^ 

->  X  O'  o  4-  -*  4-  c:  to  •--  CO  — .  r:  3.  -  >  :,T  to  ^ 
o  c~.  X  t.v  to  X  to  x^:Oj— 4- ~.  CO  X  o  cop  s 

GDOO-?  CO 'n  '*  X -^  co'to -f  x  to  '-^'-I'-t'-z-  y 

OT  4*  -3  to  XC  —^  O  CJT  0"«  t-^  O  en  to  en  4-  CO 
i-'00-!COt0^tOOOCnO-"!in05COX 


o 

w 

o 

2< 


k^>PkCOCOCOCOt^C04^C04^k;^kUCOCOCOCO?> 

o  to  eiT  xo  c;^>)Oj-'jo  4-x^to  o;-o_^o  cv 
-i"4-''^'to^o':jiV.  oV.lo -i^  co^o  to  CO  4-  5c; 

"-  -•>  -O  O  X  —  X  O  X  X  -5  C  -O  4-  O  CO  X  3 

^  ^  X  3:  O'  -T  to-3  C--  -3  r:  eii  -X  -!  top  en  :s 

"cO  X  3-.  X  '~  to  '-^'►-'  O -J  X  CO  to  Vo  x  en  to "" 

en  c;  o  X'  to  ~  X  c:  to  *-  ■-'  en  X  -1  &  ~  -; 
O  -!  X  O  CO  4-  o  o  o:  -J  en  -}  en  O  00  to  00 


Q^ 


O 

o 

rn 
r! 
g 

O 


Statement  showing  the  Annual  Production,  Impor- 
tation, Exportation,  and  Consumption  of  Bber,  and 
the  Average  Consumption  per  capita  of  population,  in 
Germany,  during  each  year  from  1872  to  1887,  inclusive: 
[From  "  StatistiBches  Jahrbuch  fiir  das  Deutsche  Reich," 
1888.] 


OOXXOOXXOOODOOOOOoSxxS 

^^^cotpiy'cpast^-jjoienit^coii 

X  X  X  X  X  X  oj  X  -7  -1 .  :  :  :  ; 

FISCA 

AFT 

DING 

^ojoi^-cotoi—ocooo.  ;  ;  :  ; 



gWtH 

>WkJ 

R°"si 

CO       »5 

o 

H 

1 

1 

o 

0 

H 

►-i.-*tajooootooooooox 

CO  O  -^  -3  CO  CO  i-i  X  to  to  4-  4-  to  -O  X  i5 

C  e;T  -o  o  X  CO  X  CO  en  X  CO  C-.  ->  en  ct:  15 

p" 

e* 

en-!Co-3  x- '  Oix'io  -^  o:  iooi4-^IS: 
c:;  CO  -o  4-  to  4-  en  4-  ^i  -J  X  4-  o  CO  en  o 

f1 

—  C:  CO  to  to  to  cr.  X  d  3-.  to  en  4-  X  X  a 

H 

CO  CO  CO  o  '-'  4- en  CO  ^  o  xio^o"to  to  ^ 

enc:en4-OenipcoXCncoXcot0  3= 
cicox'-*xco4^*-*^3*ja5eno;0DUT 

o 

o 

t" 

m 

s^i 

3 

^ 

COtOtOtONIJOtO!OtOC>5£0C«»0i-'"a 

EH 

"bt  CO  ^3  X  CD  en  ^"to-io  4-  '-1  ci  X  4^5:: 

►€ 

D 

Ol  to  *1  en  4^  CO  X  -o  to  CO  X  4-  ^  -J  o  o 

l>- 

cr.  to  COCO'-' o:  cox  O-!-)  CO  4-  en  o  3 

H 

'tolo-lO-lO  ^  to  »  CO  O  CC  to  C-.  t."  .-^ 
COXOOCOOCOCO*lCJ»en4-tOXOO 

B 

en-Jc;iO;OtOXCOi-'Cn4-COCO-!>-» 

S! 

tt 

■ 

(-t- 

H 

p. 

Ij'U't-.  O  OOO  CD  O  O  O  Q  O  CO  X  ^ 
COOtOX4-COtOXtOC04-4ltOCOXH5 

O  3  > 

.(iXtoto  -'en  -'c:  ->  ^-!  CO  co-i-iS; 

^2"^ 

s 

i-icc  K-.  en  4-  c:  4-  ^  CO  to  — '  CO  coco  en  ?S: 

to  cr.  C  CO  O  -  !  CO  4.-  -o  -^  o  X  ^  -3  ai  c> 

JJ.^  ^ 

-3X-3e-iCOXCOOC— '4-COXCOCOX:i: 

§::3 

h-L 
^ 

05  OC  - !  O  00  4i -3  Ol'"'-' O  X  CO  en  X  CO  ~f 

C;i  CT  *.  -1  O  X  to  '-'  CO  •-'  X  O  -3  CO  Oi 

i-'c:co-3Xcntooootooxcoeno5 

?? 

w 

p- 

X 

CO 

g?gg^^^??^rtrts^x-3-3^ 

o 

p 

gg'^  S'^  i  S'slS  fe  S  £  S  'i  2 1 

1^ 

> 

li;  *;-^  en  o  4-  ^  c:  cj  -J  CJT  cr.  *o  c:  O  -^  5 

CTQ 

C:  QdTo  CO  to  05  U»  bi  X"(w  O  "I'lc-  *^  +•  ^ 

P 

3g?S§5;S^SS8iii:^8Jg- 

a 

z 

1— ll—il—lt— lfc_l»— 1.             1— 11— ll_ll-*l-i. 

S?gg2g|g§23ggt=i$2?^ 

1-3 

o 

oi  en  I-'  44  en  CO  X  X  o  co_to  CO;-'  co_co  g 

00'o~bo''^-'"'--c'00''--''>-» -3  O"""-- *.->-}  S3 

o 

t, 

CO-JX05-3XOtXCO-3COCO>-'-'COO 

e;*COt04-X4-COCOCOXtOCOCOtOX23 

d 

ox  en  -!  00  -'  -•  O  to  -!  CO  -J  ."O  CO  to  .^ 

4^toto^coutxen.^coco'-'OOco 
ijicoi)<-ico-j-joo5tocojoc;ien4^ 

^ 

3 

o 

1^ 

p 

^gggril;^S^igigS££gS| 

— -tD 

CO  to  -3  -'  *.  4i  CO  CO  —  4.  io  35  4.^  CO  en  S 

CO  en  X  CO  e;i  ej»  O'  o  — '  3i  to  en  o;  CO  o  .^ 

p  '' 

Thus  the  per  capita  consumption  of  dis- 
tilled spirits  is  about  the  same  in  Germany 
as  in  France  and  Great  Britain,  and  is 
slightly  less  than  in  the  United  States. 
The  per  capita  consumption  of  beer, 
which  seems  to  be  slightly  on  the  in- 
crease, is  about  twice  as  large  as  in  the 
United  States,  and  one-fourth  less  than 
in  the  United  Kingdom. 

DENMARK   AND   SWEDEN. 

In  Denmark  and  Sweden  the  average 
per  capita  consumption  of  distilled  spirits 
is  very  much  larger  than  in  any  nation 
heretofore  considered,  being  for  each 
country,  respectively,  in  188G,  4.23  and 


Consumption  of  Liquors.] 


134 


[Consumption  of  Liquors. 


2.47  gallons,  although  there  seems  to  he 
a  slightly  decreasing  tendency  in  Den- 
mark. 

statement  showing  the  Annual  Production,  Impor- 
tation, Exportation,  and  Consumi'tion  of  Distilled 
Spirits,  and  the  Averacje  Consumption  per  capita  of 
population,  in  Denmark  and  Sweden,  during  each  year 
for  a  series  of  years: 


D  IB  go  35  00  S 


r/1 


O  O  00  00  JO  ^c  ^ 
Ci  *ht-^-0  en  GO  OI  ^ 
>-■  0--  OD  ^s  <o  *-  ■s 

^OOC" 


00  iO  C5  C5  C»  -1  ^ 

M  *>  CO  *-  Ci  CO  Q) 

^"h-i  00  Co"*«  GO  ?^ 
I^  05  Oi  to  4i  M< 
000  1-'QOfoO> 


M 

o 
a 

r^ 
O 

3 

2! 


O 

s 


sf 

a  I 
??  O 
a.3 

ft*  " 
^^ 

J®    ^ 
CD    W 

'-'-  rD 

o  = 

^1 

CO  ;i 
§  P 


00  5o 


OO  GO  00  00  00 
GO  GO  00  00  00 
C5  Ot  it^  CO  «0 


55 

00  00  00  to  «o  a 

co'*-"=d"Vo  4^  ?^ 
CO  en  *-  O  •-*  O 
WOO;-!  ^►-'05  3 
rf^  o» -i  00  CO  ?* 
ai  ^  4^  *3  *CI 

01  tS  CJ(  00  to 


►t3 
a 
o 
a 


B 


"j^  "^^  Oi  "k)  4*  io  ^ 

CO  **  -}  a:  00  X  O 

C"  Oi  Oi  O  O  00 
tC*  "^  t^  00  Oi  o 


o 

b5 

•a  o 


<75 
35  to  j-'a 

-J  V  _  "  CO  -!  g: 

GOO  35  o  •-*  a:  o 
C5  loco^ocji  *15; 

"t-i  C5  to  35  ">-'  05  ? 
to  35  CD  O  ^-  -J 
^l  tf(  O  CO  C5  H-fc 


M 
O 

w 

H 

(► 

O 


C5  CO  Ot^H-il-^  CJ»  S5 
i-  *-  O  <35  35  ^  3 
35  CO -(  0»  0«  CO  3 
-3  Ol  -5  O  CO  GO  ~? 
tOtOOl  -"CJO 

en  toco  m  OO 


a 

to  to  to  ^  to  JO  2 

fcP,.  ►t^  o  o  to  or  ^ 
^i  to  c;»  o  to  CO . 


•<1 


<;5 

S3 


OI  coo --J  CO; 

K-"  m  -!  00  00 '; 
00^0  01 ; 

-}35'tO*-{S-^ 
OO  hi-  4-.0D 
C:  OI  Ci  00  o» 


ooooooa 


»-*  ^  O  CO  -1  /= 
05  i_i?D  too 
h-i  ^  >-*  35  --t 


IT) 

o 
> 
o 


o 

B,5 
>a  o 
•    & 


O5-'00tO*;§ 

05  35  01  *-"*■? 
35  -!  -t  O  op 
Old  ■(-*-*- 


w 

X 

o 

w 

0- 
H 

s 


55 


00  00  05000 
CO  Vo"'-' CO  S: 


#.  *.  4^  CD  to  ." 
O  it*  '-'  CO  to 
05  1-*^  to  CO 


■55 
a 


4^  4^  1^  It^  !(,.  O 


m 

p 

3 


00 


o 


3 

& 

7\ 
o 

s 


Of  all  the  civilized  nations  from  which 
we  have  detailed  official  reports  as  to  the 
consumption  of  liquors,  the  Dominion  of 
Canada  must  be  credited  as  the  most  tem- 
perate. The  total  average  per  capita  con- 
sumption of  all  intoxicating  liquors  in 
Canada  for  the  year  ending  June  30, 1888, 
was  but  4.61  gallons,  3.7G  gallons  being 
malt  liquors. 


statement  showing  the  Annual  Consumption  of  Do- 
mestic and  Foreign  Distilled  Spirits,  Wine  and  Malt 
Liquors,  and  the  Average  Consumption  per  capita  of 
population,  in  the  Dominion  of  Canada,  during  each 
year  from  1881  to  1888,  inclusive: 


Detailed  statistics  for  the  other  coun- 
tries of  Europe  are  not  at  hand.  Mulhall 
(edition  of  1886)  gives  the  following  to- 
tals : 


Millions  of  Gallons. 

Alcohol. 

Wine. 

Beer. 

Spirits. 

Kquiv. 
in  Alco. 

Cialls.  per 
Inhabit'nt. 

1.45 

Austria. .. 

;500 

245 

30 

.53.0; 

Hvl;i;ium. 

4 

iro 

10 

11.4 

2.07 

Holland. . 

3 

35 

12 

8.2 

2.05 

Italy  . 

480 

20 

10 

50.2 

1.76 

Portugal.. 

60 

1 

1 

7.0 

1.55 

Russia.... 

30 

63 

145 

80.6 

1.05 

Spain 

220 

2 

3 

24.0 

1.48 

B 
•d 
o 

a 

5' 


to 


3- 

(6 

P 
O' 

w 
m 

a 

o 


GOOOOOOOGDOOgoOO 
ODOOOOODQOGOOOGO 
CB^i35O»**COl0'--i 


M  M  JO  *>.  M  CO  CO  CO  qj 
CO  00  4-10  "35  00  CT  "to  a 

to  35  -  i  -3  o  4-  Of  ^-  ;:> 
c-.jt- aoji-_x  GO  ^s  J-  §• 

CO  00 'lO --I  00  en  5! 
tOCOOtOiOOOH-14^50 
-iOtOOtO'-^^tOOCO* 


o 

o 
B 


o 


BE. 


o 
a 


V 


o 

Q' 
3 
n 

o' 

3 


•a 
o 


X) 


p 
•a 


o 

3 

ai 
P 
B 

•o 

0' 

3 


00~5OOOO00-ja 
-J  •».  O  35  2-  O  O  O  S> 
OI  00  p  4-p  4- to;-"  g- 

"h- Vo  ^'-' o  o  io  00  3 

H-  to  ^  00  CO  GO  O  to  50 
GOOOO^—COCOODO'* 


o 


^ 


Oi  w  M  j:;»  u»  j*^  _*^  00  q^ 

^s  05  o5"Vi  o»  ocV  o  a 
0»— 'Occoosc;'**'— '^ 

t-'CO^'-ODQDtOC'Oig' 
j^00»-'O^00'--Cii?: 
Or  CO  -^I  CO  ft-  O  Oi  X  * 


o 


5^ 

>-'^|-'^.  a 

^  CO  ^}  to  o '-'  o  o  S: 

rf*.iJIODi-^05tOCOH-^?5 


c 

w 

o 

3 
3 

w 

O 
o 


5^ 
--tc;TO'-*4-t0  35o^ 
cno4^cnto^o^^ 

0>-'>-'Ot*,.05  0tOS 

oooaoo-ien35aD?= 


o 


55 

i~iO"-^t^W't*^C0»-*?3 


P    Hrt 


1-1  l-l  l-l  1-1  t_l  l-l  l-l       -.^ 
en»i^cotocototoo55 

^ 

3 

0  -3 'to  00  -}  0  GO  S, 

tOCO-.J35  0  4-GC4^0 

encooo4-ooco~}.-° 

35  0  -}  0  0<  00  00  ifr- 

«• 

5^ 

oscococoj-cogtoj,- 

*n 

0 

Of  OI  35  CO  ^  —  X  .u  g: 

CO  lo  —  CO  4- 35  CO  00  S 

"^ 

053501-lCOOOaog 

cr.  00  CO  0  .^  -J  -'  -}  .* 

10,089 
12,276 
13,061 
13.489 
12,410 
13,623 
15,118 
16,258 

0 

p 

CCOOCJ5  0G035-}tOS 

ggfeggg^S" 

55 
cococotococotstog_ 

0 

P     Hri 

<jen'-i'x^obDCO^ 

r-i-  -1 

35  0  01  -3  to  to  .t-  CO  f 

o 
W 

«) 

Q 
o 
a! 

C/l 

a 
o 


o 

3 

P* 


p 

3 

p 

p 

0' 

3 


p 
a 

O  ji 

B  1=^ 

3     - 

2  ft) 


a  p 
p  a 


p 
a 
&< 

ft) 


13* 
CD 


The  following  comparative  table  is  from 
the  quarterly  report  of  the  United  States 
Bureau  of  Statistics  for  the  three  months 
ending  March  31,  1889: 


Corea.] 


135 


[Corea, 


Comparative  snmniary  of  the  Consumption  per  capi- 
ta of  PopiTLATioN  in  the  United  States,  the  United 
Kingdom,  Fiiance,  Germany,  Denmark,  Sweden  and 
the  Dominion  of  Canada  of  Distilled  Spirits;  and  in 
the  United  States,  the  United  Kingdom,  France  and 
(iERMANY  of  WiNEs  and  Malt  Liquors,  diuing  each 
year  from  1881  to  1887,  inclusive: 

[From  original  official  data.] 


^9 


'^Gc; 


5  ~.  s 


CI 
o  ■ 

B: 


o 
a 


^  3  :3 

ss  =1.5. 

ri  <V  fX) 
re  CjCi 

:  ?;2 

•  5'p 
■  w  S" 

•  D-m 

•  O  • 

:  3: 


Es  >  r^  '^  "^  *-■  ■* 


'"   n  =  = 

—  s  ^- - 

o  re  re 
re  O-C- 


5'S' 


)S  fH 


o 


f 
W 
0 

CD 

2 
3 


»S   !-.■-.►... 


!;5 
§. 


i-iKlJii-'i-'l-'>-»S' 


^S  O  Hi  CO  «»  CO  0>  .* 


>-'fS*..i-'i-'i-'i-"3 


!J5 

a. 


i-MCXJo:  *-> 


^    I 

JO  i^.  »-'•—'  .     ^  o 

^  I  *-  jo  >-'      «o  to  S 
00  ~}  £5  oi     oi  *-  .-^ 


CO*i        Ji-^ 


00  il 


£ 


-^^  ^     a. 

b      as'— S 
53      oooo?" 


O 


00 


(a)  No  data. 

Note.— The  years  referred  to  are  those  specified  in  the 
preceding  tables. 

C.  DeF.  Hoxie. 

Corea t — This  country,  so  long  called, 
and  most  justly,  "the  Hermit  nation," 
and  opened  to  the  world  by  American 
diplomacy  under  Commodore  R.  H.  Shu- 
Mdt,  U.  S.  N.,  in  1882,  is  situated  be- 
tween China  and  Japan.  It  has  an  area 
of  82,000  square  miles,  and  a  population 
of  about  12,000,000.  The  official  name 
of  the  kingdom  is  Cho-sen,  or   Land  of 


Morning  Calm. 


The  people  are  less  con- 


servative and  stolid  than  the  Chinese, 
and  less  enterprising  and  mercurial  than 
the  Japanese,  and  exhibit  a  happy  me- 
dium in  physique  and  temperament  be- 
tween the  two.  Owing  to  the  general 
prevalence  of  the  meat-eating  habit  on 
account  of  the  abundant  animal  food, 
and  because  also  of  the  remarkable  ab- 
sence of  tea  in  a  country  midway  between 
the  greatest  tea-producing  countries  of 
the  globe,  the  use  of  alcoholic  drinks  is 
general.  The  pages  of  Corean  history 
from  ancient  times  are  stained  with  the 
records  of  drunkenness  and  dissipation. 
A  characteristic  incident  is  related  of 
Yasuhiro,  an  envoy  of  Japan  to  Si  oul, 
the  Corean  capital,  in  A.  D.  1592,  when 
the  veteran  noted  that  the  Corean  dig- 
nitaries were  prematurely  old  from  dissi- 
pation instead  of  from  campaigns  and 
toils.  The  vocabulary  of  the  language  is 
surprisingly  rich  in  terms  relating  to  the 
various  kinds  of  intoxicating  drinks,  cups, 
measures  and  degrees  of  drunkenness. 
The  native  liquor,  by  preference,  is  a 
strong  spirit  made  from  rice,  though  the 
whiskeiy  imported  over  the  border  from 
Manchuria  is  much  in  vogue.  Rice,  mil- 
let and  barley  are  employed,  and  both 
fermented  and  distilled  liquors  are  pre- 
pared from  these  grains.  These  drinks 
vary  in  color,  taste,  strength  and  smell. 
They  range  from  beer  to  brandy  in  in- 
toxicating power.  In  general  they  are 
sufficiently  smoky,  oily  and  alcoholic,  and 
little  attempt  is  made  except  for  the 
costly  grades  to  extract  the  fusel  oil  gen- 
dered in  the  process  of  distillation.  The 
Government  levies  a  malt  tax  on  the  in- 
dustry, but  makes  no  attempt  to  regulate 
the  traffic,  except  "for  revenue  only."  In 
case  of  a  failure  of  crops,  as  in  1876  and 
1889,  or  even  during  severe  shortage,  the 
manufacture  and  sale  of  the  native  bever- 
age are  forbidden  in  certain  sections  under 
sev  re  penalties.  It  is  said  that  in  the 
city  of  Ai-chiu  or  Wiju  on  the  north- 
western border,  there  are  1,500  families 
supported  by  the  traffic  in  intoxicants. 
All  travelers,  their  own  vocabulary,  his- 
tory and  folk-lore  agree  in  charging  to 
the  Coreans  habits  of  gluttony  and  dissi- 
pation which  are  fostered  by  the  general 
use  of  liquor.  Corea  is  one  of  the  poor- 
est countries  in  the  world,  though  by 
right  and  nature  it  might  become  one  of 
the  richest  ;  and  much  of  its  extreme 
poverty  may  be  fairly  laid  to  the  national 


Cornell,  John  Black.] 


136 


[Cost  of  the  Drink  Traffic. 


passion  for  alcoholic  drinkl  "  Drunken- 
ness is  in  great  honor  in  this  country," 
writes  Dallet,  with  whom  Ross  agrees. 
"  If  a  man  drinks  of  rice-wine  so  as  to 
lose  his  senses,  no  one  considers  it  a  crime. 
A  mandarin,  a  great  dignitary,  a  minister 
even,  can,  without  loss  of  reputation,  roll 
under  the  table  at  the  end  of  his  dinner. 
Or  he  may  sleep  himself  sober,  and  his 
assistants,  instead  of  being  scandalized  at 
this  disgusting  spectacle,  congratulate 
him  on  being  rich  enough  to  be  able  to 
procure  so  great  a  pleasure."  Unfortu- 
nately, to  the  native  production  of  intoxi- 
cants is  now  added  the  new  danger  from 
the  liquor-sellers  of  Christendom.  In  the 
annual  trade  reports  and  returns  for  1888, 
issued  by  the  Custom  House  at  Seoul,  we 
find  that  malt  liquors,  wines  and  spirits 
were  imported  in  1887  to  the  amount  of 
$14,014,  and  in  1888,  $16,098.  One  gleam 
of  hope  however  is  in  the  active  prosecu- 
tion of  Christian  missionary  labors,  and 
the  establishment  of  churches,  already 
two  in  number.  The  dissemination  of 
Christian  temperance  principles  along 
with  the  planting  of  tea  and  the  cultiva- 
tion of  taste  for  non-alcoholic  drinks  will 
improve  the  sad  state  of  things  in  this 
country  so  cursed  with  official  corruption, 
disease  and  needless  poverty. 

[See  "  Corea.  the  Hermit"  Nation,"  and 
"Corea  Without  and  Within."  besides  the 
writings  of  Ko'^s,  Dallet,  Carles,  Lowell,  and 
the  letters  of  missionaries.] 

William  Elliott  Gkiffis. 

Cornell,  John  Black.— Born  in  Far 

Rockaway,  Long  Island,  Jan.  7,  1821, 
and  died  in  New  York  City,  Oct.  26, 
1887.  He  was  descended  from  prominent 
ancestors.  One  ancestor  was  a  member 
of  the  Colonial  Legislature  of  New  York 
(except  for  two  years)  from  1739  to  1764; 
another,  the  grandfather  of  John  B.,  was 
a  member  of  the  New  York  General 
Assembly  for  seven  years  at  the  close  of 
the  last  century.  The  founder  of  Cornell 
University,  Ezra  Cornell,  and  his  son. 
Gov.  Alonzo  B.  Cornell,  are  descended 
from  another  branch  of  the  same  family, 
as  is  also  ex-President  AVoolsey  of  Yale 
College.  When  17  years  of  age  John  B. 
Cornell  came  to  New  York  City  and  was 
apprenticed  to  his  brother  George,  who 
was  then  senior  member  of  an  iron  firm. 
In  1847  John  and  his  younger  brother 
William  set  up  in  the  iron  business  for 
themselves,  and  the  new  firm  soon  ac- 


quired the  high  standing  it  has  since 
held.  Mr.  Cornell  was  active  in  enter- 
prises of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church. 
In  the  year  1872,  and  again  in  1876,  he 
was  sent  as  a  lay  delegate  to  the  General 
Conference,  and  he  was  a  prominent 
member  of  important  church  boards, 
such  as  the  Board  of  Managers  of  the 
Missionary  Society,  the  General  Com- 
mittee on  Missions  and  the  Book  Com- 
mittee. He  also  held  the  more  import- 
ant positions  of  President  of  the  New 
York  City  Church  Extension  and  Mis- 
sionary Society,  and  President  of  the 
Board  of  Trustees  of  Drew  Seminary. 
He  was  an  ardent  Abolitionist  at  a  time 
when  his  views  on  slavery  cost  him  much 
of  his  popularity  among  his  friends,  and 
in  later  years  he  was  a  staunch  party 
Prohibitionist,  a  most  generous  contribu- 
tor to  the  cause. 

Cost  of  the  Drink  Traffic— The 

expenditures  of  the  people  of  the  United 
States  for  the  support  of  the  drink  traffic 
fall  naturally  under  two  heads:  (1)  Di- 
rect expenditures,  or  the  sums  paid  by 
consumers  for  intoxicating  liquors,  and 
(2)  Indirect  expenditures,  or  those  paid 
by  the  people  on  account  of  the  crime, 
pauperism,  drunkenness,  disorder,  idle- 
ness, sickness,  poverty,  taxes,  etc.,  due  to 
the  traffic. 

1.  direct  cost. 

The  report  of  the  Commissioner  of 
Internal  Revenue  for  the  year  ending 
June  30,  1889,  shows  that  the  quantities 
of  domestic  liquors  withdrawn  for  con- 
sumption during  that  year  were : 

Distilled  spirits. .  77, 164,640  proof  gallons. 
Fermented  liquors..  25,119,853  barrels. 

In  computing  the  cost  to  the  consumer 
of  the  domestic  distilled  spirits  used  for 
beverage  purposes  it  is  necessary,  first,  to 
consider  that  the  77,164,640  proof  gal- 
lons withdrawn  for  consumption  in  1889 
included  a  certain  unknown  quantity  of 
alcohol  used  in  the  arts,  manufactures, 
etc.  Although  this  quantity  is  unknown .  it 
may  safely  be  estimated  at  not  more  than 
10  per  cent,  of  the  total  distilled  product 
(see  Alcohol),  or  7,716,464  gallons. 
Deducting  this  sum  there  remains  69,- 
448,176  proof  gallons  of  spirits  drank  by 
the  people  in  1889.  But  the  alcoholic 
strength  of  a  proof  gallon  in  the  Avare- 
liouse  (50  per  cent.)  is  largely  reduced 


Cost  of  the  Drink  Trafiac] 


137 


[Cost  of  the  Drink  Trafiac. 


by  the  time  the  article  reaches  the  bar- 
room, by  adulteration  and  by  dilution 
with  water.  The  average  retail  strength 
is  not  in  excess  of  40  per  cent.;  and 
therefore  the  aggregate  volume  of  bever- 
age spirits  is  increased  fully  one-fifth — 
that  is,  the  69,448,176  proof  gallons  of 
beverage  spirits  withdrawn  for  consump- 
tion in  1889  became  83,337,811  gallons 
when  ready  for  sale  over  the  bar.  The 
average  retail  price  of  a  gallon  of  spirits 
to  the  consumer  is,  at  a  low  estimate,  16.^ 
Therefore  the  retail  cost  of  distilled 
spirits  consumed  for  beverage  purposes 
in  the  United  States  in  1889  is  found  to 
have  been  $500,026,866  on  the  basis  of  a 
conservative  reckoning. 

During  the  same  period  the  people 
drank  35,119,853  barrels  of  domestic 
beer,  as  shown  by  the  Internal  Revenue 
returns.  A  barrel  of  beer  contains  31 
gallons  -  or  496  half-pints,  a  half-pint 
being,  approximately,  tlie  capacity  of  an 
ordinary  beer-glass.  Each  glass  (or  half- 
pint)  retails  for  five  cents;  and  the  aver- 
age retail  price  per  barrel,  accepting  the 
figures  just  given,  is  consequently  124.80. 
But  it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  a  con- 
siderable portion  of  the  beer  used,  es- 
pecially among  the  working  classes,  is 
sold  by  the  bucket  or  "growler,"  and 
carried  away  to  be  consumed  at  home  or 
in  the  shop ;  and  when  so  sold  the  price 
is  much  lower  than  by  the  glass.  On  the 
other  hand  each  glass  or  bucket  of  beer 
contains  a  large  percentage  of  froth. 
Taking  all  the  elements  into  considera- 
tion it  seems  reasonable  to  think  that  $18 
per  barrel  is  a  very  low  estimate  of  the 
average  cost  of  beer  to  the  public ;  and  if 
this  estimate  is  accepted  the  total  retail 
cost  of  domestic  beer  in  1889  was  $452,- 
157,354. 

Besides  distilled  spirits  and  beer  the 
United  States  now  consumes  annually 
about  30,000,000  gallons  of  domestic 
wine.  (See  Consumption  op  Liquors.) 
The  average  value  of  this  product  to  the 

1  In  Older  to  obtain  an  expert  estimate,  the  editor  sub- 
mitted tlie  question  to  Robert  A.  Greacen,  a  prominent 
wholesjale  liquor-dealer  of  New  York,  who  said:  "A  gal- 
lon of  whiskey  will  make  about  80  ordinary-sized  driiiks, 
but  it  is  safe  to  reckon  75  in  order  that  there  may  be  no 
dispute.  Bartenders  often  reckon  (iO,  to  allow  for  their 
own  treats."  A  drinli  of  wliiskey  is  seldom  sold  for  less 
than  10  cents,  except  in  the  very  lowest  dives,  where  some- 
times it  may  be  obtained  for  seven  or  even  five  cents.  On 
the  other  hand,  saloons  of  the  more  pretentious  class 
charge  1.5  cents  per  drink,  or  two  drinks  for  a  quarter.  It 
is  obvious,  therefore,  that  our  estimate  of  $6  per  gallon  to 
the  consumer  is  considerably  below  the  actual  average. 

2  Internal  Revenue  Laws  of  the  United  States,  Chapter  5, 
Section  3,339. 


consumer  may  safely  be  reckoned  at  $2 
per  gallon,  making  a  total  cost  of  $60,- 
000,000  for  domestic  wines. 

During  the  year  ending  June  30,  1889, 
according  to  the  report  of  the  Chief  of 
the  Bureau  of  Statistics,  the  imports  of 
liquors  and  their  stated  values  were  as 
follows : 

Stated 

Quantities.  Values. 

Malt  liquors 2,.5i  t,ti,Sl  gals.  $1,8()1,990 

Brandy 400,08!)    "  1,070,265 

Other  distilled  spirits ■    1,127,458    "  851,822 

Champagne  and  other  spark- 
ling wines 31.'j,870  doz.  4,351,413 

Still    wines  i  3,078,5.54  gals.  I_    q  450  q=f, 

btlll  wines -j     200  020  doz.  )    '5,4o»,3oJ 

Total $10,996,849 

But  the  values  here  stated  were  the  val- 
ues of  the  liquors  before  they  had  left  the 
Custom  House.  Allowing  for  the  import 
duties  charged  upon  them,  subsequent 
increase  of  volume  by  means  of  dilution 
and  adulteration,  profits  made  by  import- 
ers, wholesalers  and  retailers,  etc.,  it  is 
entirely  fair  to  estimate  that  at  least 
100  per  cent,  must  be  added  to  the. 
stated  value  before  the  cost  of  these  im- 
ported liquors  to  the  public  at  large  can 
be  approximately  indicated.  That  is,  the 
aggregate  retail  cost  of  imported  liquors 
in  1889  may  be  put  at  $21,993,698. 

Collecting  the  various  items,  we  have 
the  following  summary  of  the  direct  cost 
of  the  drink  traffic  to  the  people  of  the 
United  States  for  the  year  ending  June 
30,  1889: 

Domestic  distilled  spirits,  83,337,811  gal- 
lons, at  $6 $500,026,866 

Domestic  beer,  25,119,853  barrels,  at  $18. . .  4.52,1.57,;J54 

Domestic  wines,  30.0110,000  gallons,  at  $2. .  60,000,000 

Imported  liquors  of  all  kinds,  $10,996,849, 

to  which  add  100  per  cent 21,993,698 

Total $1,034,177,918 

In  this  estimate  no  account  is  taken  of 
the  illicit  whiskey  of  the  "moonshine" 
stills,  cider,  home-made  wines  or  smuggled 
liquors.  It  must  also  be  considered  that 
the  calculations  made  above  are  conser- 
vative, inclining  to  understatement  rather 
than  to  overstatement.  Probably  a  juster 
estimate  of  the  total  direct  cost  would  be 
$1,100,000,000.  Even  this  figure  is 
smaller  than  the  one  obtained  by  apply- 
ing to  the  official  returns  for  1889  the 
methods  of  calculation  used  by  Har- 
greaves.  On  the  other  hand,  certain  sta- 
tisticians have  made  lower  estimates.  F. 
JS".  Barrett,  editor  of  the  American  Gro- 
cer, at  the  request  of  the  Chief  of  the 
Bureau  of  Statistics  in  1887,  submitted  a 


Cost  of  the  Drink  Traflac] 


138 


[Cost  of  the  Drink  Traffic. 


report  on  the  subject,  wliich  was  printed 
in  a  special  report  issued  by  the  Bureau. 
Mr.  Barrett,  in  a  letter  accompanying  his 
analysis,  indicated  his  anti-Prohibition 
sentiments  by  an  uncomplimentary  allu- 
sion to  '•  fanatical  advocates."  According 
to  his  figures,  the  annual  direct  expendi- 
ture for  drink  in  the  United  States,  on 
the  basis  of  Government  statistics  for  the 
year  ending  June  30,  1886,  was  1700,- 
000,000. 1  He  estimated  the  average  price 
of  whiskey  at  7-i  cents  per  drink,  or  |4.50 
per  gallon,  instead  of  10  cents  and  $6, 
the  figures  that  Ave  have  adopted;  and  he 
reckoned  the  price  of  domestic  beer  to 
the  consumer  at  TO  cents  per  gallon,  or 
$15.50  per  barrel,  instead  of  $18  per  bar- 
rel, tlie  price  that  we  give.  Mr.  Edward 
Atkinson,  at  about  the  same  time,  made 
an  independent  calculation,  agreeing 
with  Mr.  Barrett's  conclusion  that  the 
direct  expenditures  for  drink  at  that 
time  aggregated  about  |;700,0()0,000  per 
annum.  This  estimate  of  1700,000,000 
is  the  lowest  one  that  has  been  made  in 
"recent  years. 

The  total  direct  cost  of  the  drink  traf- 
fic is  steadily  increasing.  For  the  year 
ending  June  30,  1889,  the  quantity  of 
distilled  spirits  withdrawn  for  consump- 
tion showed  an  increase  of  5,599,154  gal- 
lons over  the  quantity  withdrawn  the 
previous  year — that  is,  allowing  10  per 
cent,  for  spirits  used  in  the  arts,  etc.,  and 
adding  one-fifth  to  the  remainder  on  ac- 
count of  dilution  and  adulterations,  there 
was  an  increase  of  0,047,080  gallons,  in- 
dicating an  increased  cost  during  the 
year  to  the  public  of  $30,282,410  for  do- 
mestic distilled  spirits  alone ;  at  the  same 
time  the  domestic  beer  consumed  showed 
an  increase  of  439,034  barrels,  indicating 
an  increased  cost  of  $7,913,412  on  account 
of  domestic  beer.  Thus  in  1889  the  di- 
rect cost  of  drink  to  the  public  (omitting 
wines  and  imported  liquors  of  all  kinds) 
was  $44,195,828  greater  than  in  1888. 
Comparisons  with  other  years  show  re- 
sults more  or  less  striking.  It  is  manifest, 
therefore,  that  the  direct  cost  of  the 
traffic  is  increasing  at  the  rate  of  from 
$40,000,000  to  $50^000,000  per  year. 

In  speaking  of  the  direct  cost  we  have 
not  here  made  allowance  for  the  sums 
paid  by  liquor-makers  and  sellers  for  grain, 
hops   and   grapes,   buildings,  machinery 

'  Mr.  Barrett's  estimates,  if  made  for  the  year  ending 
June  30,  1889,  would  show  a  total  direct  expenditure  for 
that  year  of  not  less  than  $800,000,000. 


and  appliances,  labor,  etc.  It  is,  of  course, 
understood  that  the  money  paid  by  the 
people  for  drink  is  not  all  retained  by  the 
drink-dealers,  but  is  in  part  paid  by  them 
in  turn  to  persons  engaged  in  various  pur- 
suits. But  the  magnitude  of  the  profits 
of  the  liquor  traffic  is  not  under  considera- 
tion in  this  article.  Even  if  the  aggregate 
sums  paid  back  by  the  liquor  traffic  to 
the  people,  or  special  classes  of  the  people, 
were  large  enough  to  balance  precisely  the 
sums  paid  by  the  people  for  liquors,  the 
traffic  would  not  on  that  account  be  a 
contributor  to  the  general  welfare.  Upon 
this  subject  Mr.  E.  J.  Wheeler  comments 
in  a  logical  manner  in  his  book,  "  Pro- 
hibition: The  Principle,  the  Policy  and 
the  Party."  "  Suppose,"  says  he,  "  that 
$700,000,000  is  the  sum  paid  each  year  for 
drink  in  this  country.  ^Tot  a  dollar  of 
this  sum,  it  may  be,  will  be  lost  to  the 
nation;  but  the  labor  and  the  material 
used  in  making  and  marketing  tlie  liquor 
for  which  this  sum  was  expended  are  lost 
tj  the  nation.  The  value  of  that  ma- 
terial and  labor  is  represented  by  the 
$700,000,000  after  the  taxes  and  license 
fees  are  deducted.  Suppose,  by  way  of 
illustration,  that  this  nation  withdraws 
from  other  forms  of  industry  500,000 
men,  and  sends  them  to  labor  for  one 
year  in  the  construction  of  the  Nicaragua 
canal.  Let  $700,000,000  be  the  sum  paid 
them  for  their  labor,  their  transportation, 
the  cost  of  machinery,  and  all  their  ap- 
pliances. And  suppose,  further,  that  in 
one  way  or  another  every  dollar  of  this 
sum  is  by  the  end  of  the  year  returned 
again  to  the  nation,  either  in  exchange 
for  provisions  purchased,  or  in  bank  de- 
posits, or  in  some  other  form.  The  na- 
tion would  not  have  lost  a  single  dollar 
of  the  $700,000,000,  but  it  Avould  have 
lost  the  equivaleni  of  thai  sum,  in  the 
necessaries,  comforts  and  luxuries  sup- 
plied to  these  men.  If  the  work  they 
have  in  the  meantime  performed  has 
created  a  canal  whose  value  is  $700,000,- 
000,  the  nation  has  lost  nothing  but  in- 
terest. If  the  work  has  proved  valueless, 
the  lo^s  has  been  $700,000,000  plus  the 
interost.  If  the  work  has  proved  to  be 
positively  destructive,  the  amount  of 
vahie  destroyed  must  be  added  to  the 
$700,000,000"  to  ascertain  the  full  extent 
of  the  loss."  By  similar  processes  of  cal- 
culation tjie  accounts  for  and  against  the 
liquor-traffic  must  be  made  up. 


Cost  of  the  Drink  Traffic! 


139 


[Cost  of  the  Drink  Traffic. 


2.   INDIEECT   COST. 

It  is  still  more  difficult  to  give  exact 
figures  of  tlie  indirect  cost.  The  items 
to  be  taken  into  account  are  so  numerous 
and  the  statistics  are  often  so  unsatisfac- 
tory that  any  conclusion  which  may  be 
suggested  must  be  tlie  result  of  interpre- 
tation rather  than  of  direct  calculation. 
In  relation  to  a  few  of  the  most  import- 
ant items  it  is  possible  to  deal  Avith  ap- 
proximate figures. 

1,  Pauperism, — Mr.  Fred.  H.  Wines, 
in  the  Compendium  of  the  10th  Census 
(1880)  says:  "  It  is  almost  if  not  quite  im- 
possible to  obtain  the  statistics  of  pauper- 
ism." He  reports  67,000  inmates  of 
almshouses  in  1880.  The  average  cost 
of  their  support  would  be  about  $100  a 
year,  making  a  total  of  $6,700,000.  In 
the  State  of  JS'ew  York  the  official  report 
for  1888  gives  the  cost  of  out-door  relief 
as  about  two-thirds  of  the  cost  of  main- 
taining paupers  in  almshouses.  Estimat- 
ing at  this  rate  for  the  whole  country,  we 
should  have  $4,466,666  for  out-door  relief, 
making  $11,166,666  expended  in  the  na- 
tion on  account  of  pauperism  in  1880. 
On  the  very  reasonable  assumption  that 
three-fourths  of  this  was  due  to  intem- 
perance, we  should  have  a  total  of 
$8,374,889  given  from  public  funds  for 
maintaining  paupers  created  by  the  drink 
business.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that 
this  estimate  is  much  under  the  mark. 
It  does  not  include  any  part  of  the  sums 
paid  to  pensioners  of  various  kinds.  Be- 
sides, the  expenditures  of  charitable 
organizations,  under  the  direction  of 
churches,  societies  and  private  individ- 
uals, are  left  out  of  the  account. 

2.  Crime. — Similar  difficulties  are  en- 
countered in  estimating  the  cost  of  crime. 
Mr.  Wines,  in  his  pamphlet,  "  Crime,  the 
Convict  and  the  Prison,"  says :  "  The 
problem  involves  many  estimates,  some  of 
which  are  very  obscure."  Taking  the  num- 
ber of  inmates  of  prisons  and  reformatories 
as  given  in  the  Census  of  1880,  70,000,  and 
reckoning  the  expenditure  (including 
prisons  and  repairs)  at  $200  a  year  per 
inmate,  he  estimates  the  total  cost  of 
crime  in  the  United  States  in  1880  at 
$15,000,000.  To  this  should  be  added 
the  cost  of  arrest  and  trial,  making,  accord- 
ing to  Mr.  Wines,  "  $50,000,000  annually 
raised  by  taxation  to  defend  the  com- 
munity against  the  ravages  of  crime." 
Judge  Noah  Davis  and  many  other  ex- 


perienced and  impartial  observers  declare 
that  three-fourths  of  all  crime  is  due  to 
intemperance;  and  conservative  processes 
of  calculation  therefore  indicate  a  total 
expenditure  of  $37,500,000  per  annum  for 
crime  due  to  drink, — assuming  that  Mr. 
Wines  has  approximated  the  actual 
amount  in  reckoning  the  entire  outlay  at 
$50,000,000.  But  there  is  good  reason  for 
believing  that  he  has  not  done  so.  On 
pages  546-7  we  print  figures  and  deduc- 
tions indicating  that  in  cities  of  the 
United  States  having  an  aggregate  pop- 
ulation of  about  17,000,000,  the  expenses 
of  the  police  department  alone,  on  account 
of  offenses  due  to  drink,  are  in  excess  of 
$26,000,000  annually. 

3.  Insanitij,  e/c.  —  The  Census  returns 
show  that  168,982  insane  and  idiotic 
persons  were  enumerated  in  the  United 
States  in  1880.  The  enumeration  was 
far  from  complete.  At  $200  each  per 
year  (the  cost  of  many  exceeding  this) 
the  cost  of  the  insane  and  idiotic  to  the 
public  would  exceed  $33,000,000  annually. 
In  view  of  the  great  perplexities  of  the 
problem  we  shall  charge  only  one-fourth 
to  the  saloon,  making  $8,250,000.  Besides 
the  insane  and  idiotic  there  are  other 
" defectives,"  the  deaf,  dumb  and  blind, 
cripples  and  the  like,  and  multitudes  who 
stand  on  the  "border  lines."  Consider- 
ing the  universally  recognized  fact  that 
the  hereditary  influence  of  drink  is  one 
of  the  most  prolific  causes  in  the  produc- 
tion of  defective  persons,  the  money  used 
in  caring  for  these  victims  of  liquor  must 
reach  an  appalling  total. 

4.  Sickness. — Dr.  Hargreaves,  by  what 
seems  a  reasonable  computation,  i  esti- 
mates that  there  are  150,000  persons  simul- 
taneously sick  in  the  United  States  in  con- 
sequence of  intemperance.  It  is  probable 
that  an  equal  number  of  temperate 
persons  are  made  sick  through  the 
intemperance  of  others,  especially  women 
and  children,  who  suffer  terribly  from 
want  of  fuel,  clothing,  food  and  all 
the  comforts  of  life  because  of  the 
drunkenness  of  husbands  and  fathers, 
not  to  speak  of  the  sufferers  from  absolute 
violence  and  abuse.  If  this  be  conceded, 
and  the  average  cost  of  medical  attend- 
ance and  medicine  be  placed  at  the  low 
figure  of  $1  a  day,  the  total  annual  cost 
will  be  $109,500,000. 

»  Worse  than  Wasted,  p.  54. 


Cost  of  the  Drink  Traffic] 


140 


[Craig,  William  H. 


QUALIFYING   FACTORS. 

In  computing  the  indirect  cost  it  is 
requisite,  however,  to  allow  for  any  items 
to  the  credit  of  the  traffic.  The  most 
important  item  is  that  of  revenue  paid  by 
it  to  Federal,  State  and  local  authorities. 
For  the  year  endins^  June  30,  1889,  the 
taxes  from  distilled  and  fermented  liquors 
collected  by  the  Internal  Eevenue  De- 
partment of  the  Federal  Government  ag- 
gregated i;98,036,041  59.  In  tlie  same 
year  the  total  expenditures  of  the  Inter- 
nal Revenue  Department  amounted  to 
$4,185,i28.65,  of  which  perhaps  one-fourth 
was  paid  for  collecting  the  taxes  on 
tobacco,  oleomargarine,  etc.,  leaving  up- 
wards of  $3,000,000  expended  in  1889  for 
collecting  the  Federal  revenues  from 
liquors.  Hence  the  aggregate  annual  in- 
come of  the  National  Government  from  the 
drinlv  traffic  on  account  of  Internal 
Kevenue  is  not  in  excess  of  195,000,000, 
to  which  add  customs  duties  from  liquors 
aggregating  17,786,399.87— making  a 
grand  total  of  about  $102,800,000. 

In   the   same   year    the   total  number 
of    dealers    in   liquors   paying    Internal 
Revenue  taxes  was  181,783.     It  is  not  a 
fair  assumption  that  all  of  these  dealers 
were  regularly  licensed  by  State  and  local 
autl:  orities ;  and  it  must  be  remembered 
that  a  great  many  were  druggists,  selling 
liquors  for  medicinal  and  similar  purposes 
under  merely   nominal   license   fees.     It 
will  probably  be  right  to  take  it  for  granted 
that  not  more  than  170,000  of  the  181,783 
persons  who  paid  Internal  Revenue  taxes 
were  regularly  and  exclusively  engaged  in 
the  liquor  business  under  State  and  local 
license  laws  in  1889.     About  one-third  of 
these  dealers  were  in  thf-  distinctively  low 
license  States  of  New   l^ork,  California, 
Wisconsin  and  Maryland,  States  in  which 
the  annual  license  rate,  striking  an  aver- 
age, is  certainly  not   in  excess  of   1150. 
The   distinctively  High    License   States, 
like  Massachusetts,  Nebraska,  Minnesota, 
Michigan,     Pennsylvania,     Illinois     and 
Missouri,  contained  less  than  one-third. 
From  these  figuros  it  seems  proper  to  con- 
clude that  the  average  annual  license  fee 
per  liquor-dealer  paid  into  State  and  local 
treasuries  is  not  more  than  $250.     Esti- 
mating that  there  are  now  in  the  United 
States  170,000  persons  subject  to  ordinary 
license  charges,  the  total  revenue  of  State 
and  local  Governments  from  the  traffic 
is  $42,500,000.     From  this  a  certain  sum 


must  be  deducted  for  the  cost  of  collect- 
ing— say  5  per  cent.,  or  $2,125,000;  leav- 
ing a  balance  of  $40,375,000,  which  added 
to  the  Federal  revenue  gives  an  aggregate 
of  about  $135,000,000  revenue  per  an- 
num paid  by  the  drink  traffic  in  the 
whole  of  the  United  States  to  Federal, 
State  and  local  authorities. 

1)1  considering  whether  other  items  to 
the  credit  of  the  traffic  may  justly  be  al- 
lowed for,  it  is  very  difficult  to  adopt  a 
basis  of  reasoning  that  will  be  acceptable 
to  all  persons.  It  is  claimed  by  pro-liq- 
our  statisticians  that  the  sums  paid  for 
labor  are  to  be  counted  absolutely  to  the 
credit  of  the  traffic.  On  the  other  hand 
it  is  maintained  that  if  the  traffic  were 
utterly  destroyed  the  laborers  now  en- 
gaged in  it  would  find  other  employment, 
while  many  thousands  whose  working 
power  is  now  ruined  or  impaired  by 
drink  would  find  their  wage-earning 
power  improved.  The  same  antagonistic 
claims  are  set  up  by  different  persons  in 
considering  the  significance  of  the  ex- 
penditures made  by  the  traffic  for  ma- 
chinery, buildings,  material,  etc.  In  the 
opinion  of  the  opponents  of  the  traffic, 
these  expenditures  count  for  less  than 
nothing  when  viewed  from  the  standpoint 
of  wise  national  economy.  It  is,  there- 
fore, impossible  to  make  allowance  for 
them  in  this  article. 

The  estimated  revenue  ($135,000,000 
per  annum)  seems,  therefore,  to  stand  as 
the  sole  item  to  the  credit  of  the  traffic  in 
reckoning  its  cost  to  the  people  of  the 
United  States.  Against  this  revenue  is  an 
expenditure,  direct  and  indirect,  of  ])Toh- 
ably  about  $2,000,000,000,  annually  in- 
creasing at  from  $40,000,000  to  $50,000,- 
000.  And  in  estimating  the  indirect  cost 
we  have  taken  no  account  whatever  of 
losses  from  fires  due  to  intemperance,  de- 
preciation of  property  values,  losses  due  to 
thestimulationof  allied  evils  like  gambling 
and  prostitution,  losses  resulting  from  the 
enforced  illiteracy  and  ignorance  of  mul- 
titudes whose  ability  to  strive  for  better 
things  is  destroyed  by  the  saloon,  etc ,  etc. 
It  is  manifestly  within  the  bounds  of 
moderation  to  believe  that  the  money 
equivalent  of  these  unestimated  losses 
approximates  if  it  does  not  exceed  the 
entire  boasted  revenue. 

Craig,  William  H. — Born  in  Gait, 
Canada,  Aug.  18,  1849.  and  died  at  his 
home  in  Kansas  City,  Mo.,  April  9,  1890. 


Crime] 


141 


[Crime. 


He  came  to  the  United  States  in  1864, 
and  although  but  15  years  of  age  attached 
himself  to  the  commissary  department  of 
the  United  States  Army  and  served  until 
the  end  of  the  Civil  War.  He  purposed 
studying  for  the  ministry,  but  his  eyes 
failing  him  during  his  course  at  the  North- 
western University  at  Evanston,  HI.,  he 
was  obliged  to  give  up  the  plan,  and  be- 
gan his  business  career  as  clerk  in  a  Chi- 
cago house.  He  was  married,  September, 
1877,  to  Jennie  E.  Northup  of  Joliet, 
HI.,  and  in  1878  they  removed  to  Kansas 
Cit}^,  where  Mr.  Craig  entered  the  real 
estate  business  and  amassed  a  fortune. 
He  was  a  prominent  member  of  the 
Methodist  Episcopal  Church.  A  total 
abstainer  from  boyhood,  he  always  advo- 
cated the  principle  of  the  Prohibition  of 
the  liquor  traffic.  Upon  joining  the 
Prohibition  party  he  became  a  recognized 
leader  of  it  in  the  West.  Soon  afterwards 
he  began  the  publication  of  the  Kansas 
City  Herald,  a  Aveekly  journal  devoted  to 
the  interests  of  the  new  party  and  tem- 
perance reform.  This  paper  never  paid 
expenses,  but  Mr.  Craig  continued  to  is- 
sue it  until  1889,  when  he  disposed  of  it 
to  local  Prohibitionists  Avho  afterwards 
permitted  it  to  expire.  Mr.  Craig  made 
large  donations  to  the  Prohibition  work: 
one  year  the  Woman's  Christain  Temper- 
ance Union  of  Missouri  received  from 
him  a  check  for  $1,000.  As  the  candi- 
date of  the  Prohibition  party  for  State 
Treasurer  of  Missouri  in  1888  he  received 
4,524  votes. 

Crime  — The  study  of  mental  pathol- 
ogy has  clearly  established  the  fact  that 
the  faculties  and  propensities  of  the 
human  mind  can  be  stimulated  or  de- 
pressed by  purely  physical  agencies. 
There  are  drugs  that  excite  the  activity 
of  the  imagination,  and  injuries  to  certain 
parts  of  the  cerebral  organism  tend  to 
weaken  the  memory;  just  as  other  drugs 
stimulate  the  functions  of  the  digestive 
organs,  while  the  laceration  of  certain 
nerves  or  sinews  may  result  in  lameness 
or  the  loss  of  sight.  The  influence  of 
alcohol  thus  affects  the  higher  faculties  of 
the  human  brain.  H  torpifies  the  moral 
instincts  and  weakens  the  faculty  of  log- 
ical inference,  while  at  the  same  time  it 
stimulates  the  propensity  of  combative- 
ness.  Animals  fuddled  with  alcoholic 
drugs  become  ill-tempered  and  aggress- 


ive—often to  the  degree  of  attacking  their 
own  keepers.  By  a  half-ounce  dose  of 
strong  rye-brandy  Dr.  Hermann  Gessner 
of  Munich  excited  a  usually  gentle  deer- 
hound  to  a  pitch  of  fury  which  came  near 
endangering  the  life  of  the  experimenter. 
"  The  "greater  part  of  the  exciting  influ- 
ence of  alcohol,"  says  Prof.  Otto  of  Up- 
sala.  is  directed  toward  the  posterior  and 
inferior  portions  of  the  brain ;  in  other 
words,  it  excites  chiefly  the  organs  of  the 
animal  propensities,  and  according  to 
the  law  that  whatever  stimulates  strongly 
one  class  of  cerebral  organs  weakens  an- 
other class,  alcohol,  while  it  adds  vigor  to 
the  animal  propensities,  enfeebles  the 
intellectual  faculties  and  the  moral  sen- 
timents." 

The  history  of  crime  has  invariably 
confirmed  that  conclusion.  "The  places 
of  judicature  I  have  long  held  in  this 
Kingdom,"  says  Sir  Matthew  Hale, 
Chief- Justice  of  England,  "  have  given 
me  an  opportunity  to  observe  the  original 
cause  of  most  of  the  enormities  that  have 
been  committed  for  the  space  of  nearly 
20  years;  and  by  due  observation  I  have 
found  that  if  the  murders  and  man- 
slaughters, the  burglaries  and  robberies, 
the  riots  and  tumults,  the  adulteries,  for- 
nications, rapes  and  other  outrages  that 
have  happened  in  that  time  were  divided 
into  five  parts,  four  of  them  have  been 
the  issues  and  products  of  excessive 
drinking." 

Just  200  years  later  an  independent 
observer  of  our  own  country  arrived  at 
almost  exactly  the  same  conclusion.  Dr. 
Elisha  Harris  of  New  York,  in  a  mon- 
ograph on  the  subjective  causes  of  crime, 
published  in  1873,  says  :  "  As  a  physician 
familiar  with  the  morbid  consequences  of 
alcoholic  indulgence  in  thousands  of  suf- 
ferers from  it,  as  a  student  of  physiology 
interested  in  the  remarkable  phenomena 
of  inebriation,  and  as  a  close  observer  of 
social  and  moral  tendencies,  it  was  easy 
for  the  Avriter  to  believe  that  not  less  than 
one-half  of  all  crime  and  j^auperism  in 
this  State  depends  upon  alcoholic  ine- 
bi'iety.  But  after  two  years  of  careful 
inquiry  into  the  history  and  condition  of 
the  criminal  population,  he  finds  that  his 
conclusion  is  inevitable  that,  taken  in 
all  its  relations,  alcoholic  drinks  may 
justly  be  charged  Avitli  far  more  than 
half  of  the  crimes  that  are  brought  to 
conviction  in   the   State   of  New  York, 


Crime.] 


143 


[Crime. 


and  that  fully  85  per  cent,  of  all  con- 
victs give  evidence  of  having  in  some 
larger  degree  been  prepared  or  enticed 
to  do  criminal  acts  because  of  the  phys- 
ical and  distracting  effects  produced  upon 
the  human  organism  by  alcohol." 

Prison  officials  of  every  civilized  coun- 
try have  confirmed  that  verdict.  "  By 
far  the  most  fruitful  single  cause  of 
crime  is  the  temptation  of  the  public  tav- 
ern," says  prison  chaplain  Eberts  of 
Brunswick,  Germany,  "  and  though  pov- 
erty  or  revenge  may  in  many  cases  prove 
to  have  been  the  proximate  cause  of  law- 
less acts,  intemperance  and  the  conse- 
quent habits  of  shiftlessness  would  in 
nine  out  of  ten  cases  be  found  to  have 
developed  the  original  bias  of  the  moral 
disposition  that  lured  trespassers  from 
the  path  of  rectitude."  "  I  have  heard 
more  than  15,000  prisoners  declare  that 
the  enticements  of  the  ale  and  beer- 
houses had  been  their  ruin,"  says  the 
Eev.  Mr.  CHay,  Chaplain  of  the  Preston 
(England)  House  of  Correction,  "  and  if 
every  prisoner's  habits  and  history  were 
fully  inquired  into  it  would  be  placed 
beyond  a  doubt  that  nine-tenths  of  the 
English  crime  requiring  to  be  dealt  with 
by  the  law  arises  from  an  English  sin 
which  the  same  law  scarcely  discourages," 
"  The  alleged  vindictiveness  of  the  Latin 
races,"  says  Prison  Inspector  Longinotti 
of  Naples,  "  is  rarely  noticed  in  rural 
districts  where  the  poverty  of  the  peas- 
ants or  other  causes  have  made  temper- 
ance an  involuntary  virtue.  In  the  cities 
brawls  and  vendettas  are  children  of  the 
same  fiend  that  has  proved  a  fruitful 
parent  of  idleness  and  unchastity.  In- 
temperance, aided  perhaps  by  the  social 
temptations  of  city  life,  is  the  chief  cause 
of  crime."  "  On  examining  the  reports 
of  the  Prison  Inspectors  for  the  Provinces 
of  Quebec  and  Ontario,"  says  a  report  to 
the  Dominion  House  of  Commons,  "your 
Committee  further  find  that  out  of  28,289 
commitments  to  the  jails  for  the  three 
previous  years,  21,236  were  committed 
either  for  drunkenness  or  for  crimes  per- 
petrated under  the  influence  of  strong 
drink." 

In  summing  up  the  prevalent  causes 
of  crime  we  shall  find  that  intemperance 
must,  in  every  case,  be  regarded  either 
as  a  direct  or  indirect  factor  of  the  con- 
ditions favoring  the  development  of  a 
vicious  disposition. 


1.  Drunkenness  excites  the  instinct  of 
destructiveness  and  thus  becomes  a  direct 
cause  of  violence,  and  often  of  wholly  un- 
provoked assaults. 

2.  Inebiiety  clouds  the  perceptive  fac- 
ulties and  thus  disqualifies  its  victims  for 
judging  the  consequences  of  their  acts  or 
realizing  the  force  of  dissuasive  argu- 
ments. 

3.  Habitual  intemperance  weakens  the 
influence  of  self-respect  and  eventually 
almost  deadens  the  sense  of  shame. 

4.  Intemperance  tempts  to  idleness— 
the  parent  of  vice. 

5.  Intemperance  is  a  chief  cause  of 
poverty,  and  thus  indirectly  of  the  crimes 
prompted  l)y  hunger  and  distress. 

G.  Alcohol  tends  to  beget  a  disincli- 
nation to  intellectual  employments,  and 
thus  neutralizes  a  chief  agency  of  reform. 

7.  Intemperance  begets  a  hereditary 
disposition  to  idleness  and  vice.  The 
lineage  of  the  notorious  Jukes  family 
has  been  traced  to  a  man  who  is  de- 
scribed as  a  hunter,  sometimes  a  vagrant 
and  always  a  hard  drinker,  and  seven- 
eights  of  whose  descendants  were  either 
paupers  or  habitual  criminals.  In  the 
thirtieth  annual  report  of  the  Exei-utive 
Committee  of  the  Prison  Association  of 
New  York  we  find  the  detailed  premises 
of  an  estimate  that  the  total  loss  to  soci- 
et}'  by  the  crime  and  the  shiftlessness  of 
that  family  amounted  in  75  years  to  nearly 
a  million  dollars.  With  rare  exceptions 
the  female  descendants  of  that  genera- 
tion of  dram-drinkers  were  almshouse 
pensioners  or  harlots.  The  males,  with 
still  rarer  exceptions,  were  thieves,  va- 
grants or  paupers. 

It  has  often  been  urged  by  the  apolo- 
gists of  the  drink  habit  that  a  good  deal 
of  the  mischief  charged  to  the  influence 
of  alcohol  is  an  unavoidable  conse- 
quence of  ignorance  and  poverty;  but 
aside  from  the  fact  that  drunkenness  is  a 
chief  cause  of  illiteracy  and  pauperism, 
it  is  a  suggestive  circumstance,  confirmed 
by  the  testimony  of  many  competent  ob- 
servers, that  '*'  want  and  distress,  uncom- 
bined  with  dissolute  habits,  are  rarely 
productive  of  crime,"  Thus  in  temperate 
Hindustan,  a  famine  threatening  the  very 
existence  of  eleven  million  human 
beings  resulted  in  nothing  more  criminal 
than  an  increase  of  vagrancy.  The  fearful 
distress  of  the  Silesian  weavers  in  1856-8 
led  to  an  increase   in   the  frequency  of 


Crusade.] 


143 


[Crusade. 


petty  thefts  (pilfering  of  field  produce 
by  starving  children),  but  to  not  a  single 
act  of  violence,  riot  or  armed  robbery. 
Whole  families,  on  the  point  of  death  by 
actual  starvation,  remained  in  their  houses, 
quietly  awaiting  the  action  of  the  relief 
committee,  and,  restrained  by  life-long 
habits  of  frugality  and  self-denial,  declined 
to  resort  to  acts  of  lawless  vengeance 
even  when  the  insolvency  of  their  em- 
ployers was  clearly  j^roved  to  have  been 
a  fiction  of  fraud.  The  history  of  our 
Labor  reforms  abounds  with  similar  in- 
stances of  self-denial  under  extreme  prov- 
ocatictns  to  lawlessness,  wherever  the 
counsels  of  moderation  were  seconded  by 
habits  of  sobriety;  while,  on  the  other 
hand,  even  the  rigor  of  military  disci- 
pline has  not  always  been  able  to  prevent 
a  pandemonium  of  crime  when  alcohol 
added  its  fuel  to  the  fire  of  violent  pas- 
sion. The  Austrian  General  Tilley  ex- 
plained the  monstrous  outrages  commit- 
ted during  the  sack  of  Magdeburg  by  the 
frank  admission  that  he  had  lost  the  reins 
of  discipline.  "  They  got  wine  enough 
to  make  four-fifths  of  them  drunk,"  he 
said,  "•  and  all  the  protests  of  my  officers 
were  unavailing  against  the  rage  of  an 
uncontrollable  plurality."  Similar  scenes 
followed  the  defeat  of  the  Russian  army 
in  the  defiles  of  Zorndorf.  "The  van- 
quished infantry,"  says  Carlyle  ("  His- 
tory of  Frederick  the  Great,"  vol.  5,  p. 
368),  "  broke  open  the  sutler's  brandy 
casks,  and  in  a  few  minutes  got  roaring 
drunk.  Their  officers,  desperate,  split 
the  brandy-casks.  Soldiers  get  down  to 
drink  it  from  the  puddles,  furiously 
remonstrate  with  the  officers,  and  kill 
a  good  many  of  them — a  frightful  blood- 
bath and  brandy-bath  and  chief  nucleus 
of  chaos  then  extant  above  ground." 
Felix  L.  Oswald. 

[For  particulars  of  the  prevalence  of  crime 
under  different  systems  of  liquor  legislation,  see 
High  License,  Prohibition,  Benefits  of, 
and  the  Index.] 

Crusade. — The  Woman's  Crusade  was 
certainlv  one  of  the  most  strikino^  move- 
ments  of  tbe  latter  half  of  the  19th  Cen- 
tury. It  was  without  precedent  in  the 
history  of  crusades  in  that  it  was  con- 
ducted by  women  alone.  It  was  without 
precedent  in  its  high  and  noble  purpose, 
and  in  its  immediate  and  far-reaching  re- 
sults.    First  inaugurated  in  Ohio  during 


December,  1873,  it  was  preceded  by  some 
marked  and  unusual  events  in  that  State. 
In  the  winter  of  1872,  at  Springfield,  O., 
two  saloon-keepers  were  tried  under  the 
Adair  law,  which  in  1870  had  been  so 
amended  that  the  wife  or  mother  of  the 
drunkard  could  bring  suit  for  damages  in 
her  own  name  against  the  liquor-seller. 
In  both  these  suits  Mrs.  E.  1).  Stewart 
("  Mother  Stewart  "),  who  became  a  fore- 
most leader  in  the  Crusade,  appeared  as 
advocate  for  the  drunkard's  wife.  The 
trial  was  by  jury  in  the  Justice's  Court, 
and  Attorney  G.  C.  Eawlins  for  the  prose- 
cution insisted  on  Mother  Stewart's  plead- 
ing the  cause  of  those  much-wronged 
women.  She  made  an  able  plea  and  won 
both  suits.  During  the  same  year  she 
went  on  Sunday,  disguised  in  a  long  gos- 
samer and  sun-bonnet,  to  a  saloon  near 
her  church  and  bought  a  glass  of  liquor 
which  she  took  home  with  her.  This 
evidence  of  violated  law  caused  the  clos- 
ing of  the  saloon.  She  tried  to  persuade 
the  vSpringfield  women  to  open  a  crusade 
against  the  saloons,  but  they  were  too 
timid. 

Dr.  Dio  Lewis  spoke  in  Fredonia,  N. 
Y.,  Dec.  14,  1873.  He  told  the  story  of 
his  mother  and  her  friends  j)raying  for 
the  liquor-dealer  who  was  destroying 
their  homes.  He  incited  the  women  to 
form  a  society  for  the  purpose  of  visita- 
tion to  the  saloons.  Mrs.  Judge  Barker 
was  chosen  President  and  leader.  An 
appeal  to  the  liquor-dealers  was  drawn  up, 
and  saloons  were  visited  by  100  w^omen, 
but  the  work  was  soon  abandoned  and  the 
saloons  were  not  closed.  A  similar  effort 
was  made  in  Jamestown,  N.  Y.,  Dec.  17, 
1873.  A  band  of  63  women  visited  sa- 
loons, but  their  closing  was  not  effected. 
It  was  but  a  few  days  after  these  efforts 
in  Fredonia  and  Jamestown  that  the 
whole  country  was  thrilled  by  reports  of 
the  uprising  of  women  in  Hillsboro  and 
AVashington  C.  H.,  Ohio. 

On  the  23d  of  December,  1873,  Dio 
Lewis  spoke  in  Hillsboro.  He  declared 
that  the  dram-shops  could  be  closed  if 
only  the  women  had  energy,  persistence 
and  a  true  Christian  spirit.  A  motion  to 
put  the  new  idea  into  execution  was  car- 
ried by  a  rising  vote.  In  a  very  short 
time  the  names  of  75  ladies  of  standing 
and  influence  were  enrolled.  A  commit- 
tee of  three  was  appointed  to  write  an  ap- 
peal.    The  Chairman  of  this  committee 


Crusade.] 


144 


[Crusad«. 


was  the  wife  of  Judge  Thompson  and 
daughter  of  an  ex-Governor  of  the  State 
of  Ohio,  Mrs.  Eliza  J.  Thompson,  who 
became  the  leader  and  mother  of  the  Cru- 
sade. She  was  not  present  at  the  lecture, 
but  her  young  son  was,  and  he  went  home 
full  of  the  strange  doings  that  were  to  be 
inaugurated.  He  told  of  the  meeting  ap- 
pointed for  the  next  morning  in  the 
Presbyterian  Church,  and  urged  his 
mother  to  go.  The  young  daughter  also 
brought  her  Bible  opened  at  the  14()tli 
Psalm,  Sciyiug,  "  I  believe  it  is  for  you." 
Mrs.  Thompson  read,  and  new  meanings 
flashed  through  her  soul.  She  no  longer 
hesitated,  but  went  at  once  to  the  church, 
where  a  goodly  audience  was  already  as-* 
sembled.  She  was  unanimously  chosen 
leader,  and  opening  the  Bible  she  read  the 
146th  Psalm,  which  has  ever  since  been 
called  the  "  Crusade  Psalm."  By  request 
Mrs.  Gen.  McDowell  led  in  prayer,  and  al- 
though she  had  never  before  heard  her 
own  voice  in  public,  she  spoke  with 
"  tong-ue  of  fire  "  and  the  audience  melted 
in  tears.  Mrs.  Cowden,  wife  of  the 
Methodist  minister,  started  the  hymn, 

"  Give  to  the  wind  thy  fears, 

Hope,  and  be  undismayed; 
God  hears  thy  sighs  and  counts  thy  tears: 

He  will  lift  up  thy  head." 

While  thus  singing,  Mrs.  Thompson 
said :  "  Let  us  form  in  line,  two  by  two, 
the  small  women  in  front,  the  tall  ones  in 
the  rear,  and  let  us  proceed  on  our  sacred 
mission,  trusting  alone  in  the  God  of 
Jacob."  Seventy-five  women  fell  into 
line,  while  more  than  that  number  re- 
mained to  pray  in  the  church.  The  band 
called  at  three  drug-stores  whose  propri- 
etors signed  a  pledge  binding  themselves 
to  sell  liquor  only  on  physicians'  pre- 
scriptions. One  druggist.  Dr.  Dunn,  re- 
fused to  sign  the  pledge  offered,  and  fi- 
nally brought  suit  against  the  ladies  for 
"  trespassing  and  obstructing  his  busi- 
ness." They  visited  hotels  and  saloons 
until  the  "  number  of  drinking-places 
was  reduced  from  13  to  one  drug-store, 
one  tavern  and  two  saloons  that  sold 
most  cautiously."  Morning  prayer-meet- 
ings were  held  every  day  (save  Sunday) 
during  the  winter  and  spring,  and  a 
Avonderful  influence  seemed  to  permeate 
the  whole  community. 

From  Hillsboro,  Dio  Lewis  went  to 
Washington  C.  H.,  Dec.  24,  1873,  where 
he  again  told  the  story  of  his  mother's 


efforts,  and  again  called  on  the  women  to 
adopt  this  plan  for  the  lescue  of  their 
homes.  A  "  praying  band  "  was  formed. 
Fifty-two  women  enrolled  their  names  as 
Committee  of  Visitation.  A  "  Commit- 
tee of  Responsibility,"  composed  of  37 
men,  was  also  appointed.  Three  ladies 
were  chosen  to  draw  up  an  appeal  to 
liquor-sellers.  Mrs.  George  Carpenter 
was  Chairman  of  the  Committee  and 
leader  of  the  "  band."  The  appeal  pre- 
pared by  these  ladies  was  generally  used 
in  Ohio  and  other  States.  It  was  as 
follows : 

"  Knowing,  as  you  do,  Ihe  fearful  effects  of 
intoxicating  drinks,  we,  the  women  of  W  ashing- 
tonC.  H..  after  earnest  prayer  and  deliberation, 
have  decided  to  appeal  to  you  to  desist  from 
this  ruinous  tratiic  that  our  husbands  and 
brothers,  and  especially  our  sons,  be  no  longer 
exposed  to  this  terrible  temptation,  and  that  we 
may  no  longLr  see  them  led  into  those  paths 
which  go  down  to  sin  and  bring  both  soul  and 
body  to  destruction.  We  appeal  to  the  better 
instincts  of  your  hearts,  in  the  name  of  desolate 
homes,  blasted  hopes,  ruined  lives,  widowed 
hearts,  for  the  honor  of  our  comnumity,  for  our 
happiness,  for  the  good  name  of  our  town  in 
the  name  of  God  who  will  judge  you  and  us, 
for  the  sake  of  your  own  souls  which  are  to  be 
saved  or  lost.  We  beg,  we  implore  you  to 
cleanse  yourselves  from  this  heinous  sin,  and 
place  yourselves  in  the  ranks  of  those  who  are 
striving  to  elevate  and  ennoble  themselves  and 
their  fellow  men.  And  to  this  we  ask  you  to 
pledge  yourselves." 

From  the  morning  meeting  of  Dec.  26, 
40  of  the  very  flrst  women  of  Washing- 
ton C.  H.  marched  from  the  church  and 
began  their  work  of  visitation  and  prayer. 
Meanwhile  other  ladies,  Avith  man  v  sfentle- 
men,  remained  in  prayer  at  the  church ; 
and  while  the  women  went  from  saloon 
to  saloon — not  omitting  hotels  and  drug- 
stores,— every  few  minutes  the  tolling  of 
the  church-bell  told  all  who  could  hear 
that  concerted  action  and  prayer  were 
moving  upon  the  saloon.  All  that  day 
doors  were  open  and  uniform  courtesy  was. 
shown.  The  next  day  doors  were  locked 
and  the  band  knelt  in  the  snow  on  the 
pavement.  But  in  spite  of  locked  doors, 
the  day  was  marked  by  the  first  sur- 
render ever  made  by  a  saloon-keeper  of 
all  his  liquors  in  answer  to  prayer.  He 
gave  his  entire  stock  into  the  women's 
hands  to  do  with  it  as  they  chose.  Hun- 
dreds of  people  crowded  the  street,  while 
shouts,  cries,  laughter,  praises  and  ring- 
ing of  church-bells  formed  the  accom- 
paniment to  the  gurgling  stream  of  "  fire- 


Crusade] 


145 


[Gushing,  Henry  Dearborn. 


Avater  "  as  it  flowed  away  aud  hid  in  the 
earth.  On  the  '2d  of  January,  1874,  in  a 
great  mass-meeting,  announcement  was 
made  that  "  the  last  liquor-dealer  had  un- 
conditionally surrendered."  The  result 
of  eight  days  of  prayer  and  song  was  the 
closing  of  11  saloons  and  the  pledging  of 
three  druggists  to  sell  only  on  physicians' 
prescriptions.  The  next  week  a  liquor 
house  in  Cincinnati  pledged  |5,00U  to 
hreak  down  the  movement.  A  new  man 
took  out  a  license,  and  a  stock  of  liquors 
was  forwarded  to  one  pf  the  deserted 
saloons.  The  Crusaders  followed  the  li- 
quors and  remained  in  the  saloon,  engaged 
in  prayer  until  11  o'clock  at  night.  They 
returned  the  next  day  and  remained  with- 
out fire  or  chairs  a  part  of  the  time  locked 
in,  while  the  would-be  dealer  went  away. 
The  next  day  a  temporary  tabernacle  was 
built  in  front  of  the  saloon,  and  the  wo- 
men continued  in  prayer.  Before  night 
the  man  surrendered,  and  the  saloon  was 
closed. 

The  history  of  this  movement  in  Wash- 
ington C.  H.  and  Hillsboro  is  essentially 
its  history  in  hundreds  of  towns  in  Ohio 
and  other  States.  Like  a  prairie  fire  it 
swept  through  all  the  Northern  States  to 
the  Mississippi  River,  and  west  into  Ne- 
braska and  Kansas,  and  also  into  some  of 
the  Southern  States — notably  Kentucky, 
West  Virginia  and  Missouri.  In  a  few 
places  in  Ohio  some  roughness  was  shown 
by  policemen;  but  generally  much  cour- 
tesy was  the  rule.  In  Cincinnati  and 
Pittsburgh,  Pa.,  the  women  were  arrested 
and  taken  to  jail,  but  no  trial  took  pkice. 
Very  false  impressions  were  given  by  the 
newspapers.  In  parts  of  this  country  and 
in  Europe  the  Crusade  was  thought  to 
resemble  the  Keign  of  Terror  in  Paris, 
and  the  Crusaders  were  likened  to  the 
French  women  who  filled  the  streets  of 
that  fated  capital.  Nothing  could  be 
farther  from  the  truth.  The  women  who 
led  and  who  participated  in  the  Crusade 
were  persons  of  the  highest  social  stand- 
ing. They  were  the  first  women  of  the 
churches,  wives  and  daughters  of  Gov- 
ernors, Judges,  clergymen  and  leading 
business  men.  They  were  women  of  abil- 
ity, of  unimpeached  Christian  character, 
and  of  the  highest  culture.  Never  in 
one  single  instance  were  they  guilty  of 
any  act  of  violence.  Never  did  they 
touch  any  liquor-dealer's  property  until 
under  the  influence  of  song  and  prayer, 


which  seemed  to  bring  heaven  down  upon 
him,  showing  him  the  heinousne.-s  of  his 
destructive  business,  he  surrendered  and 
gave  them  permission  to  do  what  they 
would  with  his  stock  of  liquors.  One 
German  saloon-keeper  called  the  Cru- 
saders '•  Dem  liock  in  Ages  Women." 
The  power  of  that  remarkable  uprising  of 
women  has  not  been  spent,  neither  will  it 
be  until  tlie  mission  for  which  it  was  sent 
is  accomplished. 

Clara  C.  Hoffman. 

Cumberland  Presbyterian 
Church.— The  General  Assembly,  at 
Kansas  City,  Mo.,  May  16,  1889,  adopted 
the  minority  report  of  the  Committee  on 
Temperance,  declaring  in  part  as  fol- 
lows : 

■'1.  That  nothing  short  of  Constitutional  and 
statutory  Prohibition  of  the  manufactuiv  and 
sale  of  alcoholic  liquors  as  beverages  by  the 
United  States  and  the  several  States  will  be 
satisfactory,  and  to  this  end  we  will  pray  aud 
work. 

•'  2  That  admitting  that  it  is  a  cr'me,  '  it  can- 
not be  legalized  witljout  sin.'  It  cannot  be  li- 
censed without  legalizing  it  ;  therefore  to  vote 
for  license  is  sin. 

■'  3.  That  the  manufacture  of  and  dealing  in, 
or  in  any  way  favoring  such  dealing  (this  in- 
cludes revenue  officers,  such  as  gaugers,  .store- 
keepers, etc.),  is  inconsistent  with  the  I'hristian 
character,  aud  should  receive  church  discipdne. 

"4.  That  we,  as  a  church,. stand  cquarely  and 
unequivocally  in  favor  of  Proliibition.  ;ind  here- 
by pledge  ourselves  to  aid  in  every  laudable  eu- 
terjirise  that  in  any  way  looks  to  the  overthrow 
of  the  accursed  liquor  traffic,  now  licensed  and 
prot  cted  by  the  general  Government  and  most 
of  the  States.     .     .     . 

"  This  report  is  to  be  considered  as  advocat- 
ing the  principles  of  Prohibition,  and  not  as  an 
indorsement  of  any  political  pa^t3^" 

Cushing,  Henry  Dearborn. — Born 
in  Salisbury,  N.  H.,  Oct,  15,  1803,  and 
died  in  Washington,  D.  C,  in  October, 
1881.  When  he  was  a  boy  his  parents 
removed  to  Orange,  N.  H.  The  school 
advantages  there  were  poor,  but  he  did 
much  general  reading  from  books  bor- 
rowed of  a  neighbor  who  lived  six  miles 
from  his  home.  At  the  age  of  15  he  was 
thrown  upon  his  own  resources  on  ac- 
count of  the  poverty  of  his  family.  From 
that  time  until  he  was  18  he  worked  upon 
a  farm,  taught  school,  and  studied  a  term 
or  two  at  an  academy.  He  began  the 
study  of  Latin  at  his  home,  walking  six 
miles  twice  a  week,  after  a  full  day's 
work,  to  recite  to  his  teacher.     At  18  he 


Daniel,  Williani.] 


146 


[Delano,  William  H, 


found  employment  in  Boston,  and  after- 
wards engaged  in  business  with  a  brother 
at  Bangor,  Me.,  only  to  return  to  Boston 
in  1842,  having  suffered  reverses.  In 
the  last  ten  years  of  his  life  he  devoted 
much  of  his  energies  to  the  temperance 
cause.  He  was  an  active  member  of  the 
Massachusetts  Temperance  Alliance,  and 
took  a  prominent  part  in  its  discussions, 
sometimes  speaking  from  the  platform 
but  oftener  presenting  carefully-prepared 
papers.  In  1878  he  issued  an  able  tract 
on  "  City  Governments,"  and  10,000 
copies  were  circulated  by  the  Alliance. 
For  two  years  before  his  death  he  was  an 
invalid.  Always  a  most  generous  contrib- 
utor of  money  to  temperance  work,  in 
his  will  he  bequeathed  5  per  cent,  of  a 
valuable  estate  to  be  used  by  the  President 
of  the  Massachusetts  Temperance  Alli- 
ance in  furtherance  of  Prohibition.  He 
also  addressed  the  following  words  in  his 
will  to  his  heirs :  "'  I  should  have  given 
more  to  the  temperance  cause  but  for  a 
belief  that  it  can  be  best  sustained  by 
living  men  and  women.  So  I  commend 
that  cause  to  my  heirs,  and  hope  they  will 
sustain  it  by  their  example,  money,  in- 
fluence and  votes." 

Daniel,  William,  fourth  candidate  of 
ihe  Prohibition  party  for  Vice-President 
,of   the   United   States;    born  on   Deal's 
Island,  Md.,  Jan.   24,  182G.     His   father 
was  a  native  of  North  Carolina,  and  his 
mother  of  Maryland.     He  was  educated 
in  the  public  schools  and  at  Dickinson 
College,  graduating  in  1848.     He  studied 
law  and  Avas  admitted  to  practice  in  1851. 
In  1853  he  was  elected  a  member  of  the 
Maryland  House  of  Delegates  and  intro- 
duced a  Prohibitory  liquor  bill  similar  to 
the  Maine  law.     He  was  re-elected  to  the 
House  in  1855  on  the  temperance  issue, 
and  in  1857  was  returned  to  the  State 
Senate  as  an  advocate  of  Local  Option. 
After  serving   one  term  he  removed   to 
Baltimore,  where  he  has   since   resided, 
pursuing  his  profession.     In  1864  he  was 
a  member  of  the  Maryland  State  Coisti- 
tutional  Convention.     He  was  a  champion 
of  freedom,  and  took  a  prominent  part  in 
the   discussions  of   that  body  which  re- 
sulted in  the  emancipation  of  Maryland's 
slaves.     At  first  a  Whig  in  politics  and 
afterwards  a  Pepublican,  Mr.  Daniel  was 
an  earnest  advocate  of  the  Prohibition  of 
the  liquor  traffic  almost  from  the  begin- 


ning of  his  career.  He  was  chosen  Presi- 
dent of  the  Maryland  State  Temperance 
Alliance,  organized  in  1872,  and  retained 
that  position  until  1884.  Through  the 
influence  of  this  Alliance  and  especially 
the  efforts  of  its  President,  a  Local  Option 
law  was  enacted  in  Maryland,  under 
which  Prohibition  was  carried  in  several 
counties.  Mr.  Daniel  attended  the  Na- 
tional Prohibition  Convention  of  1884  at 
Pittsburgh,  as  the  head  of  the  Maryland 
delegation,  and  was  made  Temporary 
Chairman  of  the  body.  He  was  nom- 
inated for  Vice-President  and  received 
150,626  votes.  From  1885  until  1888 
he  was  Chairman  of  the  Maryland 
State  Prohibition  Committee.  He  has 
been  identified  with  the  interests  of  the 
Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  and  has  been 
active  in  Sunday-school  work,  in  the 
Young  Men's  Christian  Association,  and 
in  efforts  for  the  elevation  of  the  negro. 
He  was  for  many  years  a  member  of  the 
Board  of  Trustees  for  Dickinson  College. 

Deaths  from  Drink. — See  Loxgey- 

ITY. 

Dtdlano,  William  H, — Born  in  Her- 
kimer County,  N.  Y.,  in  1816,  and  died 
in   Bedford,   0.,  in  1885.     He  never  at- 
tended school,  but  educ'ted  himself  by 
reading,  and  was  so  far  advanced  at  the 
age  of  16  that  he  successfully  taught  a 
district  school.     His   father  and  several 
brothers  were  addicted  to  the  use  of  al- 
coholic liquors,  but  William,  early  in  life, 
pledged  himself  to  total  abstinence  and 
to  warfare   against   the   traffic.     At  the 
age   of  17  he   determined   to   enter  the 
ministry,  and,  not  able  to  acquire  a  col- 
lege training,  he  began  preaching  in  1835, 
and   from  that  time  until  his  death  in 
1885   was   a   clergyman   in    the  Baptist 
Church.     He    was   an   Abolitionist,  and 
while  preaching  in  central  New  York  he 
was  a  "  conductor  "  on  the  "  underground 
railroad"   and  helped   many  a  slave  to 
reach  Canada.  He  sometimes  stood  guard 
with  a  shot-gun  to  protect  the  slaves  he 
had  secreted  in  his  house.     He  took  part 
in  the  famous  "  Jerry  Eescue  "  at  Syra- 
cuse, N.  Y.     He  was  not  less  enthusiastic 
in  the  temperance  cause,  and  was  con- 
nected with  the  Sons  of  Temperance,  the 
Good  Templars  and  the  Washington ian 
movement.     In  1880  he  went  over  to  the 
Prohibition  party,  and  although  well  ad- 
vanced in  years  labored  zealously  for  its 


Delavan,  Edward  Cornelius.]        147  [Delirium  Tremens. 

success  until  his  death.     While  pastor  at  also  in  the  agitation  against  the  use  of 

Garretsville,    0.,   in  1878  and   187!),  his  fermented  liquors.     When  the  American 

opposition  to  the  saloon  was  so  obnoxious  Temperance  Union  was  organized  in  183G 

to  the  liquor  interests  that   his  church  he   became   Chairman   of   its   Executive 

building  was  blown  up  with  gunpowder.  Committee  and   donated   $10,000   to  its 

treasury.     In  1S3S  he  visited  Europe,  tak- 

Delavan,    Edward    Cornelius. —  ing  with  him  to  England  a  large  supply 

Born   in  Schenectady  County,  N.  Y.,  in  of  temperance  literature,  including  800 

1793,   and   died   in  Schenectady,  N.  Y.,  volumes  of   Dr.   Edwards's   "Permanent 

Jan.  15,  1871.     He  acquired  a  fortune  as  Temperance    Documents."      In    France, 

a  wine-merchant.     In   1828,  in  company  on  Nov.  12  of  this  year,  Mr.  Delavan  had 

with  Dr.  Eliphalet  Nott,  he  organized,  in  an  interview  with  King  Louis  Philippe, 

Schenectady,  the  Ne^y  York  State  Tem-  who  agreed  to  sign  a  declaration  express- 

perance  Society.     In   1831   he   defrayed  ing  his  opinion  that  the  habitual  use  of 

the  expenses  of  Rev.  N.  Hewitt's  temper-  intoxicating  liquors  was  injurious,  if  Mr. 

ance  mission  to  Europe.     In  1834  he  per-  Delavan      thought     it      would      benefit 

suaded  Dr.  Justin  to  draw  up  a  temper-  France, 
ance  declaration,  to  Avhich  he  secured  the 

signatures  of  Presidents  Jackson,  Madi-  Delaware.— See  Index, 

son    John  Quincy  Adanis    Van   Buren,  Delirium  Tremens.— Delirium  tre- 

Tyler,    Polk,    laylor,    J^illmore,     "lerce,  i-^ens,  ov  mania  a  pot  a,  is  a  nervous  dis- 

Buchanan,   Lincoln  and  Johnson.     The  ^^^^q^  g^used  by  the  habitual  use  of  alco- 

declaration  was  as  follows:  j^oljc   stimulants,   and   in  regard  to   its 

"  Being  satisfied  from  observation  and  ex-  pathological  tendency  may  be  defined  as 

perience    as  well  as  from  medical  te.stimony  nature's  ultimate  protest  against  the  con- 

that   ardent   spirit,   as   a    drmk,    is    not    only  ,.                    <•   xi          i     i     i      ^          mi       c     j. 

needless  but  hurtful   and  that  the  entire  disuse  tmuance  of  the   alcohol  vice.      Ihe  first 

of  it  would  tend  to  promote  the  health,  the  remonstrance  comes  in  the  form  of  nau- 

virtue  and  the  happiness  of  the  community,  sea,   languor  and   sick  headache— symp- 

we  hereby  express  our  conviction  that  should  ^oms  familiar  in  the  experience  of  every 

the  citizens  ot  the  United  States,  and  especially  ••-...               t            £             t--i.          ii 

the  young  men,  discontinue  entirely  the  use  of  mcipient    toper.     Loss   of    appetite  and 

it,  they  would  not  only  promote  their  own  general  disinclination  to  active  exercise 

personal  benefit  but  the  good  of  our  country  are  the  penalties  of  intemperance  in  its 

and  of  the  world."  more   advanced   stages   of   development, 

As  early  as  1835,  as  Chairman  of  the  and  those  injunctions  remaining  un- 
New  York  State  Temperance  Society,  heeded,  nature's  ultimatum  is  expressed 
and  by  reason  of  his  personal  activity,  he  in  the  incomparable  distress  of  nervous 
was  recognized  as  the  most  prominent  delirium.  Insomnia,  rr  chronic  sleep- 
leader  of  the  temperance  cause  in  New  lessness,  is  superadded  to  a  chronic  loss 
York.  The  American  Temperance  Intel-  of  appetite;  headaches  and  dizziness  al- 
ligencer  and  the  Temperance  Recorder,  ])uh-  ternate  with  fits  of  frantic  restlessness; 
lished  at  Albany,  were  virtually  under  the  pulse  becomes  feeble  and  rapid,  the 
his  control,  and  their  wide  circulation  breath  feverish,  and  twitchings  of  the 
made  them  more  influential  than  all  the  motor  muscles  keep  the  hands  and  tongue 
15  other  temperance  journals  then  pub-  in  a  trembling  motion ;  the  patient  raves 
lished  combined.  The  Recorder,  the  or  talks  incessantly  and  is  terrified  by 
monthly  organ  of  the  New  York  State  ghastly  visions.  Continued  sleeplessness 
Temperance  Society,  started  March  6, "  aggravates  these  symptoms  to  an  appall- 
1832,  had  at  that  time  a  circulation  of  ing  degree  and  at  last  results  in  utter 
over  200,000  copies.  He  engaged  in  a  exhaustion  of  the  nervous  system.  From 
discussion  of  the  Bible  wine  question  in  that  state  of  far-gone  debility,  tlie  drug- 
1835,  and  his  arguments  attracted  gene-  doctors,  incredible  as  it  may  seem,  often 
ral  attention.  lie  accused  the  Albany  attempted  to  rouse  the  patient  by  the  use 
brewers  of  using  foul  water  in  their  busi-  of  alcoholic  stimulants.  That  mistake, 
ness,  and  eight  suits  at  law  for  damages  suggested  by  the  delusion  that  alcohol  is 
aggregating  1300,000  were  brought  a  source  of  nerve-force,  made  delirium 
against  him.  One  case  came  to  trial  five  tremens,  in  hospital  practice,  an  almost 
years  later,  and  upon  his  acquittal  the  invariably  fatal  disease ;  and  that  expe- 
others  were  dismissed.  He  was  prominent  rience  has  at  last  enforced  a  progressive  re- 


Delirium  Tremens.] 


148 


[Democratic  Party. 


form  in  the  treatment  of  the  disorder. 
''  I  have  come  to  the  conclusion,"  says 
Dr.  James  Edmunds,  "that  the  use  of 
Hpirits  in  the  case  of  delirium  tremens 
does  nothing  but  injure  the  patient,  and 
probably  hastens  his  death.  I  now, 
without  the  slightest  hesitation,  in  every 
case  should  immediately  stop  the  spirit, 
and  I  find  that  very  few  cases  of  delirium 
tremens,  if  treated  on  that  plan,  Avill 
prove  fatal."  "If  you  follow  the  old 
treatment,"  says  Prof.  Palmer  of  the  Uni- 
versity of  Michigan,  "  you  will  lose  half 
your  patients.  If  you  follow  the  treat- 
ment I  give,  you  will  save  nearly  all.  In 
the  hospital  of  Edinburgh  the  expectant 
treatment  is  found  to  save  nearly  all  the 
patients.  They  used  to  lose  nearly  all." 
Abstinence  from  alcohol  iu  the  treat- 
ment of  delirium  tremens  is  certainly 
favored  by  the  circumstance  that  the 
patient  loses  his  appetite  for  all  virulent 
stimulants  at  hatever,  and  temporarily,  in- 
deed, loathes  the  very  odor  of  alcoholic 
liquors.  The  patient  should  be  kept  as 
quiet  as  possible  without  a  resort  to  vio- 
lent means  of  restraint.  The  progress  of 
cerebral  congestion  can  generally  be  kept 
under  control  by'  applying  ice  to  the 
head ;  and  if  the  irritation  of  the  digest- 
ive organs  causes  the  stomach  to  reject 
food  administered  in  the  usual  manner, 
the  vital  strength  of  the  organism  may 
be  sustained  by  means  of  nutritive  injec- 
tions. Experience  has  proved  that  it  is 
not  advisable  to  repress  the  attempts  at 
muscular  exertion  altogether  (as  by  the 
use  of  straight-jackets),  but  merely  to 
guard  the  patient  against  serious  injury, 
and  allow  him  by  the  restlessness  of  his 
movements  to  bring  on  a  sufficient  degree 
of  exhaustion  to  induce  sleep.  A  short 
slumber  obtained  in  that  way,  rather 
than  by  the  use  of  narcotics,  has  nearly 
always  a  restorative  eifect;  and  by  the 
law  of  periodicity,  aided  by  such  artifices 
as  the  temporary  darkening  of  the  bed- 
room windows,  drowsiness  leading  to 
more  or  less  protracted  sleep  can  be  made 
to  recur  at  certain  hours  of  the  day. 
After  the  partial  subsidence  of  the  more 
violent  symptoms,  the  patient  may  be 
permitted  to  enjoy  the  occasional  benefit 
of  out-door  exercise ;  but  his  diet  should 
for  at  least  a  month  be  limited  to  semi- 
fluid, non-stimulating  articles  of  food, 
such  as  rice-gruel  with  a  little  butter  and 
sugar,  pearsoup,  milk  porridge  and  soft- 


boiled  eggs.  Cooling  applications  to  the 
head  should  be  continued,  and  the  ut- 
most care  should  be  taken  to  guard  the 
<;onvalescent  against  the  temptations  of 
his  besetting  vice,  as  half  an  ounce  of 
brandy  is  often  sufficient  to  bring  on  a 
violent  and  frequently  incurable  relapse 
of  delirium.  Felix  L.  Oswald. 

Democratic  Party.  ^ — As  a  national 
organization  the  Democratic  party  has 
become  the  avowed  and  persevering  op- 
ponent of  Prohibitory  legislation  in  the 
United  States.  Viewed  broadly,  it  is  rec- 
ognized as  the  special  champion  and  pro- 
tector of  the  liquor  interests.  By  a  crit- 
ical examination  of  its  tendencies  and 
actions,  the  impartial  observer  discovers 
that  this  general  verdict  admits  of  local 
exceptions  and  certain  qualifications ;  but 
no  discriminating  estimate  of  the  party's 
attitude  and  performances  can  be  justly 
expressed  in  milder  words. 

EARLY   PERFORMANCES. 

The  so-called  rum  power,  as  an  organ- 
ized and  aggressive  factor  in  national 
politics,  is  a  creation  of  the  revenue  leg- 
islation of  the  Civil  War.  The  Prohib- 
itory and  restrictive  laws  enacted  in  many 
States  before  the  war  period  were  obtain- 
ed with  comparative  ease,  because  the 
traffic  was  not  then  the  disciplined  and 
watchful  foe  that  it  has  since  become. 
In  the  absence  of  formidable  organized 
resistance,  the  earnest  demands  for  Pro- 
hibition by  multitudes  of  the  best  citi- 
zens prompted  political  leaders  of  all 
parties  to  make  concessions  to  agita- 
tors so  reputable  and  so  determined. 
The  Democrats,  in  these  years,  mani- 
fested a  generous  inclination  to  incor- 
porate the  Prohibitory  principle  (at 
least  nominally)  in  the  statutes  of  the 
country.  The  first  Maine  law  (i84(i) 
and  the  revived  and  strengthened  Maine 
law  of  1851  were  passed  by  Democratic 
Legislatures.  Other  rude  Prohibitory 
laws  (those  of  Illinois,  1851;  Minnesota, 
1853;  Michigan,  1853;  Ohio,  1854;  Iowa, 
1855;  Indiana,  1855;  Nebraska,  1855; 
Mississippi,  1855,  and  Texas,  1855),  are 
to  be  credited  to  the  Democrats.  But 
even  in  that  formative  period  the  Demo- 
cratic party,  in  representative  and  critical 
struggles  for  Prohibition,  gave  indication 

'  The  editor  is  indebted  to  John  A.  Brooks,  D.D.,  Kan- 
sas City,  Mo. 


Democratic  Party.] 


149 


[Democratic  Party. 


of  the  vigorous  pro-saloon  policy  that  was 
subsequently  to  distinguish  it.  Among 
the  most  important  Prohibition  contests 
made  before  the  war  was  that  in  the 
State  of  New  York  in  1854,  resulting  in 
the  election  of  Myron  H.  Clark  as  Gov- 
ernor on  a  platform  favoring  Prohibition. 
In  that  campaign  Horatio  Seymour  was 
the  Democratic  candidate,  and  he  and  his 
party  were  firmly  opposed  to  Prohibition. 
The  Democrats  were  responsible  for  the 
repeal  of  the  Maine  law  m  1856,  and  for 
the  practical  destruction  of  the  Adair  law 
of  Ohio  in  1859. 

When  the  Prohibitory  agitation  was 
renewed  after  the  issues  of  the  war 
had  been  settled,  the  Democratic  party 
espoused  the  cause  of  tlie  opposition. 
Lacking  power  in  most  of  the  North- 
ern States,  it  yet  played  an  influen- 
tial part  in  nurturing  and  directing 
the  organized  antagonism.  Under  the 
leadership  of  Tilden  in  New  York, 
in  the  early  'seventies,  it  made  a  success- 
ful fight  against  Local  Option  and  won 
so  strong  a  support  from  the  saloon  ele- 
ment that  the  Republicans,  in  alarm, 
repudiated  their  pledges  in  order  to  divide 
with  it  the  liquor  vote.  In  Pennsylvania 
it  became  the  undisguised  representative 
of  the  liquor-dealers  in  their  effort  to 
repeal  the  Local  Option  law  nnder  which 
more  than  40  counties  of  that  State  had 
voted  for  Prohibition  in  1873.  In  Ohio 
it  led  the  saloon  forces  in  their  assaults 
upon  the  Anti-License  clause  of  the  State 
Constitution.  In  Michigan,  Massachu- 
setts, Rhode  Island  and  other  States  its 
aggressions  contributed  to  the  annul- 
ment of  the  old  Prohibitory  laws.  Du- 
ring the  important  decade  of  1870-80, 
while  yet  the  full  strength  of  Prohi- 
bitionists and  anti-Prohibitionists  alike 
was  undeveloped,  the  Democratic 
party,  deliberately  and  in  many  cases 
without  apparent  provocation  or  induce- 
ment, laid  the  foundations  for  the  sys- 
tematic operations  of  the  future. 

UTTERANCES  OF  NATIONAL  CONVENTIONS. 

The  first  distinct  declaration  against 
Prohibition  by  a  Democratic  Nationnl 
Convention  was  made  in  the  centennial 
year  of  1876  (June  28),  when  Samuel  J. 
Tilden  was  nominated  for  the  Presidency. 
The  platform  adopted  by  that  Conven- 
tion contained  the  following  words  : 

'■  In  the  absolute  acquiescence  to  the  will  of 


the  majority,  the  vital  principle  of  republics; 
in  the  supremacy  of  tlie  civil  over  the  military 
authority  ;  in  the  total  separation  of  the  church 
and  tha  State  for  the  sake  of  civil  and  religious 
freedom:  in  the  equality  of  all  citizens  before 
just  laws  of  their  own  enactment;  in  the  libtriy 
of  indii-idu(d  cimduct  tnircxed  by  sumptuary 
laws;  in  the  faithful  education  of  the  rising 
generation,  that  they  may  preserve,  enjoy  ana 
transmit  these  best  conciitions  of  human  happi- 
ness and  hope,  we  beho!d  the  noblest  products 
of  a  hundred  years  of  changeful  history  ;  but 
while  upholding  the  bond  of  our  Union  and 
great  charter  of  these  our  rights,  it  behooves  a 
free  people  to  practice  also  the  eternal  vigilance 
which  is  the  price  of  liberty.  .  .  .  We  de- 
nounce the  policy  which  tlius  discards  the  lib- 
erty-loving German  and  tolerates  a  revival  of 
the  coolie  trade  in  Mongolian  women,  imported 
for  immoral  purposes." 

The  itse  of  the  word  "sumptuary," 
while  not  recognized  by  impartial  per- 
sons as  legitimate  in  characterizing  Pro- 
hibitory laws,  is,  when  appearing  in 
Democratic  platforms,  well  understood 
by  the  public  to  have  reference  to  liquor 
Prohibition  alone. 

The  next  Democratic  National  Con- 
vention (June  24,  1880),  which  nominat- 
ed Gen.  Winfield  S.  Hancock  for  Presi- 
dent, inserted  in  its  platform  the  three 
words,  ''No  sumptuary  laws."  The  Na- 
tional Convention  of  1884  (July  10)  nom- 
inated Grover  Cleveland  for  President 
and  declared  :  "  We  oppo.se  sumptuary 
laws  which  vex  the  citizen  and  interfere 
with  individual  liberty."  In  1888  the 
Democratic  National  Convention  (June 
7),  accepting  the  programme  indicated 
by  President  Cleveland's  policy,  adopted 
a  platform  devoted  almost  exclusively  to 
the  tariff  issue ;  and  no  distinct  utterance 
on  the  liquor  question  appeared  in  it.  But 
the  following  words  were  construed  as 
repeating  the  "  anti-sumptuary  "  utter- 
ance: "The  Democratic  party  of  the 
L^nited  States,  in  National  Convention 
assembled,  renews  the  pledge  of  its  fidel- 
ity to  Democratic  faith  and  reaffirms  the 
platform  adopted  by  its  representatives 
in  the  Convention  of  1884."  This  con- 
struction was  afterwards  sanctioned  by 
Henry  Watterson,  Chairman  of  the  Com- 
mittee on  Resolutions,  who  wrote  in  a 
letter  to  Walter  B.  Hill  of  Macon.  Ga.: 
"  The  platform  of  1888  reaffirms  all  the 
platform  of  1884,  making  a  special  inter- 
pretation of  the  tariff  clause  of  the  for- 
mer." And  John  G.  Carlisle,  Speaker 
of  the  House  of  Representatives,  said  in 
an  interview  in  the    Voice  for   June  14, 


Democratic  Party.] 


150 


[Democratic  Party. 


1888 :  "  The  Convention  reaffirmed  the 
platform  of  1884.  That  platform  con- 
tained an  anti-sumptuary  plank.  The 
failure  to  speak  definitely  this  time  makes 
no  change  in  the  party.' '1 

The  record  of  the  Democratic  National 
Conventions  is  in  harmony  with  that 
made  by  the  party  in  Congress  and  the 
other  branches  of  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment, both  while  in  the  ascendancy  and 
while  in  the  minority,  (See  Uxited 
States  Government  and  the  Liquor 
Traffic) 

In  examining  the  course  of  the  Demo- 
crats in  the  States  it  is  requisite  to  view 
the  States  of  the  South  and  those  of  the 
Noi'th  separately. 

attitude  in  the  south. 

In  the  South  the  Democratic  party  is 
regarded  as  more  friendly  to  the  demands 
of  the  temperance  people  than  the  Re- 
publican party.  The  former  embraces  a 
very  large  majority  of  the  native-born 
whites,  and  undoubtedly  contains  much 
the  largest  proportion  of  the  better 
classes  of  the  dominant  race.  With  in- 
creasing ardor  and  emphasis  these  classes 
have  insisted  upon  the  enactment  of  Pro- 
hibitory measures.  Reasons  of  public 
policy  have  also  contributed  to  spread 
Prohibition  feeling  in  the  South;  the 
experience  of  communities  in  that  sec- 
tion where  the  saloon  has  been  success- 
fully outlawed  has  invariably  shown  that 
Prohibition  lessens  crime,  diminishes 
poverty  and  improvidence  and  prevents 
race  conflicts.  Again,  the  Democratic 
party's  theory  of  government  lays  stress 
upon  the  right  of  each  locality  to  admin- 
ister its  own  affairs  with  full  freedom ; 
and  a  stubborn  refusal  to  permit  the  peo- 
ple to  exercise  Prohibitory  powers  where 
strong  sentiment  exists,  is  manifestly 
not  in  accord  with  such  a  theory.  In 
consequence  of  these  and  other  influ- 
ences the  Democratic  party  in  the  South 
has  enacted  a  great  deal  of  Local  Op- 
tion legislation,  many  leaders  of  the  party 
have  exhibited  pronounced  sympathy  for 
the  principle  of  Prohibition,  Democratic 
voters  have  established  (or  helped  to 
establish)  the  policy  over  extensive  areas, 
and  Democratic  officials  have  been  com- 


pelled to  respect  public  sentiment  and 
enforce  the  laws.^  (For  particulars  of 
the  Local  Option  laws  of  the  South  and 
the  extent  to  which  Prohibition  has  been 
adopted  under  them,  see  Legislation 
and  Local  Option.) 

But  in  giving  due  credit  to  the  Demo- 
cratic party  for  these  results,  its  serious 
shortcomings  must  not  be  overlooked. 
Very  little  progress  has  been  made  in  the 
South  towards  a  homogeneous  and  com- 
prehensive Prohibition  policy.  No  South- 
ern State  has  ever  enacted  a  complete 
Prohibitory  law  with  adequate  enforce- 
ment provisions.  In  no  Southern  State 
has  the  Democratic  party  permitted  its 
representatives  in  Conventions  or  Legisla- 
tures to  champion  State  Prohibition.  In 
the  four  States  of  the  South — Texas, 
Tennessee,  West  Virginia  and  North 
Carolina — where  Prohibitory  Constitu- 
tional Amendments  have  been  submitted 
to  the  people,  the  more  influential  man- 
agers of  the  Democratic  party  have  en- 
tered into  alliance  with  the  liquor  traffic 
to  defeat  the  propositions.  For  this  hos- 
tility to  radical  measures  there  is,  per- 
haps, still  less  justification  than  for  Re- 
publican hostility  in  the  North :  the  social 
and  political  problems  in  the  South  are 
graver  by  far,  and  the  solution  of  race 
and  educational  questions  is  confessedly 
interfered  with  in  a  most  serious  way  by 
the  influence  of  the  liquor  traffic.  Be- 
sides, taking  the  South  as  a  whole,  the 
traffic  is  in  no  wise  so  threatening  or  so 
powerful  there  as  in  the  North,  and  its 
ability  to  work  mischief  to  the  political 
party  attacking  it  is  not  so  great.  The 
foreign-born  whites  in  the  South  consti- 
tute but  a  comparatively  insignificant 
element  of  the  population.  Conditions 
Justifying  aggression  are,  therefore,  em- 
phatically more  encouraging  to  the  Dem- 
ocratic party  in  the  South  than  to  the  Re- 
publican party  in  the  North ;  yet  South- 
ern legislation  against  the  liquor  traffic  is 
nowhere  to  be  compared  with  that  pre- 
vailing in  the  representative  Prohibition 
States  of  the  North.  Tins  difference  is 
undoubtedly  due  to  the  tenaciousness 
with  which  the  more  positive  Democrats 
cling  to  the  doctrine  of  local  self-govern- 
ment, oppose  the  tendency  towards  cen- 


1  The  Convention  of  1888  was  earnestly  petitioned,  by 
Soutlieni  temperance  leaders,  to  repudiate  the  former  op- 
position of  the  party  to  Prohiljition  legislation.  The  peti- 
tioners were  shown  no  favor  and  little  courtesy. 


2  The  results  in  the  South,  however    (especially  in  re 
spect  of  enforcement),  are  imperfect  and  unsatisfactory  in 
the  same  sense  thai  Local  Option  results  are  so  in  "the 
North. 


Democratic  Party.] 


151 


[Democratic  Party. 


tralization  and  "  paternal  governments," 
maintain  that  the  world  is  already  "  gov- 
erned too  much,"  and  advocate  the  ideas 
of  individual  responsibility  and  so-called 
"  personal  liberty."  It  is  also  worthy  of 
consideration  that  the  advocates  of  com- 
plete Prohibition  in  the  South  have  not 
generally  favored  the  Prohibition  party 
method  or  pressed  that  method  so  ag- 
gressively as  to  endanger  Democratic 
supremacy  and  thus  wring  concessions 
from  the  dominant  party.  It  is  true  the 
party  Prohibitionists  haveat  times  shown 
considerable  activity  in  certain  parts  of 
tlie  South,  but  they  have  not  in  many 
instances  been  strong  enough  to  inspire 
the  Democrats  with  alarm. 

The  Democratic  politicians  of  the 
South  were  not  slow  to  perceive  the  value 
of  the  High  License  compromise,  and 
High  License  laws  have  been  established 
in  several  States  of  that  section,  the  object 
being,  as  in  the  North,  to  satisfy  moder- 
ate temperance  people  without  extin- 
guishing the  liquor  traffic. 

ATTITUDE    IlSr   THE    NORTH. 

Turning  now  to  the  Northern  States, 
we  find  that  in  them  the  record  of  the 
Democratic  party  is  a  record  of  open  and 
unremitted  advocacy  of  the  easiest  terms 
for  the  saloon.  This  is  true  as  a  general 
statement,  and  more  is  to  be  said :  since 
the  Civil  War  the  Democratic  party  in 
every  State  of  the  North  has  stood  each 
year  for  the  mildest  form  of  liquor  legis- 
lation desired  by  the  traffic  at  large.  We 
have  already  alluded  to  the  deeds  of  the 
party  in  the  decade  1870-80.  In  the  ten 
years  from  1880  to  1890,  while  polit- 
ical interest  in  the  Prohibition  movement 
steadily  grew,  the  Democratic  organiza- 
tions in  every  part  of  this  section  became 
more  and  more  identified  with  the  liquor 
traffic. 

In  all  the  more  important  States  that 
voted  on  Prohibitory  Amendments  in  this 
period,  the  Democrats  first  opposed  the 
right  of  the  people  to  pass  verdict  upon 
the  liquor  traffic  at  the  ballot-box,  then 
openly  and  offensively  opposed  the 
Amendments  in  the  electoral  campaigns. 
It  is  true  that  in  Oregon  the  Democratic 
party  assented  to  submission  and  the 
Democratic  counties  of  that  State  showed 
a  larger  proportionate  vote  for  the 
Amendment  than  the  Republican  coun- 
ties; but  Oregon  forms  the  only  exce20- 


tion.  In  each  State  adopting  Constitu- 
tional Prohibition — Kansas,  Iowa,  Maine, 
Rhode  Island,  South  Dakota  aiul  North 
Dakota — the  Democratic  party  refused  to 
accept  the  will  of  the  people  and  advo- 
cated a  return  to  license  and  Local  Op- 
tion. It  is  especially  deserving  of 
remark,  however,  that  formal  opposition 
by  platform  declaration  was  discontinued 
in  Maine  and  Kansas  after  it  became 
apparent  to  the  Democratic  leaders  that 
the  interests  of  the  party  would  suffer  by 
making  ridiculous  demands  for  license 
legislation  in  the  teeth  of  overwhelming 
Prohibition  sentiment. 

Of  the  States  that  obtained  Prohibitory 
laws  before  the  war,  Vermont  and  New 
Hampshire  are  the  only  ones  (excepting 
Maine)  that  have  steadily  maintained 
those  laws  on  the  statute-books.  In  both 
Vermont  and  New  Hampshire  the  Dem- 
ocrats have  perseveringly  declared  for  the 
destruction  of  the  Prohibitory  acts. 

The  Northern  States  in  which  the 
Democratic  party  is  strongest  and  has 
been  able  more  frequently  than  in  the 
others  to  outvote  the  Republicans  and 
control  legislation — New  York,  New  Jer- 
sey, Connecticut,  Ohio,  Indiana  and  Cal- 
ifornia— are  the  States  where  the  loosest 
liquor  systems  prevail  and  where  the 
wishes  of  the  trade  at  large  have  been 
most  respected.  (Of  course  in  making 
this  comment  we  do  not  intimate  that  the 
pretended  restrictive  and  High  License 
legislation  in  other  Northern  States  has 
by  results  proved  more  advantageous  to 
real  temperance  interests  than  the  milder 
systems  of  New  York,  New  Jersey,  etc. 
But  this  [so-called]  stricter  legislation 
represents  concessions  to  a  certain  portion 
of  the  temperance  element,  and  for  that 
reason  is  possibly  to  be  considered  pro- 
gressive. In  the  Democratic  or  semi- 
Democi-atic  States,  on  the  other  hand, 
even  the  spirit  of  concession  has  made 
but  little  headway,  and  public  feeling 
has  been  shaped  almost  exclusively  by  the 
expressed  desires  of  the  majority  of  the 
rumsellers.)  In  New  York  the  Demo- 
crats have  championed  the  most  infamous 
license  measures,  especially  the  one  joro- 
posing  the  repeal  of  the  Sunday  law ;  and 
bills  advocated  by  representatives  of  very 
conservative  temperance  sentiment— bills 
having  little  or  no  real  temperance  value, 
but  objectionable  to  the  small  retail  liquor- 
dealers  because  higher  license  rates  were 


DeniDcratic  Party.] 


152 


[Democratic  Party. 


provided  for  in  them, — have  been  repeat- 
edly vetoed  by  Governor  Hill  for  the  sole 
purpose  of  solidifying  the  rum  vote  for 
the  Democratic  party.  The  Democratic 
majorities  in  the  State  of  New  York  are 
distinctively  saloon  majorities,  procured 
by  the  great  power  of  the  Tammany 
llall  organization  in  the  slums  of  New 
York  City.  In  New  Jersey  Democratic 
party  conditions  are  practically  the  same 
as  in  New  York:  Democratic  Legisla- 
tures and  Governors  have  consistently 
refused  to  enact  even  the  mildest  temper- 
ance bills,  and  the  County  Local  Option 
law  of  1888,  obtained  after  years  of  labo- 
rious effort,  was  promptly  rescinded  by 
the  next  Democratic  Legislature.  In 
Connecticut,  although  the  peculiar  laws 
of  the  State  (requiring  candidates  to 
receive  majorities  of  all  the  votes  cast, 
instead  of  mere  pluralities)  have  pre- 
vented the  Democrats  from  securing  con- 
trol, their  influence,  in  connection  with 
that  of  the  liquor  Republicans,  has  been 
sufficient  to  check  temperance  progress. 
In  Ohio  the  Democrats  have  since  1880 
twice  elected  their  State  ticket  and  a  ma- 
jority of  the  legislators  (1883  and  1889), 
and  each  time  their  success  was  due  in 
great  measure  to  their  exceedingly  offen- 
sive bids  for  saloon  support,  and  the  lead- 
ership of  especially  active  pro-liquor 
statesmen — Hoadly  in  1883  (who  was  a 
liquor-dealers'  attorney),  and  Campbell 
m  1889  (who  was  an  attorney  for  the 
brewers  and  who,  as  Chairman  of  the 
Alcoholic  Liquor  Traffic  Committee  in 
the  National  House  of  Representatives, 
had  killed  every  temperance  bill  that 
came  before  the  Committee).  In  Indiana 
and  California  the  Democrats,  while  not 
wholly  responsible  for  the  State  Govern- 
ment save  at  rare  intervals,  have  always 
been  very  powerful  and,  acting  Avith  the 
controlling  element  of  the  Republican 
party,  have  made  those  States  notorious 
for  their  practically  unrestricted  liquor 
traffic  and  their  almost  unrivalled  stub- 
bornness in  refusing  Local  Option  priv- 
ileges. It  is  true  that  the  Indiana  Dem- 
ocrats have  voluntarily  taken  a  stand  in 
recent  years  for  higher  license,  and  read- 
ily assisted  to  pass  a  higher  license  bill 
in  the  Legislature  of  1889;  and  if  they 
are  entitled  to  credit  for  this  action  the 
preceding  statement  may  be  qualified 
accordingly. 

In  the  other  States  of  the  North  the 


Democratic  party  has  uniformly  fought 
every  effort  for  progressive  (or  supposedly 
progressive)  temperance  legislation  since 
the  lines  as  now  existing  were  drawn. 

A  thorough  statement  of  the  atti- 
tude of  the  Democrats  in  the  various 
Northern  States  can  be  made  in  no  way 
so  satisfactorily  as  by  summarizing  the 
declarations  of  Democratic  State  plat- 
forms for  several  years.  We  find  that  in 
1886  the  Democratic  Conventions  in  11 
Northern  States  (California,  Connecti- 
cut, Illinois,  Indiana,  Kansas,  Minnesota. 
Nebraska,  New  Hampshire,  Ohio,  Ver- 
mont and  Wisconsin)  opposed  Prohibi- 
tion ;  in  nine  Northern  States  (Colorado, 
Maine,  Massachusetts,  Michigan,  Nevada, 
New  Jersey,  North  Carolina,  Pennsylva- 
nia and  Rhode  Island)  they  made  no  utter- 
ance on  the  temperance  question;  in  two 
Northern  States  (Indiana  and  Iowa)  they 
advocated  Local  Option  or  High  License: 
in  one  Northern  State  (Oregon)  the  sub- 
mission of  a  Prohibitory  Amendment  to 
the  people  Avas  favored,  and  in  one  North- 
ern State  (New  York)  there  was  no  Dem- 
ocratic Convention  held.  The  Northern 
Democratic  State  platforms  for  1887 
give  the  following  showing:  Silent, 
Massachusetts,  Michigan,  Pennsylvania 
and  Rhode  Island — 4 ;  opposing  Prohibi- 
tion, Iowa,  Nebraska,  New  York  and 
Ohio — 4;  favoring  High  License  or  Lo- 
cal Option,  Iowa  and  Nebraska — 2 ;  in  the 
other  Northern  States  there  were  no  Dem- 
ocratic Conventions.  The  record  for 
1888  is  as  follows:  Silent,  California, 
Colorado,  Illinois,  Massachusetts,  Michi- 
gan, Minnesota,  Nevada,  New  Jersey, 
Ohio,  Oregon  and  Pennsylvania — 11: 
opposing  Prohibition,  Indiana,  Iowa, 
Kansas,  New  Hampshire,  New  York, 
Rhode  Island  (1889),  Vermont  and  AVis- 
consin — 8 ;  favoring  High  License  or  Lo- 
cal Option,  Nebraska,  New  Hampshire, 
Rhode  Island  (1889)^  and  Vermont— 4: 
berating  the  Republican  party  for  its 
behavior  in  dealing  with  the  liquor  issue 
without  making  any  distinct  expression 
as  to  matters  of  principle,  Connecticut 
and  Maine — 2.^ 

In  this  analysis  it  will  be  seen  that  the 
Democrats  liave  favored  Local  Option  or 
High  License  in  the  States  of  New  Ilamp- 


■  The  Rhode  Island  utterance  of  1889  is  inchided  becaii^i' 
it,  rather  than  silence,  represents  the  true  attitude  of  the 
ijarty  in  that  State  in  1888. 

2  Political  Prohibitionist  for  1887,  1888  and  1889. 


DeDmark.] 


153 


[Denmark. 


shire,  Vermont,  Rhode  Island,  Iowa,  Ne- 
braska and  Indiana.  In  the  first  four 
named  States  Prohibition  was  the  law, 
and  the  Democrats,  as  a  rum  party,  pro- 
posed, the  only  alternative  policy  that 
public  sentiment  in  those  States  was 
likely  to  tolerate;  in  Nebraska  High 
License  was  indorsed  because  that  policy 
was  favored  there  by  the  unanimous  con- 
sent of  the  men  engaged  in  the  traffic;  in 
Indiana  alone  the  declaration  for  High 
License  Avas  made  under  circumstances 
possibly  eiititling  the  party  to  credit  for 
a  progressive  disposition,  but  the  High 
License  plank  of  1886  in  Indiana  was  a 
very  tame  one,  simply  advocating  "a 
reasonable  increase  of  the  license  tax," 
and  making  no  reference  to  Local  Option. 
The  application  of  the  foregoing  review 
is  exclusively  to  the  Democratic  party  as 
an  organization.  Space  does  not  permit  a 
])resentation  in  detail  of  the  records  and 
utterances  of  representative  national 
and  State  leaders  of  the  party.  Inciden- 
tal allusions  have  been  made,  in  this 
article  and  others  (see  especially  Consti- 
tutional Prohibition  and  United 
States  Government  and  the  Liquor 
Traffic),  to  individual  Democrats  whose 
connection  with  events  has  been  of  much 
importance.  No  discussion  of  this  sub- 
ject, however,  should  fail  to  give  due 
recognition  to  the  many  courageous  Dem- 
ocrats who  have  braved  the  prevailing 
sentiment  of  their  party  and  supported 
the  principle  of  Prohibition.  Few  names 
of  Prohibition  advocates  are  more  famil- 
iar or  respected  than  those  of  Senator  A. 
H.  Colquitt  of  Georgia,  the  late  Henry 
W.  Grady  of  the  same  State,  Gen.  Samuel 
F.  Gary  of  Ohio  and  ex-Senator  S.  B. 
Maxey  of  Texas — all  Democratic  leaders 
of  prominence.  Other  Democrats  in  and 
out  of  public  life,  representing  every 
State  of  the  Union,  have  contributed  and 
are  contributing  zealously  and  effectively 
to  the  promotion  of  the  cause.  The  Pro- 
hibitiou  party,  the  most  radical  wing  of 
the  Proliibition  movement,  has  drawn 
many  of  its  ablest  leaders  from  the  Dem- 
ocratic party,  including  the  man  remem- 
bered as  the  foremost  of  party  Prohibi- 
tionists, John  B.  Finch. 

Denmark.' — This  Kingdom,  embrac- 
ing the  small  northern   European  penin- 

'  The  editor  is  indebted  to  M.  J.  Cramer  of  East  Orange, 
N.J. 


sula  of  Jutland  and  a  group  of  islands  in 
the  Baltic  Sea,  witn  an  aggregate  popu- 
lation of  about  2,000,000,  has  been 
regarded  as  the  most  drunken  of  civilized 
nations.  This  view,  as  respects  distilled 
liquoi's  at  least,  seems  to  be  confirmed  by 
all  reliable  statistical  estimates.  (See 
Consumption  of  Liquors.)  There  is  no 
doubt,  however,  that  temperance  senti- 
mcnt  is  increasing  materially.  The  reports 
made  at  the  annual  meeting  of  the  Den- 
mark Temperance  Society  in  1889  showed 
that  there  were  then  19,814  members  of 
that  organization — 12,658  males  and  7,156 
females.  It  is  claimed  that  the  Good 
Templars  have  a  membership  of  between 
6,000  and  7,000  in  Denmark ;  and  Rev. 
Carl  F.  Eltzholtz,  in  a  recent  letter  in  the 
Union  Signal,  estimated  the  number  of 
total  abstainers  in  the  Kingdom  at  35,000. 
The  Government  makes  appropriations 
of  money  to  encourage  the  temperance 
organizations.  A  movement  against  spir- 
its began  before  1840,  being  started  by 
Dr.  Robert  Baird  of  Massachusetts.  The 
Good  Templar  organization  was  founded 
in  1881.  Besides  the  National  Total 
Abstinence  League  there  is  an  Association 
for  Promoting  Sobriety  that  has  the  co- 
operation of  eminent  men ;  and  Sunday- 
closing  and  coffee-house  movements  are 
on  foot,  although  most  of  the  Danish 
coffee-houses  sell  beer. 

The  richer  classes  of  Denmark  use 
wine  freely.  Beer  is  consumed  by  per- 
sons of  all  classes  save  the  abstainers,  and 
strong  spirits  are  also  popular. 

The  quantities  of  distilled  spirits  pro- 
duced, imported  and  consumed  in  Den- 
mark for  a  series  of  years  are  given  in 
our  article  on  Consumption  of  Liquors. 
It  is  estimated  that  the  annual  production 
of  beer  is  from  25,000,000  gallons  ujd- 
wards.  No  Prohibitory  or  really  re- 
strictive legislation  has  been  enacted, 
although  the  city  of  Copenhagen  requires 
dramshops  to  close  at  midnight,  prohibits 
the  employment  of  barmaids  and  directs 
that  liquor-sellers  shall  see  that  their  ine- 
briated customers  have  free  rides  home 
or  are  carried  to  police  stations  in  covered 
vehicles.  No  special  license  is  required 
for  the  sale  of  liquors,  but  a  small  annual 
tax  must  be  paid  by  each  proprietor  as  a 
shop-keeper.  Danish  statistics  credit 
about  one-tenth  of  the  accidents,  an 
eighth  of  the  lunacy,  over  a  third  of  the 
pauperism  and  76  per  cent,  of  the  arrests 


Dipsomania.] 


154 


[Distillation. 


to  drink.  Eecently  the  Danish  Medical 
Society  has  declared  the  injurious  ten- 
dency of  brandy  and  beer  upon  the  human 
system.  1 

A  humane  policy  is  pursued  by  the 
Danish  Government  in  regulating  the 
affairs  of  its  dependencies  in  the  Arctic 
waters.  The  commerce  of  Greenland  is 
a  Danish  monopoly,  made  so,  in  part,  to 
prevent  the  introduction  of  spirits.  Ice- 
land, famous  for  the  ruggedness  and 
intelligence  of  her  people,  has  no  brew- 
eries or  distilleries,  but  small^  quantities 
of  wine,  beer  and  whiskey  are  imported. 
Comparatively  few  of  the  people  have  the 
means  to  buy  intoxicants,  there  is  little 
drunkenness,  crime  is  rare  and  the  moral 
character  of  the  inhabitants  is  good.  In 
the  Faroe  Islands  conditions  are  practi- 
cally the  same  as  in  Iceland.  Santa 
Croix,  the  well-known  Danish  island  of 
the  AYest  Indies,  and  other  colonies  of 
Denmark  in  that  group,  produce  large 
quantities  of  sugar  and  molasses,  from 
which  the  celebrated  Santa  Croix  rum  is 
distilled.  The  inhabitants  consume  but 
little  of  this  liquor,  most  of  it  being  ex- 
ported. There  is  no  restriction  on  its 
production  or  sale,  the  Government  en- 
couraging the  industry  for  revenue  rea- 
sons. 

Dipscmania,  or  the  thirst  mania;  a 
term  applied  to  the  diseased  condition  of 
body  and  mind  attendant  upon  an  irre- 
sistible and  insatiable  thirst  for  alcoholic 
liquors.  When  the  drinker  is  so  inca- 
pable of  controlling  his  appetite  as  to  be 
habitually  intemperate  (whether  period- 
ically or  continuously  so),  he  is  described 
scientifically  as  a  dipsomaniac,  and  it  is 
for  the  drinker  of  this  class  that  the  ine- 
briate asylum  exists. 

Direct  Veto. — See  Great  Britain. 

Disciple  Church.  —  The  General 
Christian  Missionary  Convention,  com- 
posed of  delegates  representing  the  "  Dis- 
ciples "  of  all  the  States  and  Territories, 
was  held  in  Jjouisville,  Ky.,  October.  18^9. 
The  following  resolution  was  unanimously 
adopted : 

"  Resolved,  That  it  is  the  mature  conviction 
of  the  Christian  workers  of  this  Convention 
that  the  liquor  traffic  is  one  of  the  greatest  hin- 
drances to  the  spread  of  the  gos))el,  the  purity 
of  tne  clmrches  and  the   material  and  moral 

1  On  the  authority  of  Joseph  Malins  of  Manchester, 
Eng. 


welfare  of  the  people;  and  as  such  it  is  our  most 
sacred  duty  to  oppose  its  deadly  influence  and 
to  seek  its  entire  suppression  by  such  means  as, 
in  our  judgment,  may  prove  most  effectual." 

Distillation. — The  process  by  which 
a  liquid,  after  being  confined  in  a  closed 
vessel,  heated  and  vaporized,  and  subse- 
quently reconverted  to  the  fluid  state  in 
a  colder  connecting  vessel  or  tube,  is  ob- 
tained in  a  purified  form.  If  contami- 
nated water  be  placed  in  a  retort  and  a 
degree  of  heat  slightly  above  the  boiling 
point  of  water  be  applied,  the  various 
impure  elements,  not  being  convertible 
into  vapor  at  that  comparatively  low 
temperature,  will  remain  as  solids  at  the 
bottom  of  the  retort ;  while  the  escaping 
steam,  passing  to  the  mouth  of  the  re- 
tort, will  be  condensed  upon  contact  with 
the  colder  temperature  and  the  resulting 
liquid  will  be  a  perfectly  pure  water. 
Water  from  which  impurities  are  thus 
eliminated  is  called  distilled  water. 

Distillation  as  a  commercial  process  is 
employed  chiefly  for  obtaining  alcoholic 
spirits.  Any  vegetable  or  animal  sub- 
stance in  passing  through  the  stages  of 
decomposition  undergoes  fermentation. 
When  the  so-called  stage  of  vinous  fer- 
mentation is  reached,  alcohol  is  generated. 
If  the  substance  is  grain  (as  barley)  or 
fruit  (as  grapes),  the  liquid  at  this  stage 
becomes  beer  or  wine,  in  which  the  in- 
toxicating element  of  alcohol  remains  in 
a  diluted  form,  the  chief  constituent  of 
the  solution  being  water.  To  concentrate 
the  alcohol  the  mixture  must  be  subjected 
to  distillation.  Alcohol  boils  at  173°  F., 
and  water  at  212'-';  therefore  under  a 
heat  between  these  points  the  alcohol  is 
separated  from  the  water  and  other  in- 
gredients and  passes  off  as  vapor.  The 
mixture  is  heated  in  a  large  copper  boiler 
or  still,  to  which  is  attached  a  long  spiral 
tube  or  "  worm "  surrounded  by  cold 
water.  The  cold  condenses  the  alcohol 
vapor,  which  falls  into  a  vessel  placed  to 
receive  it.  This  first  distillation  is  not  a 
perfect  success,  for  the  affinity  between 
alcohol  and  water  is  so  strong  that  the 
two  liquids  are  carried  over  in  about  equal 
parts,  the  compound  being  technically 
called  "  proof  spirits."  To  obtain  stronger 
alcohol  distillation  must  be  repeated 
three  or  four  time^,  and  even  then  from 
10  to  20  per  cent,  of  water  commonly  re- 
mains. The  distilling  process,  when 
thus  repeated,  is  called  "  rectification." 


Distillation.] 


155 


[Divorce. 


There  seems  to  be  but  little  doubt  that 
the  ancient  Chinese  understood  and  prac- 
ticed distillation  many  centuries  before 
the  Christian  era.  (See  Chin'a.)  The 
Chinese  records  relate  that  the  discoverer 
(Iti)  was  disgraced,  and  that  his  name 
was  held  in  loatliing  by  subsequent  gene- 
rations. To  the  rest  of  the  civilized 
world  distillation  was  unknown  until  the 
art  was  gradually  introduced  from  Arabia, 
where  it  was  discovered  in  the  lltli  Cen- 
tury A.  D.  by  Albucasis,  a  chemist. 

Theoretically  the  more  popular  strong 
liquors  of  commerce  are  obtained  by  dis- 
tillation direct — brandy  by  distilling 
wine,  whiskey  and  rum  by  distilling 
macerated  grain,  molasses,  potatoes,  etc. 
But  in  jiractice  liquor  is  not  always  so  de- 
rived. Kaw  alcohol,  highly  concentrated, 
is  used  for  its  manufacture,  the  crude 
article  being  specially  treated  in  order  to 
produce  special  beverages — i.  e.,  treated 
by  adulteration  or  processes  akin  to  that, 
the  sole  object  being  not  to  prepare  an 
honest  liquor  but  a  marketable  imitation. 
And  in  the  eager  desire  to  procure  the 
maximum  quantity  of  spirits  from  the 
minimum  quantity  of  grain  or  other  ma- 
terial used,  the  conditions  governing  the 
production  of  honest  alcohol  are  overrid- 
den. The  common  beverage  alcohol  of 
commerce,  known  as  ethylic  alcohol,  is 
only  one  of  a  family  of  alcohols,  each 
member  of  which  (with  the  one  exception 
of  methylic  alcohol)  is  far  more  injurious 
to  the  health  of  man  than  the  ethylic  al- 
cohol. To  separate  these  more  dangerous 
alcohols  from  the  material  distilled  higher 
temperatures  are  required :  while  ethylic 
alcohol  is  obtained  at  1'7'S°  F.,  the  pro- 
duction of  propylic  alcohol  requires  205'^, 
that  of  butylic  alcohol  228*^,  and  that  of 
amylic  alcoliol  (fusel  oil)  270'^.  Propylic 
alcohol,  the  first  of  the  three  last-named, 
having  a  comparatively  low  boiling-point 
(below  that  of  water)  is  separated  in  con- 
siderable quantities  during  the  process  of 
distillation.  Though  more  deleterious 
than  the  ethylic,  it  is  not  so  poisonous  as 
the  butylic  or  amylic,  which  having  higher 
boiling-points  need  not  be  generated  in 
very  large  amounts  if  the  temperature  is 
kept  down  and  the  distillation  discon- 
tinued after  the  ethylic  product  has  been 
evaporated.  But  in  practice  these  butyl- 
ic and  amylic  corruptions  are  introduced 
into  the  distilled  spirits  by  raising  the 
temperature   and   continuing   the   heat; 


and  instead  of  eliminating  them  by  re- 
distillation, unscrupulous  distillers  simply 
neutralize  their  taste  by  chemical  means. 
The  effects  of  liquor  in  which  these  heav- 
ier alcohols  are  present  are  frightful. 
Their  presence  can  be  readily  detected  by 
a  simple  experiment.  Let  a  quantity  of 
the  suspected  spirits  be  placed  in  a  vessel 
and  ignited ;  if  a  plate  or  glass,  held  over 
the  flame,  becomes  discolored  with  a  black 
deposit,  it  is  to  be  concluded  that  the 
heavier  alcohols  exist  in  the  liquor,  for 
ethylic  alcohol  yields  no  such  deposit 
when  burned. 

Distilled  Liquors. — See  Spirituous 
Liquors. 

District  of  Columbia.— See  In- 
dex. 

Divorce. — An  exceedingly  valuable 
statistical  work  on  "  Marriage  and  Di- 
vorce "  was  issiied  by  the  United  States 
Department  of  Labor  (Carroll  D.  Wright, 
Commissioner),  in  1889.  It  is  the  result 
of  special  investigations  inaugurated  by 
the  Divorce  Reform  League,  presents  a 
digest  of  laws  governing  marriage  and 
divorce,  and  gives  statistics  covering  20 
years.  These  statistics  show  the  number 
of  divorces  granted  in  that  period  in  the 
various  States  of  the  Union,  together 
with  the  causes.  Taken  as  a  whole,  how- 
ever, unless  considered  in  connection 
with  various  circumstances,  the  statistics 
of  causes  for  divorce  are  of  comparatively 
little  value.  That  20  per  cent,  of  the  di- 
vorces were  granted  for  adultery,  38  for 
desertion,  16  for  cruelty  and  only  4.2  for 
drunkenness  proves  little,  since  the  con- 
dition of  the  statutes,  facility  of  proof, 
and  personal  considerations  have  great 
influence  in  the  determination  of  the  al- 
leged causes. 

The  connection  of  intemperance  with 
divorce  was  made  a  special  point  in  the 
study  of  29,670  cases.  The  4.2  per  cent, 
given  above  is  manifestly  unreliable;  for 
in  no  less  than  nine  States,  including  some 
of  the  most  populous,  intemperance  is 
not  a  legal  cause  of  divorce.  But  from 
45  selected  counties  in  12  representative 
States,  in  all  of  which  it  is  a  cause,  a  far 
difi'erent  result  was  obtained.  Here  out 
of  29,665  cases,  "intemperance  Avas  a  di- 
rect or  indirect  cause  "'  in  5,966  or  20.1 
per  cent,  of  all  examined,  or  24.3  per 
cent,   of   the  24,586  in  which  a  specific 


Divorce.] 


156 


[Dodge,  William  Earl. 


answer  was  given  to  the  question  con- 
cerning its  presence.  In  one-sixth  of  the 
cases  the  facts  were  reported  as  unknown. 
But  some  remarks  should  be  made  liere. 

1.  The  allegations  of  the  libels  often 
assert  the  existence  of  several  causes,  using 
any  in  which  proof  is  thought  possible. 
Sometimes,  but  more  rarely,  a  real  cause 
is  omitted.  Perhaps  adultery  most  fre- 
quently comes  under  this  latter  class,  and 
desertion  doubtless  covers  many  unnamed 
causes.  But  intemperance  could  hardly 
be  made  to  appear  in  double  the  per  cent. 
of  the  cases  given,  for  it  is  doubtless  used 
freely  in  most  allegations. 

2.  Rarely  is  a  divorce,  a  crime  or  any 
other  effect  of  a  social  evil,  due  to  a  single 
cause.  Probably  several  causes  contribute 
to  a  large  part  of  divorces.  We  can  only 
say,  thcTefore,  what  the  careful  language 
of  Mr.  Wright  implies,  that  intemperance 
appeared  as  a  contributing  cause  in  20  or 
24  per  cent,  of  the  divorces.  This  in- 
fluence may  range  all  the  way  from  the 
least  appreciable  amount  to  Mie  dominant 
or  even  sole  cause.  In  a  word,  here  as 
elsewhere  in  social  statistics,  both  the 
quantitative  and  qualitative  analysis  of 
the  several  and  often  complex  causes 
must  be  made.  As  a  coin  by  its  mere 
size  may  be  valued  at  5  cents,  but  be 
worth  25  cents  or  15  if  its  quality  be  con- 
sidered, so  it  is  with  statistical  estimates 
of  the  causes  of  divorce  or  crime.  Scien- 
tific statistics  have  Just  begun  to  treat 
these  matters  properly. 

Attention  should  be  directed  to  the 
statistics  of  the  report  regarding  intem- 
perance and  divorce  in  certain  States  to 
guard  against  false  conclusions.  For  ex- 
ample, divorces  for  drunkenness  in  Iowa 
were  only  ().3  per  cent,  of  the  whole  num- 
ber in  the  five  years  1867-71,  but  became 
8.8  per  cent,  in  the  five  years  1882-6.  In 
Maine,  where  under  the  Divorce  law  of 
1883  divorces  decreased  greatly,  there 
were  23  for  intemperance  in  the  first  five 
years  and  also  23  in  the  single  year  1886. 
In  Connecticut  there  were  in  the  first  five 
years  only  65  divorces  for  intemperance 
out  of  a  total  of  2,314;  but  in  the  last 
five  years  there  were  388  out  of  oidy 
1,933.  Xow,  no  liasty  conclusions  re- 
garding Prohibition  in  the  former  States 
or  Local  Option  in  Connecticut  should 
be  drawn  from  these  striking  figures. 
Popular  sympathy  for  the  victims  of 
drunken  spouses  may  have  led  to  the  ut- 


most use  of  intemperance  as  a  ground  of 
divorce  in  Maine  and  Iowa;  while  a 
study  of  the  Connecticut  tables  will  show 
that  since  the  repeal  of  the  "omnibus"' 
clause  in  1878,  and  it  became  necessary 
to  prove  something  more  specific  than 
general  misconduct,  the  statutory  cause 
of  drunkenness  has  been  made  to  do  full 
service. 

There  is  still  another  side  to  this  sub- 
ject :  the  relation  of  divorce  to  intemper- 
ance, suicide,  sexual  vices  and  industrial 
conditions,  as  well  as  to  its  effect  on  the 
individual,  the  family  and  society.  Like 
every  other  social  evil,  divorce  is  at  once 
both  cause  and  effect.  Unhappily,  little 
material  for  exact  knowledge  is  obtainable 
M.  Kummer  of  the  Swiss  Bureau  of  Sta- 
tistics found  that  "the  proportion  of 
crime  committed  by  divorced  men  is 
from  eight  to  ten  times  greater  than  the 
general  average."  "The  tendency  to 
suicide  on  the  part  of  men  who  have  been 
divorced  is  more  pronounced  than  that  of 
widowers,"  says  Bortellon.  Morselli 
found  more  than  five  times  as  many  sui- 
cides among  the  divorced  of  both  sexes 
in  Wiirtemburg  as  among  the  married, 
and  more  than  six  times  as  many  among 
divorced  men  in  Saxony. 

Further  statistical  study  on  the  broad 
foundations  laid  by  the  remarkable  re- 
port of  Mr.  Wright  should  be  made. 
The  occupation  of  divorced  persons, 
their  religion,  vices,  crime,  local  resi- 
dence, renuirriage,  repetition  of  divorces, 
the  lapse  of  time  between  the  dissolution 
of  one  marriage  and  the  contracting  of 
another,  the  effect  on  property  and  chil- 
dren, are  all  important  sociological  points 
and  many  of  them  are  probably  within 
the  range  of  practical  statistics.  Uniform 
laws  would  remove  many  difficulties, 
though  migration  to  obtain  divorce  cover 
a  small  part  of  the  divorces  of  the  coun- 
try. Both  constitutional  amendment  and 
concurrent  state  legislation  have  been 
urged.  New  York  has  a  commission  in 
the  interests  of  the  latter.  Should  this 
prove  inadequate,  we  can  resort  to  the 
former  with  important  gains. 

S.  W.  Dike. 

Doctors.  —  See  Medicine. 

Dodge,  William  Earl —Born  in 
Hartford,  Conn.,  Sept.  4,  1805,  and  died 
in  New  York  City,  Feb.  9,  1883.     His 


Dodge,  William  Earl.] 


u: 


[rougall,  John. 


father  removed  to  New  York  City  in 
1805,  and  William  began  his  mercantile 
career  there  at  the  age  of  lo,  working  as 
a  clerk  for  his  father.  AVhen  he  reached 
manhood  he  engaged  in  the  dry-goods 
business  with  a  partner,  on  his  own  ac- 
count, nnder  the  firm  name  of  Hunting- 
ton &  Dodge.  Three  years  later  he  mar- 
ried a  daughter  of  Anson  G.  Phelps,  and 
in  1833  became  a  partner  ii\  the  firm  of 
Phelps,  Dodge  &  Co.  Mr.  Dodge  was  one 
of  the  first  directors  of  the  Erie  Railroad, 
but  resigned  upon  the  refusal  of  the 
management  to  discontinue  the  Sunday 
traffic.  For  the  same  reason  he  severed 
his  connection  with  the  Jersey  Central 
and  with  the  Elevated  Railroad  of  New 
York  City.  During  the  30  years  of  his 
connection  with  the  Delaware,  Lacka- 
wanna &  Western  Railroad  no  Sunday 
trains  were  run.  He  was  one  of  the 
founders  of  the  Mutual  Life  Insurance 
Company,  was  for  three  years  Presi- 
dent of  the  New  York  Chamber  of 
Commerce,  and  was  a  benefactor  of 
Union  Theological  Seminary,  a  Manager 
of  the  American  Bible  Society  and  one  of 
the  originators  of  the  Union  League  Club. 
He  was  among  the  strongest  moneyed 
supporters  of  the  Government  in  the 
Civil  War,  and  was  elected  in  1866  a 
member  of  Congress.  Appointed  In- 
dian (Commissioner  by  President  Grant, 
he  visited  the  Western  Territories  and 
made  himself  familiar  with  every  phase  of 
the  Indian  question.  Throughout  his  life 
and  by  his  Avill  at  his  death,  he  gave  most 
liberally  to  philanthropic  enterprises.  He 
was  a  friend  of  the  negro  and  a  generous 
benefactor  of  Lincoln  University  for  col- 
ored men.  He  helped  to  establish  in  New 
York  City  a  Christian  Home  for  Intem- 
perate Men  and  a  like  institution  for 
women.  He  was  a  total  abstainer  and  his 
social  eminence  did  not  lead  him  to  sacri- 
fice his  principles.  While  a  member  of 
the  House  of  Representatives  he  was  a 
member  of  the  Congressional  Temperance 
Society.  He  was  the  personal  friend  of 
John  B.  Gough,  and  expressed  his  sym- 
pathy for  Neal  Dow  in  the  struggle  for 
Prohibition  in  Maine.  At  the  fifth 
American  Temperance  Convention,  held 
at  Saratoga,  N.  Y.,  Aug.  1,  1865,  it  was 
proposed  to  form  two  temperance  soci- 
eties, a  National  Society  and  a  Publica- 
tion House.  But  the  two  were  subse- 
quently merged  in  one,  the  National  Tem- 


perance Society  and  Publication  House, 
with  headquarters  in  New  York  City, 
and  Mr.  Dodge  was  elected  President  of 
the  organization,  a  position  which  he  held 
continuously  until  his  death.  Mr.  Dodge 
said  in  1880: 

"  Having  watched  the  progress  of  the  temper- 
ance reformation  from  its  beginning,  and  the 
several  crises  which  have  from  time;  to  time  se- 
cured fresh  public  attention  and  in  each  case 
carried  the  cause  forward,  I  am  now  fully  con- 
vinced that  the  next  cieat  battle  is  for  Prohibi- 
tion. This  principle  uf  the  suppression  of  the 
traffic  by  popular  vote,  either  through  lonstitu- 
tional  Amendments,  State  and  national,  or  by 
local  Prohibition,  is  the  question  which  the 
friends  of  temperance  in  this  counlry  are  bound 
to  press  until  public  sentiment  shall  secure  the 
result.  It  is  not  claimed  that  Prohibition  will 
prevent  all  intemperance;  but  it  will  go  far 
towards  it  by  removing  the  public  temptation. 
The  license  system  is  the  chief  obstacle  in  the 
way.  It  gives  a  kind  of  legal  respectability  to 
the  business.  The  time  must  come  when  no 
Christian  can  maintain  his  standing  in  the 
church  who  will  manufacture,  sell  or  use  intoxi- 
cating drinks,  or  vote  for  any  party  favoring 
income  from  license  to  sell  poison." 

Dougall,    John. — Born    in    Paisley, 

Scotland,  July  8,  1808,  and  died  in  New 
York  City,  Aug.  19,  1886.  He  received 
but  a  meagre  school  education,  but  he  en- 
larged it  greatly  by  general  reading.  In 
1826,  when  18  years  old,  he  emigrated  to 
Montreal,  Canada,  and  entered  the  com-  ^ 
mission  business.  In  1833  he  became  a 
member  of  the  Montreal  Temperance 
Society.  Under  the  preaching  of  Dr. 
Kirk  of  Boston,  in  1838,  he  embraced 
religion,  and  in  1840,  soon  after  his  mar- 
riage, he  joined  a  Congregational  church. 
Iti  addition  to  managing  a  large  mercan- 
tile business  Mr.  Dougall  for  several  years 
conducted  the  Canada  Temperance  Advo- 
cate, and  in  1846  he  started  the  Montreal 
Witness,  which  was  published  for  ten 
years  as  a  weekly,  and  afterwards  was 
issued  semi-weekly  and  later  three  times 
a  week.  In  1860  a  daily  edition  was  printed 
at  a  half-penny  a  copy,  and  iJthough 
maintaining  the  religious  character  and 
temperance  principles  of  the  weekly,  it 
attained  a  phenomenal  circulation  in  a 
short  time.  Mr.  Dougall  believed  daily 
papers  of  similar  character  could  be  suc- 
cessfnlly  conducted  in  other  cities,  and  he 
conferred  with  editors  of  religious  weekly 
newspapers  and  talked  to  large  gatherings 
on  this  subject.  A  gentleman  of  means 
encouraged  him  to  start  such  a  journal  in 
New  York  City,  and  accordingly  in  1871 


Dow,  Neal.] 


158 


[Dow,  Neal. 


the  'New  York  Daily  Witness  was  begun. 
But  it  was  never  self-sustaining,  and  in 
1878,  when  it  had  almost  acquired  a  pay- 
ing circulation,  it  was  discontinued.  The 
New  York  Weekly  Witness,  on  the  con- 
trary, was  a  great  success  almost  from  its 
first  publication  in  1872,  although  its  ad- 
vocacy of  the  Prohibition  party,  in  1884, 
was  made  at  a  heavy  sacrifice.  In  1876 
the  Sabbath  Beading  was  inaugurated  and 
soon  became  successful;  but  Gems  of 
Poetry,  started  in  1880,  was  abandoned 
after  a  few  years.  The  Pioneer,  estab- 
lished by  Mr.  Dougall  in  1885,  and  de- 
voted exclusively  to  the  advocacy  of  the 
principles  of  the  Prohibition  party,  is  one 
of  the  chief  Prohibition  papers. 

Dow,  Neal,  third  candidate  of  the 
Prohibition  party  for  President  of  the 
United  States;  born  in  Portland,  Me., 
March  20,  1804.  His  father  and  mother 
were  Quakers.  He  received  his  education 
in  the  Portland  public  schools,  the 
Academy  at  Portland  and  the  Friends' 
Academy  at  New  Bedford,  Mass.  A  total 
abstainer  from  his  youth,  at  the  age  of  21 
he  became  a  member  of  the  Maine  Chari- 
table Mechanic  Association  and  fought 
his  first  battle  for  temperance  by  oppos- 
ing the  admission  of  a  rumseller  who  had 
applied  for  membership  in  the  Associa- 
tion. A  protracted  discussion  ensued, 
finally  resulting  in  the  rejection  of  the 
applicant.  Mr.  Dow's  labors  have  won 
for  him  tlie  title  of  "  Father  of  the  Maine 
Law."  He  was  identified  more  promi- 
nently than  any  other  person  witli  the 
movement  that  "led  to  the  passage  of  the 
first  State  Prohibitory  law.  Determined 
to  arouse  a  public  sentiment  that  should 
outlaw  the  drink  traffic  in  Maine,  he  de- 
voted many  years  to  canvassing  the  State. 
He  sometimes  secured  two  or  three  good 
speakers,  and  carried  them  with  him  on 
extended  tours  giving  lectures,  holding 
mass-meetings,  and  scattering  temperance 
documents.  Maine's  Prohibitory  act  of 
1846  was  the  first  fruit  of  these  efforts. 
This  measure  was  not  very  effective  from 
the  fact  that  it  made  no  adequate  provis- 
ion for  the  punishment  of  law-breakers 
or  for  the  seizure  of  liquors  illegally  held 
for  sale;  but  under  the  inspiration  of 
Mr,  Dow's  example  the  temperance  advo- 
cates throughout  the  State  continued  the 
agitation  to  amend  it,  A  Legislature 
pledged  to  Prohibition  was  finally  chosen. 


Mr,  Dow,  at  that  time  Mayor  of  Portland, 
drafted  a  bill  that  he  believed  would  be 
effective.  By  its  terms  the  manufacture, 
sale  and  keeping  for  sale  of  intoxicating 
liquors  were  forbidden ;  liquors  kept  for 
sale  were  to  be  seized,  confiscated  and 
destroyed ;  no  action  could  be  maintained 
for  the  recovery  of  liquors  thus  confis- 
cated, and  there  could  be  no  property  in 
such  liquors;  cases  arising  under  this  act 
Avere  to  take  precedence  in  the  Courts  over 
all  others  except  cases  where  the  persons 
on  trial  were  actually  in  waiting  in  con- 
finement; cases  could  not  be  continued 
for  trial,  nor  could  sentence  be  postponed, 
and  action  was  to  be  immediate;  the  pen- 
alties of  fine  or  imprisonment  named  in 
the  act  were  invariably  to  be  imposed  on 
convicted  persons,  and  were  not  to  be 
lightened,  directly  or  indirectly,  by  the 
Court;  liquors  for  medicinal  purposes,  or 
for  use  m  manufactures  or  the  arts,  were 
to  be  sold  by  an  agent  especially  ap- 
pointed in  each  town,  who  should  have 
no  pecuniary  interest  in  the  sales  made ; 
the  act  Avas  to  go  into  effect  as  soon  as 
approved  by  the  Governor,  Mr,  Dow 
submitted  this  bill  to  some  of  the  leading 
temperance  men  of  Portland,  who  de- 
clared it  improbable  that  such  a  measure 
would  be  passed  by  the  Legislature,  He 
arrived  in  Augusta,  the  State  capital, 
April  29,  1851 — two  days  before  adjourn- 
ment. The  next  morning  he  requested 
the  Speaker  of  the  House  to  immediately 
appoint  a  committee  to  consider  his  bill, 
and  to  grant  a  hearing  that  afternoon. 
The  request  was  granted  both  in  the 
House  and  in  the  Senate,  In  the  after- 
noon the  Legislature  adjourned  to  give 
him  a  hearing.  The  hall  was  crowded. 
He  spoke  for  an  hour  and  presented  the 
bill.  It  was  rushed  to  the  printer  (who, 
curiously  enough,  was  a  rumseller),  and 
passed  by  a  vote  of  86  to  40  in  the  House 
and  18  to  10  in  the  Senate.  Governor 
Hubbard,  a  Democrat,  signed  the  act 
June  2,  1851,  and  Mr.  Dow's  bill  became 
the  famous  Maine  law.  The  interest  in 
the  new  measure  centered  in  Portland, 
the  metropolis  of  the  State,  where  Mr. 
Dow  was  Mayor.  He  quietly  announced 
that  the  law  would  be  enforced,  and  issued 
a  proclamation  allowing  liquor-dealers  a 
reasonable  time  to  transport  their  goods 
to  other  States,  but  warning  them  not  to 
sell  in  Portland.  In  a  short  time  Port- 
land's saloons  had  ceased  to  exist,  some  of 


Druggists. 


159 


[Drunkenness. 


them  being  closed  up  and  others  converted 
into  reputable  places  of  business.  Mr. 
Dow  prepared  quarterly  reports  on  the 
workings  of  Prohibition,  containing 
unanswerable  proofs  of  the  successful  en- 
forcement of  the  law.  In  18GL  he  re- 
cruited a  regiment,  the  13th  Maine 
Volunteers,  and  entered  the  army.  He 
was  made  a  Brigadier-G^ieral  by  Pi'esi- 
dent  Lincoln  in  April,  1862,  and  was 
twice  wounded  in  battle. ;  'He  has  visited 
England  three  times,  delivering  about  500 
addresses  under  the  ^spices  of, i  the 
United  Kingdom  Allian^.  As  the  fcan- 
didate  of  the  Prohilition  party  for  Presi- 
dent in  1880  he  received  9,678  votes! 

Druggists. — The' relations    o|fci  the 

druggist's  calling  to  the  practical  aspects 
of  the  drink  question  are  of  much  im- 
portance. The  prevailing  practice  of 
most  physicians,  who  prescribe  alcohol 
and  alcoholic  liquors  to  patients,  makes 
it  necessary  for  pharmacists  to  keep  stocks 
of  alcohol  and  the  various  popular  bev- 
erages. Prohibitory  laws,  even  the  most 
stringent,  have  not  discriminated  against 
the  privilege  of  physicians  to  so  pre- 
scribe or  the  right  of  druggists  to  veiul  on 
physicians'  prescriptions — indeed,  all  Pro- 
hibitory acts  specially  exempt  alco- 
holic liquors  used  for  "medicinal  pur- 
poses." But-  the  disposition  of  unscrupu- 
lous physicians  and  druggists  to  abuse 
their  powers  is  guarded  against  in  such 
acts  by  restrictions  and  penalties  more  or 
less  severe:  in  some  cases,  as  in  Kansas 
and  the  Dakotas,  the  pharmacy  features 
of  the  Prohibitory  laws  are 'so  rigid  that 
druggists  cannot  safely  attempt  frequent 
evasions  in  any  community  wliere  there  is 
a  disposition  to  enforce  legal  provisions, 
violations  subjecting  the  offending  drug- 
gist to  fine,  imprisonment  and  depriva- 
tion for  a  number  of  years  of  his  certifi- 
cate as  a  pharmacist.  On  the  other  hand 
the  term  "  medicinal  purposes  "  is  capa- 
ble of  being  made  to  cover  illegitimate 
sales,  so  long  as  the  physician  has  full 
discretion ;  and  a  conscienceless  druggist 
co-operating  with  a  conscienceless  physi- 
cian may,  under  favorable  local  conditions 
and  for  a  while,  at  least,  make  his  phar- 
macy business  a  mere  cloak  for  catering 
to  the  drink  appetite  and  amassing  prof- 
its. Experience  under  all  Prohibitory 
systems  has  shown  that  the  "drug-store 
saloon  "  is  one  of  the  chief  obstacles  in 


the  way  of  complete  success ;  but  under  a 
rigid  law  like  that  of  Kansas  the  difficulty 
is  everywhere  greatly  lessened,  and  in 
communities  where  the  officers  of  the  law 
are  faithful  it  can  be  and  is  entirely 
removed.  Hearty  co-operation  has  at 
times  been  given  by  reputable  pharma- 
cists toward  bringing  offenders  to  justice; 
but  tlie  general  attitude  of  the  pharmacy 
trade  is  not  everywhere  so  satisfactory  as 
is  to  be  desired — in  fact,  pharmacists  fre- 
quently complain  bitterly  against  rigid 
restrictions,  and  in  certain  instances  have 
become  identified  with  tlie  anti-Prohibi- 
tion element. 

The  responsibility  for  drug-store  viola- 
tions rests,  in  the  main,  upon  the  medi- 
cal profession,  and  is  especially  charge- 
able to  the  general  belief  that  alcoholic 
liquors  are  essentials  of  the  pharmaco- 
poeia. There  is,  however,  a  growing  opin- 
ion among  scientists  that  even  if  alcohol 
has  a  necessary  place  in  medical  practice 
there  is  no  necessity  for  prescribing  any 
of  the  alcoholic  beverages  of  commerce. 
If  this  opinion  were  generally  recognized 
and  pure  alcohol  instead  of  the  fascinat- 
ing beverages  were  prescribed  in  all  cases 
where  alcoholic  prescription  is  deemed 
advisable,  the  temptation  to  pharmacists 
that  is  incidental  to  Prohibitory  laws 
would  practically  disappear ;  for  the  de- 
mand for  pure  alcohol  as  a  beverage  is  at 
present  so  insignificant  as  not  to  be  taken 
into  account. 

In  the  license  States  the  sale  of  alco- 
holic liquors  by  druggists  is,  generally 
speaking,  practically  unrestricted.  In 
addition  to  the  annual  fee  of  $25 
charged  by  the  United  States  Govern- 
ment, druggists  pay  in  some  States  a 
nominal  local  fee  (for  example,  $1  per 
year  in  Massachusetts)  required  by  State 
"law.  Several  of  the  representative  Local 
Option  States  provide  special  pharmacy 
regulations  for  Prohibitory  districts. 
But  sales  of  liquor  by  the  drink  are,  as  a 
rule,  permitted  with  but  slight  restric- 
tions. Prominent  drug-stores  in  all  the 
great  license  cities  have  an  extensive  pat- 
ronage from  persons  who  never  enter 
saloons  and  would  consider  it  compro- 
mising to  take  their  drams  over  an  ordi- 
nary bar. 

[  For  legislative  provisions  concerning  drug- 
gists in  the  various  States,  see  Legislation.] 

Drunkenness. — For  particulars  of 
the  influence  exercised  by  various  legis- 


Dutch  Reformed  Church.] 


ICO 


[Edgar,  John. 


lative  systems  toward  increasing  or  dimin- 
ishing drunkenness,  see  High  License 
and  Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 

Dutch    Reformed    Church. — No 

action  on  Prohibition  was  taken  by  the 
General  Synod  of  this  church  in  1888  or 
1889.  The  latest  deliverance  was  made 
at  Catskill,  N.  Y.,  June,  1887,  the  follow- 
ing resolutions  being  adopted : 

"  1.  That  this  Synod  reiterates  the  deliverance 
of  former  Synods  on  the  subject  of  temperance, 
and  urges  incn-ased  interest  and  zeal  throughout 
the  denomination  in  gospel  temperance  work. 

■'2.  Th:it  we  especially  and  heartily  sympa- 
thize with  the  work  of  the  W.  C.  T.  U.,  a'nd  bid 
the  Union  God-speed  in  the  noble  effort  lo  res- 
cue men  from  the  curse  of  strong  drink." 

Edgar,  John. — Born  in  Ballynahinch, 
Ireland,  in  1798;  died  in  Belfast,  Ireland, 
Aug.  2G,  1866.  Ilis  father  was  a  Presby- 
terian clergyman  in  Ballynahinch,  and 
for  many  years  was  in  charge  of  the 
academy  from  which  the  son  graduated. 
The  young  man  finished  his  college 
course  at  Glasgow  University  and  studied 
theology  in  Belfast,  where  in  1820  he 
was  ordained  pastor  of  a  "  mission"  church. 
His  energy  and  power  as  a  preacher  rap- 
idly built  up  his  church,  but  eventually 
he  resigned  its  pastorate  to  fill  the  chair  of 
Systematic  The  logy  in  the  Presbyterian 
Theological  College  at  Belfast.  Upon 
the  union  of  the  two  branches  of  the 
Presbyterian  Church  in  Ireland  in  1840, 
Dr.  Edgar  was  made  Divinity  Professor 
of  the  united  church.  In  18-t3  he 
became  Moderator  of  the  General  Assem- 
bly and  succeeded  in  securing  a  fund  for 
the  establishment  of  Christian  institu- 
tions in  Southern  and  Western  Ireland. 
During  the  potato  famine  of  1846  he 
labored  zealously  for  the  relief  of  the  peo- 
l)le,  raising  money  for  the  starving,  intro- 
ducing iitdustrial  schools  for  the  training 
of  the  youth,  sending  out  missionaries 
and  inciting  to  benevolence  among  the 
gentry.  In  temperance  work  he  was  one 
of  the  most  conspicuous  persons  of  his 
time  in  Great  Britain,  and  he  was  the 
father  of  the  reform  in  Ireland,  the  first 
temperance  organization  in  that  country 
having  had  its  origin  in  a  letter  written 
by  him  and  published  in  the  Belfast 
JSfeivs-Letter,  Aug.  14,  1829.  Six  days 
later  a  society  was  formed  at  New  Ross 
in  County  Wexford.    A  second  letter  was 


published  in  the  Neios-Ldter,  Sept.  4  and 
11,  and  afterwards  was  issued  as  a  tract. 
In  his  second  letter,  speaking  of  the  first 
one,  he  said  that  "a  number  of  con- 
temporary journals  have  cheerfully  pub- 
lished my  communication  on  behalf  of 
temperance,  and  many  men  of  rank  and 
position  of  the  first  eminence  are  hearty 
in  the  matter."  On  Sept.  24,  at  Belfast, 
the  Ulster  Temperance  Society  was  organ- 
ized. Dr.  Edgar  being  one  of  the  original 
six  signers  of  the  constitution.  In  Oc- 
tober, 1829,  he  preached  the  first  of  a 
series  of  temperance  sermons  in  the  Meth- 
odist Chapel,  Donegal  Square,  Belfast, 
and  by  the  close  of  the  year  25  temper- 
ance societies  had  been  founded  in  Ire- 
land, with  a  total  membership  of  800. 
In  1829  he  issued  "An  Address  to  the 
Temperate "  (Dublin),  while  "  The  In- 
toxicating Drinks  of  the  Hebrews" 
(Belfast,  1837),  and  "Scriptural  Tem- 
perance "  (Belfast,  1837),  were  his  contri- 
butions to  the  Bible  Wines  controversy. 
He  also  introduced  Dr.  Lyman  Beccher's 
"  Six  Sermons  on  Intemperance  "  to  the 
British  public.  His  usefulness  in  the 
later  development  of  temperance  reform 
in  Great  Britain  was,  however,  seriously 
interfered  with  by  his  opposition  to  the 
total  abstinence  movement  and  to  Father 
Mathew's  remarkable  pledge-signing  cru- 
sade in  Ireland.  "Scriptural  Temper- 
ance "  and  his  "'  Limitations  of  Liberty  " 
were  written  expressly  to  combat  the  agi- 
tation for  total  abstinence,  and  while  they 
could  not  turn  back  the  popuh-rtide  they 
served  to  rob  their  author  of  sympathy 
and  active  participation  in  the  new  pluise 
of  the  reform  almost  until  his  death. 
He  wished  to  limit  temperance  efforts 
to  opposition  to  the  spirit  traffic,  and  in 
1847  made  final  strenuous  eiforts  to  carry 
back  the  agitation  in  Ireland  to  this  basis, 
but  without  success.  Toward  the  close  of 
his  life  he  becamereconciled  to  the  change 
in  sentiment,  if  not  its  pronounced  advo- 
cate, and  in  1855,  as  Moderator,  signed 
an  Address  on  Temperance,  from  the 
Committee  of  the  Irish  Presbyterian  As- 
sembly, unquestionably  prepared  by  him- 
self, in  which  total  abstinence  from  all 
intoxicating  liquors  was  favored.  Again 
in  1861  he  published  a  paper  on  the 
"  Relation  between  Temperance  and  the 
Religious  Revival,"  in  which  he  mani- 
fested a  disposition  to  tolerate  and  com- 
mend the  total  abstinence  movement. 


Educational  Laws.] 


IGl 


[Epilepsy. 


Educational  Laws. — See  Legisla- 
tion and  Scientific  Temperance  Ed- 
ucational Laavs. 

Edwards,  Justin. — Born  in  West- 
li:iin})ton.  Muss.,  April  25, 1787,  and  died 
in  jiatli  Alum,  Va.,  July  23,  185;].  He 
(graduated  from  Williams  College  in  1810. 
He  became  pastor  of  the  Congregational 
Church  at  Andover,  Mass.,  in  1812,  and 
remained  in  charge  for  15  years.  In 
1828  he  was  appointed  pastor  of  the 
Salem  street  church  of  Boston,  but  he 
resigned  in  1829  to  become  (General  Sec- 
retary of  the  American  Temperance  So- 
ciety which  he  served  for  seven  years, 
delivering  addresses,  organizing  branch 
societies  and  preparing  his  six  reports  of 
the  Society  from  1831  to  1836,  which 
were  afterwards  published  in  a  volume 
entitled  *'  The  Permanent  American 
Temperance  Documents."  Dr.  Dawson 
Burns  characterizes  Dr.  Edwards  as 
"  beyond  all  question  the  ablest  organizer 
and  promoter  of  the  original  temperance 
movement  in  America."  ("  Temperance 
History,"  vol.  1,  p.  368.)  The  formation 
of  "  The  American  Society  for  the  Pro- 
motion of  Temperance,"  at  Boston  on 
Feb.  13,  182(),  marks  the  beginning  of 
organized  effort  against  liquor-drinking, 
and  Dr.  Edwards  was  foremost  among  the 
founders  of  this  Society.  During  the 
previous  year  he  had  written  a  widely- 
cii'culated  tract  on  the  "' Well-Ccnducted 
Farm,"  in  which  he  described  the  suc- 
cessful experiment  of  a  farmer  who  pro- 
hibited the  use  of  spirits  on  his  farm  in 
spite  of  the  well-nigh  universal  custom. 
The  radical  position  taken  from  the  first 
by  the  doctor  and  his  colleagues  in  the 
American  Temperance  Society  is  shown 
by  the  declaration,  made  a  part  of  the 
constitution  in  1826,  that  the  principal 
object  of  the  temperance  movement  was 
not  the  reformation  of  the  intemperate, 
however  desirable  that  might  be,  but  the 
prevention  of  intemperance.  During  his 
career  as  Corresponding  Secretary  and 
(xeneral  Agent  of  this  Society  Dr.  Ed- 
wards inaugurated  a  temperance  move- 
ment in  W'ashington  which  spread  to 
Congress  and  resulted  in  establishing 
the  Congressional  Temperance  Society; 
and  on  Aug.  31,  1830,  he  delivered  the 
first  temperance  address  in  St.  John's, 
New  Brunswick,  leading  to  the  formation 
of  the   St.  John's   Temperance  Society, 


one  of  the  earliest  in  Canada.  After  his 
resignation  he  was  for  six  years  President 
of  Andover  Theological  Seminary.  From 
1842  until  1849  he  labored  for  "Sabbath 
observance  as  zccilously  as  he  had  for 
temperance.  Of  four  tracts  (two  of  them 
on  temperance)  written  by  him  and  pub- 
lished by  the  American  Tract  Society, 
more  than  750,000  copies  were  printed 
up  to  1857.  They  are  entitled:  the 
"Well-Conducted  Farm ;"  "  On  the  Traffic 
in  Ardent  Spirits;"  "Joy  in  Heaven 
Over  One  Sinner  that  Repenteth,"  and 
"  The  Way  to  ])e  Saved."  Of  his  "  Tem- 
perance Manual"  193,625  copies,  and  of 
his  "  Sabbath  Manual "  583,544  copies 
were  distributed.  He  prepared  a  com- 
mentary on  the  Bible,  unfinished  at  the 
time  of  his  death,  which  included  all  of 
the  New  and  a  part  of  the  Old  Testament. 


Effects  of  Alcohol. 

Effects  of. 


-See  Alcohol, 


Effects     of    High    License. — See 

High  License. 

Effects  of  Prohibition, — See  Pro- 
hibition, Benefits  of. 

Egypt.— See  Africa. 

England. — See  Great  Britain. 

Epilepsy. — This  fearful  disease  is 
one  of  the  maladies  to  which  the  excessive 
drinker  is  subject.  It  is  most  frequent' 
among  absinthe  drinkers.  "This  [alco-' 
holic]  epilepsy,"  says  Dr.  B.  W.  Eichard-- 
son,  is  "'  essentially  characteristic.  .  .  . 
The  seizure  usually  occurs  at  first  in  the 
night  and  during  sleep,  and  may  not  be 
distinguished  by  the  sufferer  himself  from 
one  of  the  many  old  attacks  of  what  he  prob- 
ably calls  night-mare.  In  time  his  friends 
become  acquainted  with  the  fact  of  the 
seizure  or  some  evidence  is  left  of  it  in 
the  form  of  bruise  or  bitten  tongue.  Still 
later  the  attack  occurs  in  the  daytime, 
and  then  the  precise  nature  of  the  disease' 
is  declared.  In  its  early  stages  alcoholiO 
epilepsy  is  comparatively  easy  of  cure.- 
It  is  cured  sometimes  spontaneously  by 
simple  total  abstinence  from  alcohol.  In 
its  later  stages  it  is,  however,  as  incurable 
as  any  other  type  of  this  serious  and  in- 
tractable malady."  1 

>  Diseases  of  Modern  Life  (New  York,  1884),  pp.  3C5-6.     • 


Equal  Suffrage.] 


1G2 


[Equal  Suffrage. 


Equal  Suffrage.^  —  Only  a  few  years 
ago  I  bitterly  opposed  Woman  Suffrage. 
A  wealthy  widow,  whose  guest  I  was,  said 
to  me  one  election  day :  "  Sir,  do  you 
think  justice  is  done  woman  when  my 
two  gardeners,  who  have  no  property,  are 
foreign-born  and  can  scarcely  speak 
English,  have  gone  to  the  polls  to  vote 
for  what,  if  carried,  will  add  $500  to  my 
taxes,  and  will  place  saloons  along  the 
pathway  of  my  two  boys,  while  I,  who  pay 
more  taxes  than  any  man  in  this  county 
and  am  trying  to  raise  my  boys  to  be 
good  and  useful  citizens,  have  no  voice 
concerning  what  shall  tax  my  property  or 
affect  the  welfare  of  my  children  ? " 
Prom  that  moment  my  views  commenced 
changing  and  the  sentiment  of  right 
which  lies  at  the  bottom  of  every  con- 
science set  up  a  leavening  process.  Old 
truths  had  new  meanings.  "  Taxation 
without  representation  is  tyranny  " — wo- 
men are  taxed.  "  This  is  a  Government 
of  the  people,  by  the  people,  and  for  the 
people  " — women  are  people.  "  Govern- 
ments derive  their  Just  powers  from  the 
consent  of  the  governed " — women  are 
among  the  governed.  "  The  dej)ths  of 
society  are  woman's  depths — its  heights 
should  be  her  heights."  "  The  wrongs  of 
society  are  woman's  wrongs — its  rights 
should  be  her  rights." 

Is  it  right  that  native-born  women, 
with  finest  gifts  of  mind  and  graces  of 
character,  who  have  inherited  the  purest 
principles  of  government,  guarded  the 
country's  patriotism  and  helped  to  raise 
its  revenues,  should  be  disfranchised, 
while  foreign-born  men.  ignorant  of  our 
language  and  laws  and  regardless  of 
morals,  can  express  themselves  in  the 
strongest  sense  of  citizenship  ?  In  a  land 
where  "liberty"  is  the  watch-word,  is  it 
right  that  woman  should  be  a  slave  to 
laws  which  tax  her,  try  her,  imprison  her 
and  hang  her,  without  any  voice  as  to 
the  justice  of  these  laws  or  the  character 
of  the  men  elected  to  enforce  them  ?  The 
perpetuity  of  the  Republic  depends  upon 
the  virtue  and  intelligence  of  its  people. 
Have  men  all  the  virtue?  Do  women 
fill  the  saloons  and  gambling-houses,  and 
crowd   the   street  corners,  polluting  the 


»  Since  the  three  cortribntiona  embraced  under  this  head 
are  wholly  controversial,  the  editor  diBclaims  responsibil- 
ity for  all  the  opinions  expressed.  The  appearance  of 
hiich  articles  in  this  work  is  juRtified  by  the  prominence 
('iven  to  certain  aspects  of  the  Woman  Suffrage  (iitjcussioii 
111  cotmection  with  the  Prohibition  movement. 


air  with  oaths,  obscenities,  and  tobacco- 
smoke  ?  Do  men  fill  the  churches  and 
gather  the  children  about  the  home 
altars  ?  What  about  intelligence  ?  Do 
men  possess  all  of  this  saving  element  ? 
The  record  of  our  high  schools  tell  us 
that  two  girls  graduate  for  one  boy.  Then 
if  upon  virtue  and  intelligence  depends 
the  perpetuity  of  the  Republic,  and 
women  have  the  preponderance  of  these 
saving  influences,  why  withhold  from 
them  a  share  in  the  political  life  of  the 
nation  ? 

Some  say  the  ballot  would  soon  lower 
the  high  standard  of  woman's  excellence. 
If  woman's  excellence  is  the  result  of  her 
disfranchisement,  then  the  ballot  is  deg- 
radation per  se,  and  man  should  also  be 
disfranchised  that  he  may  be  elevated. 
A¥oraan's  excellence  is  not  the  result  of 
disfranchisement  but  of  tlie  s]3iritual 
forces  of  her  nature.  The  belief  that 
enfranchisement  would  degrade  woman 
is  but  another  of  the  apprehensions  which 
always  meet  radical  chaiges.  Henry 
Clay  said  immediate  emancipation  would 
result  in  the  burning  of  Southern  homes 
and  dire  disaster.  Abraham  Lincoln  said 
in  substance  the  same.  "■  It  won't  work  " 
has  met  every  scientific  invention,  every 
radical  reform.  Within  the  past  century 
hundreds  of  new  fields  have  been  opened 
to  woman;  lot  objectors  name  one  where 
womanhood  has  been  degraded,  or  one 
that  has  not  been  benefited  and  blessed 
by  the  touch  of  her  influence,  whether 
social,  industrial,  intellectual  or  political. 

Many,  prompted  by  a  desire  for  wo- 
man's welfare,  say :  "  It  Avould  be  degrad- 
ing to  woman  to  have  her  enter  the  dirty 
pool  of  politics."  That  which  has  to  do 
with  the  safety,  morality  and  prosperity 
of  the  people  "ought  not  to  be  a  "  dirty 
pool."  If  it  is,  the  sooner  the  cleansing 
power  of  woman's  ballot  is  felt  the  better 
for  the  country.  It  will  not  be  the  first 
time  she  has  had  cleansing  work  to  do. 
For  centuries  she  has  been  cleaning  dirty 
pools  of  tobacco  spit,  dirty  fioors,  clothes 
and  characters,  and  going  through  haunts 
of  vice  to  reclaim  her  loved  lost  ones; 
and  since  she  must  endure  the  conse- 
quences of  the  "  dirty  pool "  of  politics, 
she  should  be  allowed  to  turn  the  "dirty 
pool "  into  a  crystal  spring  that  its  pure 
flow  may  give  her  purer  associations. 
That  this  pool  be  cleaned  is  as  much  a 
domestic  necessity  as  house-cleaning,  and 


Equal  Sujafrage.] 


163 


[Equal  Suffrage. 


domestic  purity  demands  the  most  potent 
means  for  the  cleansing  work.  A  sensible 
woman  cannot  appreciate  the  encomiums 
wliich  on  the  fourth  day  of  July  place 
her  but  a  little  lower  than  the  angels,  when 
slie  knows  that  on  election  day  she  is 
classed  with  paupers,  idiots  and  criminals. 

It  is  also  said :  "  Woman  cannot  devote 
suthcient  time  to  a  study  of  political 
questions  to  Justify  her  having  the  bal- 
lot." The  time  she  consumes  in  talking 
to  her  neighbor  about  the  style  of  new 
bonnets  would  enable  her  to  become  as 
well  posted  on  tariff  as  the  average  farmer, 
while  her  quickness  of  perception  and 
moral  sense  would  enable  her  to  reach  a 
knowledge  of  general  questions  at  least 
equal  to  that  possessed  by  the  average 
voter  who  has  about  attained  perfection, 
in  the  opinion  of  political  leaders,  when 
ho  votes  the  old  party  ticket,  no  matter 
what  the  platform  or  who  the  candidate. 

The  objection  made  by  the  politicians 
of  Washington  Territory,  when  women 
secured  the  ballot  there,  was  this :  "  Wo- 
man is  impracticable;  she  will  not  stick 
to  party."  But  the  record  of  her  ballot 
shows  that  she  did  stick  to  principle.  A 
leading  journal  of  that  Territory  said: 
"The  result  of  the  late  election  shows 
that  all  parties  must  put  up  good  men  if 
they  expect  success."  That  there  are  bad 
women  who  will  join  bad  men  at  the 
ballot-box  may  be  true;  but  the  propor- 
tion of  bad  is  not  so  great  among  women 
as  men,  therefore  advantage  instead  of 
harm  will  result. 

The  probable  influence  of  Woman  Suf- 
frage upon  the  temperance  reform  can  be 
no  better  indicated  than  by  the  following 
words  of  the  Brewers'  Congress  held  in 
Chicago,  October,  1881 : 

"Resolved,   That   we  oppose  always  and 
everywhere  the  ballot  in  the  hands  of  woman, 
for  woman's  vote  is  the  last  hope  of  the  Prohi 
bitionists." 

Eeading  between  the  lines,  this  means 
also  that  woman's  ballot  is  the  death-knell 
of  the  liquor  traffic.  When  the  liquor- 
dealers  and  gamblers  secured  a  decision 
adverse  to  woman's  ballot  from  Judge 
Nash  of  Washington  Territory  they  lit 
bonfires  and  rang  bells,  for  it  meant  a 
loose  rein  to  such  as  they.  When  in  Eock- 
ford,  111.,  a  few  years  ago  two  boxes  were 
prepared  for  a  test  of  the  sentiment  of 
both  sexes  on  the  license  question,  the 
one  containing  the  votes  of  men  favored 


license,  while  the  one  containing  the 
votes  of  women  showed  out  of  '/i,000 
votes  only  four  for  license,  and  into  that 
box  went  the  votes  of  Irish,  Germans 
and  Scandinavians,  as  well  as  of  native- 
born  women.  Ex-Governor  Hoyc  of 
Wyoming,  where  women  have  had  the 
ballot  for  20  years,  says :  "  Woman  Suf- 
frage gives  us  better  laws,  better  officers, 
better  institutions,  better  morals  and  a 
higher  social  condition."  J.  W.  King- 
man, ex-Judge  of  Wyoming,  said :  "  Wo- 
men make  themselves  felt  at  the  polls  as 
they  do  everywhere  in  society  by  an 
effectual  discountenancing  of  the  bad 
and  a  helping  hand  for  the  good  and  the 
true."  In  Kansas,  enforcement  of  Pro- 
hibition was  a  failure  in  many  places  un- 
til municipal  suffrage  was  conferred  upon 
women,  when  at  the  first  discharge  of 
this  pent-up  moral  power  the  saloon  bat- 
teries of  Kansas  were  silenced  and  a  new 
emphasis  was  given  to  God's  truth,  "  It 
is  not  good  for  man  to  be  alone." 

The  principle  of  equal  suffrage  has 
been  recognized  in  the  platform  of  the 
Prohibition  party  since  the  first  National 
Convention,  and  both  principle  and 
policy  demand  that  it  shall  remain  there. 
That  the  party  should  have  but  one  idea 
is  absurd;  that  it  should  have  but  one 
leading  issue  is  right,  and  does  not  affect 
the  Suffrage  plank.  No  party  ever  goes 
before  the  country  with  only  one  idea, 
and  yet  never  but  one  real  issue  absorbs 
the  public  thought.  The  Republican 
party  had  a  number  of  planks  in  its  plat- 
form of  1888,  but  protection  was  its 
rallying  cry.  The  Democratic  party  had 
as  many  planks  in  its  platform,  but  tariff 
reform  was  its  shibboleth.  The  Prohibi- 
tion party,  had  an  equal  number  of 
planks,  but  Prohibition  was  its  watch- 
word. Of  all  the  hundreds  of  speeches 
made  by  Prohibitionists  in  the  campaign 
of  1888,  in  every  one  Prohibition  was  the 
all-absorbing  theme.  No  one  proposes 
to  make  any  other  the  leading  issue. 
Miss  Willard's  "tandem  team"  with 
Prohibition  in  the  lead,  is  advocated  by 
every  Suffragist  in  the  party.  The  plat- 
form adopted  at  the  last  National  Con- 
vention in  Indianapolis,  June,  1888,  de- 
clares Prohibition  to  be  "  the  dominant 
issue,"  and  extends  full  fellowship  in  the 
party  to  all  "who  on  this  dominant  issue 
are  agreed." 

We  are  told  that  a  party  is  not  needed 


Equal  Suffrage.]                               104  [Equal  Suffrage. 

t6   secure    equal   suffrage — that  it  must  to   decide  the    educational   hasis.     This 

come   through  education,  agitation  and  policy  Avould  place  the  ballot,  North  and 

petitioning.     What    is    more    educating  {South,  East  and  West,  upon  that  basis  on 

and  agitating  than  a   political  party  on  which   experienced   men   and  historians 

questions   to   be   decided  by  politicians  ?  make  dependent  the   perpetuity  of  a  Ke- 

W'hat  party  should  help  on  the  education  public — virtue  and  intelligence, 

and  agitation?  That  party  which  expects  Geokge  W.  Bain. 
the  benefit  of  woman's  ballot  when  it  is 

secured ;  that  party  which  needs  most  Suffrage  is  the  outward  expression  of 
woman's  ballot  to  enforce  its  principles,  the  inward  sense  of  self-protection  and 
Since  the  Prohibition  party  is  the  only  self-preservation.  Suffrage  is,  therefore,  a 
party  that  can  claim  woman's  ballot  as  natural  right;  it  comes  of  God  and  can- 
its  rightful  inheritance,  let  us  be  careful  not  be  denied  one-half  the  race  by  the 
not  to  sell  it  for  a  mess  of  pottage — the  other  half  without  unwarranted  usurpa- 
immediate  control  of  a  few  votes.  tion  of  power.     Suffrage  is  an  expressed 

While  no  other  issue  can  take  the  place  opinion  upon  matters  vital  to  the  life, 
of  Prohibition,  we  will  need  woman's  liberty  and  happiness  of  the  individual ; 
ballot  when  the  day  of  enforcement  without  it  no  expression  can  be  had  upon 
comes,  and  to  keep  it  within  reach  is  the  the  laws  that  affect  person  or  prop- 
part  of  policy  as  well  as  principle;  for  erty,  and  the  persons  thus  denied  are 
the  speed  of  our  progress  is  not  so  great  subject  to  the  whims,  caprices  and  impo- 
a  question  as  our  ability  to  hold  the  land  sitionsof  those  who  make  and  administer 
wlien  it  has  come  into  our  possession,  the  laws.  The  man  or  woman  has  never 
To  enforce  Prohibition  in  our  large  cities  been  born,  and  doubtless  never  will  be, 
anew  saving  force  must  be  injected  into  who  is  sufficiently  just  and  Christian 
our  politics;  and  it  does  not  exist  out-  to  be  trusted  with  unlimited  power  over 
side  of  our  women.  If  this  comes  not  by  any  other  human  being.  Self-protection 
the  golden  rule,  alarming  necessity  will  is,  therefore,  the  only  kind  of  protection 
yet  make  it  a  war  measure.  to  be  trusted  in  the  many  emergencies  of 

The  day  will  come  when  the   Prohibi-  life, 

tion  party   will   need   woman's  ballot  to  All  government  is  a  usurpation  except 

secure  enforcement  of  its  purpose.     The  that  which  is  based  upon  the  consent  of 

day  will  never  come  when  old  parties  can  the  governed.     Suffrage  is  the  instrument 

adopt  new  great  principles  any  more  than  through   which   this  consent  is  secured, 

could  new  wine   go  into  old  bottles.     So  Opponents  of  equal  suffrage   may  urge, 

what  we  already  possess  as  a  saving  grace  upon   the  broad    grounds   taken  in  the 

let  us  keep,  and  what  we  must  finally  have,  foregoing  assertions,  tliat  children,  idiots 

in  larger  measure,  let  us  cultivate,  assured  and  criminals  should  be  vested  with  the 

that  the  evolution  in  woman's  rights  will  privilege  of  suffrage.     The  parent  has  a 

bring  to   woman  the   ballot.     As  out  of  right,  inherent  with  parentage,  to  repre- 

the  idea  that  a   man  of  brain  and  heart  sent    and    protect    the  child  because  of 

and  conscience  is   as  good   as  any  other  its  inexperience  and  undeveloped  mind ; 

man,  though  that  man  of  brain  and  heart  the  idiot  is  irresponsible ;  the  criminal  is 

and   conscience    be  a    beggar   and  that  dangerous   and  has,   therefore,  forfeited 

other  man  a  king,  came  this  Republic;  his  right  to  suffrage  as  a  penalty  for  his 

so  out  of  the  idea  that  a  being  of  brain  misdeeds.     None  of  these  things — urged 

and  heart  and  conscience  is  as  good  as  any  against  child,  idiot  or  criminal  suffrage — 

other  being,  though  that  being  of  brain  can  be  justly  urged  against  suffrage  by  the 

and  heart  and  conscience   be  a  woman,  intelligent  women. 

and  that   other  being  a  man,   will  come  Women  have  a  right  to  suffrage  upon 

equal   suffrage.      The    danger   that  this  the  same  grounds  that  men  have,  and  the 

policy  will  heap  upon  the  South  female  Declaration  of  Independence  stands  as  a 

colored  ignorance  is  met  by  the  platform  monument  to  male  usurpation  of  power 

of  the  Prohibition   party,  which  declares  which  thwarts  the  existence  and  ends  of 

that  "mental  and  moral  qualification  for  a  true  Republic,  until  women  shall  vote, 

the   exercise   of    an    intelligent   ballot "  To   declare   "  that   all  men   are   created 

ought  to  be  the  condition   for  male  and  equal ;    that  they  are   endowed  by  their 

female,  and  that  the  several  States  ought  Creator  with  certain  unalienable  rights; 


Equal  Suffrage.]  165  [Equal  Suffrage. 

that  among  these  are  life,  liberty  and  the  demands    the   intelligence,   sobriety  and 

pursuit   of    happiness  ;    that    to    secure  virtue  of  women  at  the  ballot-box,  as  a 

these   rights  governments  are  instituted  balance  of  power. 

among  men,  deriving  their   just  powers         History  teaches  that   cities  control  the 

from  the  consent  of  the  governed,"  and  politics  of  nations,  and  through  corrup- 

then  to  deny  one-half  the  people  governed  tion  of  municipalities  governments  have 

the  power  of  consenting,  is  inconsistent.  been  overthrown.     American  cities  are  at 

One  who  believes  in  a  government  by  the  present  time  controlled  by  the  spawn 
the  people  must  grant  women  suffrage  of  the  saloon.  There  is  but  "one  reserve 
or  deny  that  women  are  "  people."  The  force  upon  which  the  Government  can 
opponent  may  urge  that  the  stability  of  call  to  rescue  the  politics  of  the  nation 
laws  rests  upon  the  power  of  enforcement,  from  the  clutches  of  tlie  vicious  elements 
that  back  of  the  ballot  is  brute  force  and  of  society,  namely.  Woman  Suffrage.  It 
the  bullet,  and  that  the  physical  power  has  all  other  responsible  elements  enfran- 
of  women  is  too  limited  to  enforce  their  chised.  The  three  vices  of  tiie  cities- 
will  power.  Let  it  be  remembered  that  the  brothel,  the  gambling-den  and  the 
if  women  cannot  defend  so  they  cannot  saloon— are  the  great  enemies  of  the 
attack ;  also,  that  it  is  as  great  a  service  child  and  the  home.  Against  these  ene- 
to  government  to  go  down  into  the  valley  mies  the  very  nature  of  women  is  pitted 
and  shadow  of  death  to  give  birth  lo  a  son  in  all  the  strength  of  their  love  for  off- 
and  then  rear  him  to  manhood,  as  it  is  spring  and  liome.  Prohibitory  legisla- 
te go  out  upon  the  field  of  battle  and  tion  will  never  prohibit,  as  it  should,  any . 
shoot  him.  or  all  of  these  vices,  without  the  enforc- 

In  short,  no  objection  can  be  urged  ing  ballot  of  the  great  undeceased  but 
against  Woman  Suffrage  which,  if  carried  unrecorded  constituency  in  American 
to  its  logical  conclusion,  will  not  compel  politics,  women.  The  lesson  tanght  in 
the  objector  to  give  up  every  declaration  Kansas,  where  women  exercise  municipal 
and  principle  upon  which  the  Eepublic  suffi-age,  is  of  unspeakable  value  and  con- 
is  founded,  and  disfranchise  men.  There-  firms  the  claim  that  AVoman  Suffrage  is 
fore  I  conclude  that  ours  is  not  a  true  the  great  moral  force  that  makes  Prohibi- 
Republic   until   women   are   allowed    to  tion  prohibit. 

vote,  since  natural  right  and  justice  de-         The  demoralizing  influence  of  an  in- 

mand   that    they   exercise    the    elective  justice  is  reflex,  demoralizing  the  perpe- 

franchise  as  freely  and  on  the  same  terms  trators  of  such   injustice.     The  slave  of 

as  do  men.  the  South  scarcely  suffered  more  than  the 

It  is  not  my  purpose  to  claim  that  by  slaveholder  and  his  descendants.  Denying 
nature  one  sex  is  superior  to  the  other  in  the  mother-instinct  of  the  nation  expres- 
brain  or  moral  power ;  but  I  am  com-  sion,  and  the  development  that  comes  to 
pelled  to  acknowledge  that  unequal  social  the  elector  from  the  exercise  of  suffrage, 
laws  have  made  the  women  the  superiors  has  filled  our  almshouses,  jails,  asylums 
of  men  in  intelligence,  sobriety,  loyalty  and  penitentiaries  with  the  waifs  of  so- 
und virtue.  Reliable  statistics  show  that  ciety.  Noble  men  stand  appalled  before 
there  is  a  much  higher  percentage  of  the  great  crowd  of  indigent;  and  if  in 
educated  women  than  of  educated  men.  their  search  for  remedial  agencies  they 
It  is  then  expedient  that  women  vote,  recognize  that  the  tenderness  of  women, 
for  by  this  means  only  can  laws  reflect  linked  with  the  strength  of  men  in  legis- 
the  highest  degree  of  intelligence  pos-  lation,  is  as  necessary  as  the  union  of 
sessed  by  the  people.  There  is  but  one  these  two  agencies  in  the  home  and  so- 
drunken  woman  to  every  thousand  drunk-  ciety,  the  State  will  no  longer  suffer  the 
en  men;  therefore  the  sober  judgment  fearful  penalties  of  half-orphanage.  Be- 
of  our  citizens  can  be  best  secured  by  al-  side  the  breadwinners  will  stand  the  home- 
lowing  clear-brained  women  at  the  polls,  makers,  each  clothed  with  full  power  to 
There  is  but  one  criminal  woman  to  supplement  the  other  and  solve  the  prob- 
twelve  criminal  men ;  therefore  the  law-  lem  of  life  for  the  greatest  good  to  the 
abiding,  virtuous  element  of  womanhood  greatest  number.  The  penalties  of  pov- 
could  so  far  outweigh  and  control  the  erty,  vice  and  crime  upon  us  teach  that 
vicious  and  dangerous  men  who  now  suffrage  needs  women  far  more  than 
vote,  that   every  sentiment  of  patriotism  women  need  suffrage. 


Equal  Suffrage.] 


1G6 


[Equal  Suffrage. 


The  political  party  that  pledges  to 
legislate  in  the  moral  interests  of  the 
people  must  be  supported  by  the  moral 
force  of  women  if  it  is  to  meet  with  suc- 
cess. 

The  Prohibition  party  is  the  only  one 
in  existence,  at  the  present  time,  which 
presents  in  its  platform  a  single  moral 
principle.  The  other  political  parties 
struggle  alone  for  office,  greed  and  gain. 
The  life  and  success  of  the  Prohibition 
party  depend  upon  the  enfranchisement 
of  women.  The  public  sentiment  which 
demands  this  party  has  grown  from  the 
organized  and  persistent  efforts  of  the 
Woman's  Christian  Temperance  Union. 
The  issues  of  the  one  are  the  issues  of 
the  other.  It  is,  therefore,  not  only  just 
that  the  Prohibition  party  declare  and 
labor  for  Woman  Suffrage,  it  is  also  ex- 
pedient, as  it  is  always  expedient  to  act 
justly  and  do  right.  Time  never  fails  to 
crown  such  acts  with  victory  and  honor. 

Woman  Suffrage  is  the  logical  sequence 
of  the  Declaration  of  Independence  and 
the  Bill  of  Rights.  Human  liberty  v. 
class  rule  is  in  the  evolution  of  govern- 
ments. Suffrage,  the  exponent  of  liberty, 
has  already  passed  through  the  several 
class  qualifications  of  orthodoxy,  property 
and  color  in  this  country,  and  is  now 
preparing  to  leave  behind  the  last  rem- 
nant of  such  legislation  indicated  by  sex 
suffrage.  Helen  M.  Gougar. 

Three  leading  questions  must  be  con- 
sidered : 

1.  Is  Woman  Suffrage  in  itself  desir- 
able ? 

2.  If  secured,  would  it  assist  the  cause 
of  Prohibition  ? 

3.  Assuming  that  it  is  desirable  in  it- 
self, and  that  it  would  assist  the  cause  of 
Prohibition,  should  it  be  advocated  by 
the  Prohibition  party  ? 

To  the  first  question  I  must  reply. 
Probably  not.  The  question  has  never 
been  before  the  public  in  such  a  form  as 
to  elicit  any  thorough  discussion.  The 
advocates  of  suffrage  have  dealt  largely 
in  assumptions  and  ad  captandum  vulgus 
arguments,  and  its  opponents  have  relied 
upon  the  instinctive  judgment  of  the 
community  rather  than  upon  clearly-de- 
fined reasons.  It  is  probably  better  for 
all  concerned  that  one-half  the  citizens, 
and  the  most  esteemed  and  honored  half, 
should  stand  aloof  from  common  political 


strife,  constituting  a  moral  reserve  whose 
influence,  unselfish  and  unbiased,  will  be 
brought  in  to  turn  the  scale  in  all  im- 
portant crises.  The  fact  that  many 
changes  in  woman's  position  have  been 
effected  without  bringing  the  evils  which 
were  predicted,  does  not  prove  that  suf- 
frage would  be  a  safe  experiment.  The 
boy  cried  "  Wolf !  wolf !  "  many  times 
when  there  was  no  wolf  there,  but  at  last, 
when  people  had  grown  indifferent  to  the 
cry  of  alarm,  the  wolf  actually  came. 

To  the  second  question  I  must  answer. 
Only   slightly  and    temporarily.     It  is  a 
great  confession   of  weakness  to  assume 
that   Prohibition    cannot    be    carried  as 
other   reforms   have   been   by    manhood 
suffrage,  and  that  the  basis  of  suffrage 
must   be   changed   in    order  to   force  it 
through.       Conservative     minds     would 
hesitate  to  have  Prohibition  enacted  be- 
fore a  majority  of  men  are  enlisted  in  its 
favor.     The  impression   of  female  senti- 
ment on  the  temperance  question  which 
one    gathers   in    a    Woman's    Christian 
Temperance  Union  Convention  is  scarcely 
representative  of  the  community  at  large. 
Foreign  women,  negro  women,  fashion- 
able women,  business  women  and  thought- 
less women    must  all  be  reckoned  with. 
In  general,  wherever  we  find  a  man  who 
sustains  the  saloon,  directly  or  indirectly, 
we  may  be  sure  there  is  somewhere  a  wo- 
man— the     female     of     his     species — to 
match  him.     The  principal  reason  which 
operates  in  the  mind  of  good  men  to  pre- 
vent  their   political   action    against   the 
liquor  traffic,  is  their  attachment  to  some 
political   party.     While    women    do  not 
vote  they  are  largely  free  from  this  in- 
fluence.    When    the   suffrage    was    first 
conferred  many  women  might  join  a  new 
party  in  the  interests  of  temperance,  but 
as  soon  as  women  became   fully  enlisted 
in  the  race  for  office  and  the  effort  to 
"  beat "  their  opponents,  they  would  be- 
come as  party-blind  as  the  good  deacons 
of  the  old  parties  to-day.     There  seems 
to  be  no  reason  to  doubt  that  if  women 
were  placed  in  the  same  position  in  which 
men  are,  they  would  act  as  men  do. 

To  the  third  question  I  have  a  more 
positive  answer.  Granting  that  Woman 
Suffrage  is  desirable  in  itself,  and  that  it 
would  assist  the  cause  of  temperance  if 
secured,  it  is  still  certain  that  the  Pro- 
hibition party  ought  not  to  advocate  it. 
The  linking  together  of  two  great  meas- 


Equal  Suffrage.] 


167 


[Ethics  of  License. 


ures  is  sure  to  hinder  the  passage  of 
both.  This  is  capable  of  mathematical 
(leinonstration.  Let  there  be  3,000  voters 
ill  a  township.  It  is  proposed  to  build  a 
new  bridge,  and  it  is  also  proposed  to  build 
a  new  school-house.  Naturally  some  who 
favor  one  of  these  measures  will  oppose 
the  other.  If  the  two  measures  are  sub- 
mitted together,  so  that  a  man  cannot 
vote  for  one  without  also  voting  for  the 
(ither,  neither  of  them  can  be  carried  un- 
til there  is  a  majority  favorable  to  both. 
Yet  each  could  be  carried  separately 
long  before  that  time.  There  will  be  a 
time  in  the  progress  of  discussion  when 
1,000  voters  will  favor  the  bridge  and 
oppose  the  schoolhouse,  another  1,000 
will  favor  the  schoolhouse  and  oppose 
the  bridge,  and  the  remaining  1,000  will 
favor  both.  Submit  both  propositions 
together  and  you  are  defeated  by  a  two- 
thirds  vote.  Submit  either  of  them 
separately  and  you  win  by  a  two-thirds 
vote.  In  such  a  case  we  should  submit 
the  two  questions  separately  —  not  as  a 
matter  of  policy  but  as  a  matter  of  prin- 
ciple. It  is  the  o'Tly  way  in  which  the 
people  can  be  enabled  to  express  their 
true  convictions.  If  an  ardent  advocate 
of  the  schoolhouse  should  say,  "  I  will 
not  allow  these  things  to  be  separated;  if 
anybody  wants  the  bridge  he  has  got  to 
vote  for  the  schoolhouse  too,"  he  would 
be  guilty  of  a  political  immorality.  This 
is  what  is  commonly  called  a  "rider" — 
one  measure  linked  to  another  so  that 
the  person  who  desires  the  one  mtist  vote 
for  the  other  amiinst  his  will.  This  is 
the  position  which  the  Sttffragists  take  m 
the  Prohibition  party  to-day.  They  make 
suffrage  a  rider.  They  say,  "  The  plat- 
form, the  speakers,  the  machinery  of  the 
Prohibition  party  shall  be  used  for  suf- 
frage also,  so  that  no  one  can  help  the 
party  without  helping  suffrage.  If  any 
man  wants  to  help  the  Prohibition  party 
he  has  got  to  help  the  cause  of  Woman 
Suffrage  whether  he  believes  in  it  or 
not." 

This  policy  is  particularly  odious  at  a 
time  when  they  are'  urging  their  fellow- 
citizens  to  drop  all  subordinate  questions 
and  unite  upon  the  one  issue  of  Prohibi- 
tion. They  ask  the  tariff  men  and  the 
anti-tariff  men  to  drop  that  question  and 
attend  to  temperance.  They  exhort  all 
other  citizens  to  drop  or  defer  their  pet 
schemes  for  the  sake  of  crushing  the.  sa- 


loon, and  yet  insist  upon  lugging  in  their 
own  hobby  which  is  the  greatest  weight 
of  all.  They  cannot  claim  to  be  working 
for  suffrage  in  the  interests  of  Prohibi- 
tion because  they  cannot  get  suffrage 
until  they  already  have  a  majority  of 
men.  This  is  the  one  sufficient  reason 
for  the  twenty  years'  failure  of  the  party. 
Like  the  Irishman's  pig,  "  it  is  little,  but 
it  is  old."  The  independent  men  wJio 
are  ready  to  leave  the  old  parties  refuse 
to  join  a  third  party  which  insists  upon 
violating  their  consciences  by  such  a 
yoke  as  this.  When  the  Suffrage  plank 
was  dropped  in  Ohio  in  1885  the  Prohibi- 
tion vote  rose  from  11,000  to  28,000; 
but  after  four  years  of  toil,  with  the  suf- 
frage millstone  again  upon  its  neck,  the 
party  cannot  record  a  single  foot  of  pro- 
gress. The  suspicion  arises  that  the 
managers  of  the  party  do  not  expect  to 
win  voters  and  at  last  carry  the  country, 
but  simply  to  carry  on  a  miscellaneous  agi- 
tation— playing  at  politics. 

In  conclusion,  it  is  well  to  refer  to  the 
compromise  of  the  Hon.  John  M.  Olin, 
which  was  rejected  under  such  remark- 
able circumstances  at  the  Indianapolis 
Convention  of  1888,  He  reminded  the 
Suffragists  thai;  the  question  was  purely 
a  constitutional  one,  and  that  the  only 
party  action  which  is  possible  in  the  case 
is  to  submit  a  Constitutional  Amend- 
ment. This  the  non-Suft'ragists,  for  the 
sake  of  peace,  were  willing  to  do.  The 
compromise  was  rejected,  and  yet  it  re- 
mains true  that  if  W'oman  Suff'rage  is 
ever  secured  it  must  be  secured  in  this 
way.  William  G,  Frost. 

Ether. — See  Chloral, 

Ethics  of  License. — We    are    not 

now  concerned  with  the  supposed  merits 
of  license  as  a  repressive  measure, 
whether  or  not  it  is  better  than  "free 
whiskey"  or  practically  more  effective 
than  legal  Prohibition.  AVe  propose  to 
ask  wdiether  in  the  court  of  pure  ethics 
it  can  stand  the  test  of  moral  law.  It  is, 
as  has  been  alleged  by  very  high  author- 
ity, "vicious  in  principle."  If  so,  the 
moral  man  will  discard  all  its  claims  to 
recognition,  no  matter  by  what  numbers 
urged  or  by  what  plausible  arguments 
supported.  His  principle  is  not  "  Do 
evil  that  good  may  come."  He  will  not 
choose  to  abate  the  consequences  of  one 


Ethics  of  License.] 


168 


[Ethics  of  License. 


sin  by  committing  another.  In  morals  he 
will  not  listen  to  a  proposition  to  choose 
the  lesser  of  two  evils.  Between  physical 
evils  he  may  be  glad  to  choose  the  lesser, 
but  in  morals  he  knows  of  no  liberty  to 
choose  whether  he  shall  offend  God  and 
his  conscience  and  do  evil  to  his  neigh- 
bor by  a  greater  or  less  sin.  All  talk  to 
him  about  '■  a  half  loaf  "  as  "  better  than 
no  bread  "  sounds  like  the  suggestion  of 
the  devil  to  make  bread  out  of  stones. 
He  wants  no  half  loaf  tainted  with  death. 
His  answer  to  all  is,  "  The  wages  of  sin 
is  death."  If  he  can  believe  that  the 
liquor  traffic  "can  never  be  legalized  with- 
out sin,"  he  wants  no  license,  though  it 
fill  his  coffers  with  money,  though  it  re- 
duce the  number  of  saloons  from  thous- 
ands to  units,  and  even  if  it  should  in  any 
exceptional  case  show  diminished  arrests. 
He  meets  every  proposition  to  license  sin 
with  the  one  unalterable  imperative, 
"  Thou  shalt  not." 

But  is  the  licensing  of  the  saloon  an 
evil  always  and  everywhere  ?  To  get 
at  a  correct  answer  it  is  well  to  ask  and 
answer  several  other  questions : 

1.  What  is  the  saloon  ? 

'  The  inquiry  is  not  after  some  ideal  in- 
stitution possibly  conducted  in  obedience 
to  a  very  strict  and  technically  exact  li- 
cense law,  but  the  actual  saloon  as  we 
have  it  and  know  it  everywhere,  that 
running  sore  on  the  body  politic,  that 
moral  cancer  on  the  conscience  of  the 
nation,  that  remorseless  enemy  of  man- 
kind which,  according  to  Gladstone, 
hopelessly  ruins  more  that  is  dear  to 
humanity  than  the  three  curses  of  war, 
famine  and  j)estilence.  Shall  we  dignify 
such  a  curse  as  that  into  a  legitimate  in- 
dustry by  the  solemn  sanctions  of  law  ? 

2.  What  is  license  ? 

Many  who  favor  it,  answer :  "  It  is  a 
tax  which  implies  no  endorsement  and 
gives  no  sanction.  It  is  rather  a  stigma 
upon  a  bad  business.  Its  real  object  is  to 
burden,  cripple  and  limit  a  great  and,  at 
present,  ineradicable  evil."  The  object 
of  moral  reformers  who  advocate  license 
is  thus  declared  to  be  to  impose  such 
burdens  on  the  accursed  trathc  as  to  de- 
stroy its  profitableness,  and  thus  to  destroy 
the  traffic.  Tb.ey  can  scarcely  excuse  the 
radical  Prohibitionists  for  attempting  the 
impossible  and  not  at  once  falling  in  with 
them  in  what  they  claim  to  be  the  im- 
mediately   effective   and   only    practical 


method  of  destroying  the  drink   curse. 
When  met  with  the  accusation  of  licens- 
ing sin,  they  reply  that  to  call  the  tax  on 
saloons  a  license  is  a  misnomer.     What, 
then,  is  a  taQ-  ?     What  is  a  license  ?    And 
wherein  do  they  differ  ?     A  tax  is  a  sum 
or  levy   imposed  upon  the  members   of 
society  to  defray  its  expenses.    A  govern- 
ment taxes  its  subjects  when  it  demands 
money  of  them  for  its  support.   A  license, 
on  the  contrary,  is  the  granting  of  per- 
mission or  authority  to  do  what  it  would 
otherwise  be  unlawful  to  do.     A  tax  re- 
quires something  to  be  given — a  license 
allows  something  to  be  done.     A  tax  is 
for  the  community — a  license  is  for  the 
individual.     A   tax   is   a   burden   to   be 
borne — a  license  is  a  privilege  to  be  en- 
joyed.    Moreovei",   the   fee   upon  the  li- 
censed traffic  constitutes  a  valid  contract 
between  the  party  issuing  the  license  and 
the  licensee,  and  makes  both  sharers  in 
the   gains   and    moral  character   of   the 
business.     This  point  was  put  with  great 
force   and  justness  by  Hon.  John  Sher- 
man of  Ohio,  in  his  celebrated  speech  in 
Columbus  in  1882,  on  this  very  subject 
of  taxing  and  licensing  the  liquor  traffic : 
"  I  cannot  see  how  you  can  have  a  tax 
law   without   its   operating   as  a   license 
law,"  said  he ;  "  a  license  is  a  legal  grant ; 
a  tax  on  a  trade  or  occupation  implies  a 
permission  to  follow  that  trade  or  occupa- 
tion.    We  do  not  tax  a  crime.     We  pro- 
hibit and  punish  it.     We  do  not  share  in 
the  profits  of  a  larceny;  but  by  a  tax  we 
do  share  in  the  profits  of  liquor-selling, 
and  therefore  allow  or  license  it." 

The  Senator's  argument  furnishes 
these  three  propositions :  (1)  The  licens- 
ing of  the  traffic  proceeds  upon  the 
theory  that  the  business  is  not  criminal, 
or  ethically  wrong,  but  legitimate  and 
proper.  (2)  To  tax  the  traffic  is  to 
license,  protect  and  justify  it.  (3)  To 
license  it  is  to  become  a  party  to  the 
business  with  all  its  social  and  moral  con- 
sequences. This  is  done  by  the  State. 
But  what  is  the  State  ?  In  a  republic  it. 
is  the  aggregate  citizenship.  The  act  of 
the  State  licensing  the  liquor  traffic  is 
therefore  the  act  of  all  who  lend  their  in- 
fluence and  authority  in  favor  of  the 
legislation  by  which  this  is  accomplished. 
This,  again,  is  done  by  voting  for  and 
supporting  men  and  parties  that  avow 
the  principle  of  license.  If  the  traffic  is 
sinful   then   the   legalizing   of   it  is  the 


Ethics  of  License.] 


169 


[Evangelical  Churcli. 


same.  Therefore  those  who  frame  tliis 
iniquity  into  a  law,  togetlier  with  all  who 
vote  or  petition  or  otherwise  work  for  or 
approve  it,  are  sinners  in  that  degree. 

This  conclusion  is  so  unwelcome  and 
so   contrary  to  popular  thought  that  it 
will  be  contested  from  various  points  of 
view.     Some  will  ol^ject  to  it  because  it 
omits  the  factor  of  necessity.    "  We  must 
remember,"  it  is  said, "  that  society  does 
not  exist  in  an  ideal  state.     Evil  is  here. 
We  must  confront  and  deal  with  it  as  a 
practical  reality.  We  have  to  do  not  with 
a  theory  but  a  condition,  and  we  must 
make  the  best  of  it.     The  tares  are  al- 
ready among  the  wheat.    We  cannot  root 
them  out.     Both  must  grow  together  till 
the  harvest.     All  we  can  do  is  to  watch 
that  no  more  be  sown,  and  by  all  proper 
devices  seek  to  repress  and  limit  the  pro- 
ductiveness of  those  now  here  and  thus 
suffer  as  few  of  the  consequences  as  pos- 
sible."    This   is   plausible,  but   it  is  un- 
sound and  utterly  vicious.     Not  only  is 
the  drink  evil  here,  but  all  those  other 
sins  which  are  met  by  uncompromising 
Prohibition.     The   arguments  made  for 
licensing  the  liquor  traffic  have  just  as 
much  fitness  and  force  for  the  licensing 
of  any  other  violation  of  God's  law.     In- 
deed, it  has  often  been  suggested  that 
since  the  social  evil  is  well-nigh  universal 
and  is  fraught  with  untold  consequences 
of  evil,  often   to   the   innocent   and  un- 
offending, society  ought  to  be  protected 
as   far   as   possible   by   some   system   of 
license  and  regulation.    And  if  the  saloon, 
why  not  the  brothel  ? 

Otliers  object  to  our  conclusion  be- 
cause it  is  said  to  leave  out  the  fact  that 
it  is  as  much  our  duty  to  limit  the  evils 
which  we  cannot  remove  as  to  destroy 
those  which  we  can.  Otherwise  we  dare 
not  do  anything  until  we  can  do  every- 
thing. Of  40  saloons  it  is  better  to  de- 
stroy 20  than  to  leave  the  40.  That  de- 
pends on  what  is  done  with  the  other  20. 
If  the  one-half  are  sacrificed  only  in  such 
a  way  as  to  secure  legal  protection  for  the 
rest,  then  it  is  better  to  have  the  40  un- 
shielded than  the  20  legalized.  Forty 
mad-dogs  on  the  streets  are  worse  than 
20.  But  it  is  better  to  let  40  take 
the  chances  of  their  necks,  unpro- 
tected, than  to  have  bands  on  the  necks 
of  20,  which  say  to  the  public,  "  Hands 
off  !  These  mad-dogs  are  licensed."  Will 
it  be  said  that  these  are  taxed  to  pay  part 


of  the  damage  done  to  the  community 
for   the   privilege   of   spreading    hydro- 
phobia ?     Good  men,  neither  drunk  nor 
having  hydrophobia,  have  been  actually 
heard  urging  this  plea  for  the  saloon  tax. 
The  inevitable  dilemma  into  which  the 
advocates  of  license  are  brought  is  this  : 
They    must    either    defend    the  saloon 
against  the  charge  that  it  is  immoral,  or 
confess  that  they  are  willing  to  license 
immorality.     But  most  men  who  make 
any  pretensions  to  morality — not  to  say 
decency — draw  back  from  the  first  and 
blush  to  confess  the  second.     And  yet  a 
very   large   number  of  those   who  have 
gone  on  record   in   conferences,  synods, 
assemblies    and    otherwise,  against    the 
saloon  as  utterly  vicious,  and  have  loaded 
it  down  with  their  unsparing  condemna- 
tion, are  among  the  stanchest  advocates 
of  license.     How  is  this  ?     Consistency 
demands  a  change.    They  ought  either  to 
show  that  the  saloon  is  not  necessarily  an 
evil,  or  refuse  to  license  it. 

Joel  Swartz. 

Evangelical  Adventist  Church. 

— This  denomination  is  represented  na- 
tionally by  the  annual  meeting  of  the 
American  Millennial  Association.  J.  E. 
Ballon,  the  Eecording  Secretary,  writes : 
'•The  American  Millennial  Association 
has  taken  no  action  of  late  on  the  tem- 
perance or  liquor  question." 

Evangelical     Chtirch. — For    more 

than  60  years  the  Evangelical  Associa- 
tion has  had  in  its  Discipline  total  ab- 
stinence and  Prohibitory  clauses.  The 
last  General  Conference,  held  in  Buffalo, 
N.  Y.,  September,  1887,  declared  it  to  be 
the  duty  of  Christians  ''To  faithfully 
co-operate  with  all  proper  movements  in 
the  use  of  agencies  and  methods  as  their 
judgment  and  conscience  may  direct, 
having  for  their  end  the  enlightenment 
of  the  public  on  the  evils  of  intemper- 
ance, the  instruction  of  the  children  and 
youth,  the  reformation  of  the  inebriate 
and  the  restriction  and  Prohibition  of 
the  liquor  traffic."  The  following  declara- 
tion was  added : 

"  Inasmuch  as  the  use  of  tobacco  and  various 
preparations  of  opium  has  bi'come  lamentably- 
prevalent,  so  that  these,  besides  being  in  them- 
selves injurious  to  health  an;l  a  waste  of  money 
almost  equal  to  that  of  the  liquor  traffic,  are,  by 
competent  authority,  declared  to  have  the  effect 
to    awaken  and   foster   desire  for  stimulants. 


Excise.] 


170 


[Farmers. 


and  thereby  to  work  in  the  interest  of  intem- 
perance ;  we  urge  upon  all,  by  all  the  considera- 
tions which  witness  against  intemperance,  to 
discountenance  the  liabitual  use  of  such,  both 
by  precept  and  example." 

Excise- — A  name  originally  applied 
to  laws  levying  taxes  on  any  species  of 
home-made  goods.  In  England  Excise 
laws  date  from  the  17th  Century,  when, 
under  the  Commonwealth,  revenues  were 
drawn  from  domestic  products  to  defray 
the  heavy  expenses  of  the  Government. 
The  alcoholic  liquor  traffic  was  the  chief 
source  of  the  Excise  revenue  from  the 
beginning,  and  gradually  the  Excise  sys- 
tem became  peculiarly  and  almost  exclu- 
sively a  system  of  liquor  taxation.  The 
term  Excise  duties  in  England  is  identical 
with  the  term  Internal  Kevenue  taxes 
in  the  United  States,  meaning  duties  laid 
and  collected  by  the  National  Govern- 
ment ;  and  in  the  same  sense  it  is  used 
in  the  British  colonies.  Very  little  of 
the  liquor  legislation  in  the  United  States 
is  distinctively  called  Excise  legislation; 
the  terms  license  and  tax  take  the  place 
of  the  old  English  term  Excise.  Some 
State  laws— notably  the  New  York  laws — 
are,  however,  popularly  called  Excise 
measures. 

Exports.— See  Impoets  akd  Ex- 
ports. 

Farmer  s. — The  anti-liquor  move- 
ment has  always  been  strongest  in  the 
rural  sections.  The  farmers,  compelled 
by  circumstances  to  practice  frugality  and 
self-restraint  in  a  sense  unknown  or 
known  but  imperfectly  to  laborers  in  the 
cities,  readily  grasp  tlie  strong  points  of 
the  economic  arguments  against  the 
saloon  and  manifest  comparatively  little 
favor  for  the  jjlausible  pro-saloon  argu- 
ments that  have  so  much  weight  with  a 
very  large  element  of  the  urban  popula- 
tion. Living  in  isolated  spots,  often  re- 
moved by  miles  from  towns  and  hamlets, 
the  farmers  are  not  subject  to  the  tempta- 
tions that  daily  and  nightly  beset  the 
occupants  of  city  tenements;  they  do  not 
regard  the  saloon  as  a  club-house  but  as 
an  institution  which  can  be  patronized 
by  them,  their  sons  or  their  laborers  only 
at  a  great  expense  of  time  and  money, 
and  that  works  demoralization  without 
yielding  even  the  apparent  advantage  of 
social  satisfaction. 


REPRESENTATIVE     UTTERANCES. 

The  organizations  and  newspapers^  of 
the  farmers  oppose  the  liquor  traffic  with 
practical  unanimity  and  great  earnest- 
ness. Indeed,  the  farmers'  organizations 
rank  with  tlie  churches  and  the  special 
temperance  societies  as  supporters  of 
the  Prohibition  cause.  The  representa- 
tive associations  of  farmers  in  the  United 
States  are  the  National  Farmers'  Alliance 
and  Laborers'  Union,  and  the  National 
Grange.  The  first-named,  in  convention 
at  St.  Louis,  December,  1889,  adopted  a 
platform  in  which  was  the  following 
plank  : 

'■  Resolved,  That  we  are  opposed  to  the 
liquor  traffic  in  all  its  forms  " 

Previously  to  the  St.  Louis  Convention, 
the  National  Farmers'  Alliance  and  the 
Farmers'  and  Laborers'  Union  were  two 
distinct  organizations,  the  former  having 
its  chief  strength  in  the  North  and  the 
latter  representing  the  agricultural 
classes  of  the  South.  The  National 
Farmers'  Alliance  has  been  steadfast  in 
opposition  to  the  saloon.  At  a  conven- 
tion held  at  Des  Moines,  la.,  Jan.  11, 
1889,  it  declared : 

"  Resolved,  That  we  recommend  the  pass- 
age of  such  laws  by  the  National  Government 
as  will  prohibit  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  all 
intoxicating  btveragcs  within  the  borders  of  the 
United  States  under  severe  penalty." 

And  the  convention  of  the  National 
Farmers'  Alliance  for  1888  made  the  fol- 
lowing utterance: 

"  Resolved,  That  we  demand  such  legisla- 
tion in  regard  to  the  liquor  traffic  as  will  pre- 
vent that  business  from  increasing  our  taxes, 
endangering  the  morals  of  our  children  and 
destroying  the  usefulness  of  our  citizens." 

The  National  Grange  exhibits  equal 
antagonism  to  the  liquor  traffic.  At  its 
annual  Convention  for  1889,  held  at 
Sacramento,  Cal.  (Nov.  13),  Master  J.  H. 
Brigham  (head  of  the  organization)  said 
in  his  address  : 

"  Every  influence  of  our  Order,  financial  and 
intellectual,  fraternal  and  moral,  is  opposed  to 
the  traffic  in  intoxicating  liquor  Unsuccessful 
efforts  have  been  made  during  the  year  to  adopt 
Amendments  prohibiting  its  manufacture  and 
sale  in  several  States.  The  failures  of  the  year 
should  teach  us  the  great  imporlanee  of  con- 
centrating the  influence  of  those  who  are  op- 
posed to  the  traffic." 


>  Characteristic  opinions  from  representative  farmers' 
organs  may  be  found  in  the  Voice  for  May  1  and  July  10, 

1890. 


Farmers.] 


171 


[Farmers. 


The  foUowincT  are  specimen  declara- 
tions of  State  organizations  of  farmers : 

Ohio  State  Farmers'  Alliauce,  February,  1890: 
•'  W/wrcas.  The  traffic  in  intoxicating  drink  is 
now  as  it  ever  has  been  the  eternal  enemy  of 
good  government,  the  home  and  mankind  ;  and 

"  Whereas.  The  farmers  are  largely  the  suf- 
ferers from  the  traffic  on  account  of  having  the 
heavy  burden  of  taxes  to  pay  in  prosecuting 
crime,  and  in  maintaining  jails,  penitentiaries 
and  poor  houses;   and 

"  W/iereas,  No  evil  has  ever  been  abolished  by 
selling  it  the  right  to  exist,  and  the  saloon  is  a 
place  that  every  decent  citizen  is  ashamed  to 
defend  ;  therefore,  be  it 

"Resolved,  By  the  Farmers'  Alliance  of 
the  State  of  Ohio,  that  the  liquor  traffic  is  an 
etiemy  to  the  home,  to  society,  to  church  and 
to  State,  and  that  the  time  has  come  when 
("liristian  people  and  all  lovers  of  good  govern- 
ment should  cease  to  be  indifferent  and  unite 
lliL'ir  efforts  for  the  suppression  of  the  evil." 

Nebraska  State  Horticultural  Society,  at 
Lincoln,  Jan.  16,  1890:  "Resolved,  That 
inasmuch  as  the  State  Legislature  has  submitted 
tlie  question  of  license  or  Prohibition  of  the 
liquor  traffic,  to  be  settled  at  the  next  State 
election,  and  that  arguments  will  be  made 
claiming  that  Prohibition  will  be  detrimental 
to  the  horticulturists,  we  therefore  at  this  meet- 
ing of  the  Nebraska  State  Horticultural  Society 
heartily  endorse  the  principle  of  Prohibition 
and  favor  its  adoption  in  the  State  Constitution 
as  against  license,  without  regard  to  party 
affiliations."     [Unanimously  adopted.] 

Iowa  State  Grange,  at  Des  Moines,  Dec.  12, 
1889:  "RES()LVED,'^By  this  State  Grange,  that 
we  are  unalterably  opposed  to  the  traffic  in  al- 
coholic and  intoxicating  drinks  as  a  beverage, 
and  demand  of  the  coining  session  of  the  State 
Legislature  no  receding  from  our  present  Pro- 
hibitory laws,  but  make  them  stronger  for  en- 
forcing them  in  all  parts  of  our  noble  State." 

Colorado  State  Grange  at  Denver,  Jan.  16, 
1890:  "Whereas.  Over  $1,000,000  000  is  an- 
luially  squandered  in  the  drink  traffic  of  our 
nation  ;  and 

'•  Whereas,  It  is  the  cause  of  seven-tenths  of 
the  crime  and  pauperism  of  our  land ;  therefore, 
belt 

"  Resolved, That  the  Colorado  State  Grange, 
now  assembled,  declare  in  favor  of  the  Prohibi- 
tion of  the  liquor  traffic,  both  in  the  State  and 
nation." 

RELATION"  TO  PROHIBITION    SUCCESSES. 

With  this  strong  sentiment  prevailing 
among  the  farmers,  it  has  natnrally  been 
easier  to  secnre  majorities  for  Prohibition 
in  the  rnral  districts  than  in  the  cities. 
A  stndy  of  retl^rns  of  Constitutional 
Prohibition  and  Local  Option  elections 
shows,  with  but  few  exceptions,  an  over- 
whelming preponderance  of  favorable 
.sentiment  in  agricultural  counties.  For 
example,  the  memorable  campaign  for 
Constitutional    Prohibition    in    Pennsyl- 


vania in  1889,  though  made  under  condi- 
tions remarkably  disadvantageotis  to  the 
Prohibitionists  and  resulting  in  an  ag- 
gregate majority  of  188,027  against  Pro- 
hibition, would  have  been  won  by  the 
Prohibitionists  if  the  votes  of  eight 
counties  containing  large  cities  had  been 
eliminated;  the  other  59  counties  of  the 
State  (in  which  the  agricultural  element 
predominated)  showed  a  Prohibition 
tendency  strong  enough  to  have  given 
Prohibitory  law  to  the  whole  of  Pennsyl- 
vania if  the  vote  of  the  eight  leading 
urban  counties  had  been  equally  divided 
for  and  against  Prohibition.  This  rural 
sentiment  has  made  Prohibition  States  of 
Maine,  Kansas,  Iowa,  Vermont,  New 
Hampshire,  South  Dakota  and  North 
Dakota,  and  has  secured  local  Prohibition 
in  more  than  100  of  the  137  counties  of 
Georgia,  in  four-fifths  of  the  country 
towns  of  Massachusetts,  in  nearly  the 
whole  of  Tennessee,  in  a  great  number  of 
the  counties  of  whiskey -making  Ken- 
tucky, etc.  In  rare  instances  the  farmers 
have  treated  the  Prohibition  question 
with  indifference  or  even  with  apparent 
hostility — notably  in  Texas,  where  the 
Prohibitory  Amendment  had  a  propor- 
tionately larger  following  in  the  cities 
than  in  the  country,  and  in  Oregon  and 
Washington,  where  the  balance  of  opinion 
among  the  farmers  seemed  to  be  against 
Constitutional  Prohibition.  But  these 
results  were  due  to  special  causes,  and 
there  is  every  reason  to  believe  that  a 
proper  presentation  of  Prohibition  argu- 
ments to  the  farmers  under  tolerably 
favorable  conditions  will  invariably  be 
followed  by  large  Prohibition  majorities. 

THE    FARMERS   AND   THE    LIQUOR    MANU- 
FACTURERS. 

Emphatic  as  is  the  general  feeling  of 
the  agricultural  masses  against  the  saloon, 
their  attitude  would  be  much  more  ag- 
gressive were  it  not  for  the  direct  pecuni- 
ary interest  that  many  of  them  have,  or 
are  persuaded  they  have,  in  the  continu- 
ance of  the  manufacturing  branches  of 
the  liquor  traflfic.  The  distillers,  brewers 
and  vintners  must  obtain  their  vegetable 
materials — their  barley,  rye,  corn,  hops, 
grapes,  etc — from  the  farms.  Several 
agricultural  industries,  especially  the 
hop-growing,  barley-growing  and  wine- 
grape-producing  industries,  are  dependent 
almost  entirely  upon  the  manufacturers 


Farmers.] 


172 


[Farmers. 


of  alcoholic  liquors.  These  manufacturers 
take  pains  to  make  it  known  to  individu- 
al farmers  that  their  patronage  will  be 
given  only  to  persons  opposed  to  Prohibi- 
tion. Many  farmers  are  thus  made  to 
believe  that  their  prosperity  is  promoted 
by  the  liquor-makers'  demand  for  their 
products. 

But  this  is  a  fallacious  belief.  The 
articles  of  agricultural  production  that 
are  essential  to  the  liquor  traffic  are, 
generally  speaking,  no  more  profitable  to 
the  farmer  than  are  crops  raised  for  other 
purposes  exclusively.  Indeed,  counted  in 
the  aggregate,  the  sums  paid  to  the 
farmers  by  brewers,  distillers,  etc.,  con- 
stitute but  an  insignificant  proportion  of 
the  value  of  farm  produce.  The  follow- 
ing is  a  statistical  demonstration :  ^ 

MATERIALS  USED    IN     THE     MANUFACTURE     OP 
DISTILLED  LIQUORS. 


O 


">  £     go 
p»Q  5  rig  3  $-c- 

f<s  ^^  —v;  3  3 

'  5'  *  o.  D-  -•  o 

'  -D  s  -- 


a 


-■^      '2  6 

rt.  O  —  •  C"  "* 
p  s  O  -  ,j, 

-so-'  —3 

Et='^  O  2-CD 

"■  o  "^  _  S: 

"S      =^° -. 

tt  i  "^  '^  d 
CO  Q^ro  -"<) 

■■>  irt- 

B  S  ^-S  » 

^   O   .-   •-    -1 
to  •     p3 


O 


U3 


So 

2  3 


p-ro 
(t  "■ 

O 

(0  p- 

e-l- 

a- 
">o 


'<  o 

«  3 


o  j: 

p  o 
^^ 

CO  o 


o 


i-5? 


»        ii.3        BS""^?-       3 


CO  3* 

JO  on 

O 

o  g 

3  g. 
m  3 


^'^  •  s-r 


g 

(► 

H 

W 

a 

IH 

t» 

M 

t< 

c 

Price. 

to 

i-'O 

oo 

o>  o 

i-'O 

o  t« 

4-rf^ 

•<!  W  M  >^  4^  CJ!  "-^ 
or  K-i  COjXiJCi  o  o 
en  or  Oi ^ 'iO "cc  00 
Oi  00  CO ->  >~i  h^  Ci 

t-i.  o  to  O  *"  *i  is 


C  "^  t3  s 


*# 

^ 

--7 

ro 

re 

(X-l 

CO>-' 

-3  W 

M 

OI  00 

Ti 

O-J 

CO 

-I03 

to 

05  0I 

o 

*.CD 

O  ti  ►t'  ^ 
GC  H^  «  : 
ciQomc 


iODCO 
'-let 
-«/0 


<1 

p  m  s  P 
•     ri-       o 

S  g  p 
p  (? 

^'3'E° 


CO 

N> 

^■,l& 

c:  0  50 

K)!-' 

CO'-'O 

—  <o 

CD  to 

QC  w»  CJI 

1<-(X 

00  CI 

OO 

^>^J^ 

g§ 

oo 

o  o  o 

o  o 

o  ^o 

oo 

g2 

s 


»o 


5"^ 

O  o 

<  o 
°  o 


^ 

m 

t-L 

to 

O  JO 

i-^c;t 

OCT 

*- 

c^ 
-} 

§=5 

o 

oo 

oo 

iO-I*^- 

to ->  i- : 

-'QOO. 


CI 


C.  GO 
C  iO 


■    o 

p_ 

•a 
•-< 
o 


1  For  the  largest  part  of  this  demonstration  we  are  in- 
debted to  the  YotCK  for  May  29,  1890,  although  we  have 
eliminated  or  changed  certain  features  of  the  KoiceV  esti- 
mates. 


In  the  above  table  the  quantities  of  materials 
used  in  the  manufacture  of  liquors  are  taken 
from  the  report  of  the  Internal  Revenue  De- 
partment for  the  year  ending  June  30,  1889. 
Comparison  is  made  with  the  total  quantities-, 
average  prices  and  total  values  for  the  whole 
country  of  the  same  materials^except  molasses, 
— as  furnished  to  Hon.  Roger  Q.  Mills  by  the 
statistician  of  the  Agricultural  Department,  and 
quoted  by  Mr.  Mills  on  page  4,552  of  the  (Jou- 
gressional  Record  [1890]. 

MATERIALS   USED     IN     THE    MANUFACTURE     OF 
MALT  LIQUORS. 

The  Internal  Revenue  Department  is  careful 
not  to  give  the  quantities  of  materials  used  iu 
the  manufacture  of  malt  liquors,  as  it  does  of 
those  used  in  the  production  of  distilled  liquors. 
It  is  necessary  therefore  to  make  independent 
estimates. 

The  chief  ingredients  of  honest  beer  are  malt 
and  hops.  It  is  agreed  by  all  authorities  that 
not  more  than  two  bushels  of  malt  goes  to  a  bar- 
rel of  ordinary  beer.  The  average  weight  of  a 
brewer's  bushel  of  malt  is  not  in  excess  of 
38  lbs.  On  the  basis  of  these  figures  the  malt 
consumed  in  producing  the  25,119  853  barrels  of 
beer  manufactured  iu  the  United  States  in  1889, 
and  the  total  sum  paid  by  the  brewers  for  the 
malt,  would  be: 

Malt  ,50,33'.^,706  bushels  at  30.8c.  per  bushel  (see  table 
above)  =  S18, 437,214.81. 

It  is  not  so  easy  to  estimate  the  quantity  of 

hops.     Practical  brewers,  when  confidentially 

consulted,  will  generally  admit  that  not  less 

than  2  lbs.  of  hops  should  go  to  a  barrel.     Dr. 

Francis    Wyatt,     Director    of    the    National 

Brewers'  Academy  in  New  York,  in  a  statement 

to  a  reporter  for  the  Voice,  said  that  2  lbs.  is  the 

average  quantity  required  to  produce  a  barrel 

of  good  beer.-'  This  is  a  veiy  moderate  estimate 

compared  with  the  ones  made  in  authoritative 

essays  on  brewing.     For  example,  the  author 

of    the    "Encyclopaedia    Brittanica "    article, 

"  Brewing  "  (S.  A.  Wyllie,  himself  a  prominent 

and  experienced  brewer),  says; 

"  For  strong  store  ales  from  10  lbs.  to  13  lbs.  of  good 
hops  to  every  quarter  of  malt  is  not  too  much;  whilst  for 
ordinary  beers,  to  be  drunk  within  two  months,  from  0  lbs. 
to  9  lbs.  per  quarter  should  suffice.  India  jtale  ale  ,ind 
bitter  beer  require  from  18  lbs.  to  25  lbs.  per  quarter.'' 

And  in  the  article  on  "  Brewing  "  in  the  "  Globe 
Encyclopaedia,"  the  following  statement  is 
made : 

"  For  each  quarter  of  malt  4i4  lbs.  of  hops  are  reqnircd 
in  ordinary  beer;  for  superior  ales  8  lbs.  are  employed,  and 
as  high  as  from  14  lbs.  to  20  lbs.  for  export  beer." 

Since  f our  "  Cjuarters  "  of  malt  go  to  a  barrel, 
the  reader  will  readily  see  that  the  estimate  of 
2  lbs.  of  hops  per  barrel  is  very  much  beneatli 
the  quantity  specified  by  writers  on  ideal  en- 
cyclopasdia  beer.  The  great  difference  illus- 
trates the  extensive  character  of  the  adultera- 
tions practised  in  the  brewing  "  industry  " 

But  even  as.suming  that  3  lbs.  per  barrel  is 
the  requisite  proportion,  the  total  quantity  of 
hops  available  in  the  United  States  falls  far 
short  of  supplying  an  average  of  2  lis.  for  eacli 
barrel  of  beer  manufactured.  In  1880  there 
were   13,347,110  barrels  of  beer  produced,  re- 


2  The  Voice,  May  9, 1889,  and  Aug.  14,  1890. 


Farmers.] 


173 


[Farmers. 


quiringCon  tlie  above  basis)  26,094.320  lbs.  of 
hops.  The-  entire  hop  crop  of  th;it  year  was  26,- 
r>46.S781bs  ,  to  which  add  497,243  lbs.  imported, 
giving  a  total  of  26,953,621  lbs.,  from  which 
.subtract  9,001  128  lbs.  exported,  leaving  a  total 
of  17  952.493  lbs.  of  hops  available  in  tliat  year 
as  against  26,694,220  lbs.  needed  to  produce 
13,347,110  barrels  of  beer  on  the  basis  of  2  lbs. 
of  hops  to  the  barrel. 

Therefore  the  quantity  actually  used  is  far 
below  the  amount  legitimately  needed;  and  the 
proof  of  this  truth  deserves  the  attention  of 
those  farmers  who  are  accustomed  to  regard 
liquor  manufacturers  as  among  tiieir  liberal 
patrons. 

Coming  now  to  determine  the  amount  of  hops 
of  American  production  at  present  bought  an- 
nually by  the  brewers,  we  find  that  there  are  no 
official  statistics  of  the  hop  crop  of  1889  ;  but 
it  is  estimated  on  reputable  authority  at  36,000,- 
000  lbs.'  On  the  same  authority  the  average 
price  per  pound  in  1889  is  put  at  18  to  18  J  cents. 
Reckoning  the  average  price  at  18^  cents,  the 
total  cost  would  be 

Hops,  36,000,000  lbs.  at  18>irc.  =  $fi,.3C0,000. 

This  is  certainly  a  very  liberal  valuation  ;  the 
report  of  the  Commissioner  of  Agriculture  for 
1887  gives  only  ?3  500,000  as  the  total  value  of 
hops  grown  in  1886. 

MATERIALS     USED     IN   THE     MANUFACTURE  OP 
VINOUS  LIQUORS. 

There  are  no  offi«  ial  figures  from  which  the 
total  suiu  paid  to  farmers  by  wine-ma keis  can 
be  accurately  computed.  The  annual  wine 
product  of  the  United  States  is  aliout  30,OC0,0CO 
gallons,  valued  (to  the  consumer)  at  about  $3 
per  gallon;  but  the  value  of  domestic  wines  at 
first  ban  1  is  put  by  the  Commissioner  of  Agri- 
culture in  his  report  for  1887  at  only  *10,000  000. 
By  far  the  laraest  proportion  of  the  wine-grape 
product  is  raise!  under  the  immediate  auspices 
of  the  wine-makers  ;  and  besides,  the  30,000,000 
gadons  stands  for  extensive  adulter;;tions.  If 
.S2,500,COO  is  indicated  as  the  sum  paid  annually 
by  wine-manufacturers  to  per.sons  who  may 
legitimately  be  classed  with  the  farming  ele- 
ment, the  estimate  will  probably  be  so  much  in 
excess  of  the  actual  amount  as  to  include  not 
merely  the  value  of  grapes  but  the  values  of 
apples,  pears,  berries  and  a'.l  other  agricultural 
proelucts  used  in  the  manufacture  of  liquors 
not  accounted  for  above. 

SUMMARY. 

The  table  printed  below,  summarizing  quan- 
tities and  values,  shows  that  the  lieiuor  manu- 
facturers pay  to  the  farmers  less  than  3  per  cent, 
of  the  total  value  of  the  materials  named.  But 
grain,  molasses,  hops,  grapes,  etc.,  constitute 
only  a  portion  of  the  agricultural  produce.  The 
aggregate  value  of  the  entire  output  of  the 
agrictiliural  interests  of  the  United  States  is 
now  about  *4, 500, 000  000  annually;  '-^  so  that  the 
aggregate  amount  paiil  by  liquor  manufacturers 
for  farm  products  in  1889  (^35  000.000  in  round 


'  "  TarifE  Reform "  documents  (New  York),  vol.  3, 
No.  7. 

2  Computed  from  the  reports  of  the  Department  of 
Agriculture. 


numbers)  was  less  than  seven  and  eight-tenths 
one-thousaneiths  (.0078)  of  the  whole  value  of  the 
goods  that  the  farmers  had  to  dispose  of  in  that 
year.  In  other  words,  if  the  annual  income  of 
the  average  farmer  be  soOO,  only  §3.90  of  this  in- 
come is  derived  from  the  liquor  manufacturers, 
making  the  most  generous  possible  allowances; 
and  this  f3.90  represents  total  receipts,  not 
profits. 


1     H 

^ 

ffi 

fe;   o 

a 

rapes 
otals 

o 
•a 

CO 

a   3 

g 

o 

CD 

> 
H 

5' 

CL 

PI 

o 

SL 

a. 

o 

■n 

b    w 

> 

a       ^ 

TO 

? 

Q 
^ 

c 

3 

shel 
lion 

n 

■  r. 

v:         T 

H 

a 

o 

m 

€ 

CO 

•«£ 

05 

»a     t 

3^ 

■c^ 

C5 

J-"    -( 

?c 

3 

S     J5 

GO        05 

gp 

O        O 

(t>  ^ 

1 

o 

"io     o 

p-;: 

o 

*-      o 

o 

•-'       o 

c^ 

v; 

^» 

^ 

c: 

»-*        UI 

cc 

OS 

p     til 

o 

CO 

"h.*     "rf- 

^ 

iO 

o 

•-^          OT 

P^ 

OJ 

o 

P           CT 

c 

Ot 

to       CJ 

o 

M 

t-.         Oi 

;<! 

o 

p        -! 

GO 

8 

00       o 

O 

o     o 

^ 

—  c 

03 

-1 

o  ~ 
■-1  ^^ 

Oi 

-A       I-. 

■  ^ 

c^ 

O        10 

g 

2    g 

&i 

KA           O 

n>  " 

o     o 

-!    '- 

o 

*.     o 

<0 

io 

<J 

•0 

C5 

at 

«* 

p 

M 

CO     1o 

g 

o 

o      o 

c 

o 

jv!         t-i 

p 

Ct           c 

§ 

o 

o          c 

o 

C-.           c 

D 

o 

.-?       00 

is      \ 

5 

g 

fe  H 

PKOFIT   AND   LOSS. 

The  immediate  and  complete  destruc- 
tion of  every  manufacturing  branch  of 
the  liquor  traffic  w^ould  in  the  aggregate, 
therefore,  not  perceptibly  diminish  the 
value  of  farm  products,  even  temporarily. 
No  permanent  injury  worth  consid- 
ering could  be  effected,  for  land  de- 
voted to  the  cultivation  of  barley,  hops, 
wine-grapes,  etc.,  can  at  any  time  be  ad- 
vantageously put  to  other  uses. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  farmer  bears 
his  full  share  of  the  losses  to  society  oc- 
casioned by  the  liquor  traffic.  The  direct 
cost  represented  by  the  actual  cash  ex- 
penditures for  alcoholic  drink  is  esti- 
mated by  no  one  to  be  less  now  than 
1800,000,000  per   annum  3  in  the  United 

8  See  footnote,  p.  138. 


Farmers.] 


174 


[Fermentation. 


States;  and  probably  it  is  nearer  $1,000,- 
000,000  per  annum  than  this  figure.  (See 
Cost  of  the  Drink  Traffic.)  The  in- 
direct cost,  occasioned  by  expenditures  on 
account  of  taxes,  crime,  pauperism,  etc., 
due  to  the  drink  traffic,  and  by  loss  of 
time,  health,  wages,  etc.,  is  believed  by 
every  careful  student  of  tie  subject  to 
be  fully  as  great  as  the  direct  cost. 
Therefore  the  entire  direct  and  indirect 
cost  to  the  peoj)le  of  the  United  States 
because  of  the  existence  of  this  traffic 
ranges  from  $1,600,000,000  to  $2,000,- 
000,000  or  more  per  annum.  In  1880 
(according  to  the  Census)  more  than  40 
per  cent,  of  all  persons  engaged  in  gain- 
ful occupations  were  connected  with  ag- 
ricultural pursuits.  It  cannot  be  safely 
assumed  that  40  per  cent,  of  the  cost  of 
the  drink  traffic  is  therefore  borne  by 
the  farmers,  for  the  farmers  are  certainly 
more  temperate  than  most  other  classes. 
But  most  people  will  admit  that  if  it  is 
estimated  that  not  less  than  20  per  cent, 
of  this  cost  falls  directly  or  indirectly 
upon  the  farmers,  the  estimate  will  be 
low.  Twenty  per  cent,  of  $1,600,000,000 
(the  lowest  possible  estimate  of  the  ag- 
gregate direct  and  indirect  cost  of  the 
liquor  traffic  per  annum)  is  $320,000,000 
— the  farmers'  share  (on  the  basis  of  an 
extremely  conservative  calculation)  of  the 
annual  expenditure  in  the  United  States 
for  supporting  a  traffic  which,  at  the 
utmost,  pays  the  farmers  but  $35,000,- 
000  for  the  grain,  hops,  molasses,  grapes, 
etc.,  consumed  in  its  manufacturing 
branches.  On  the  basis  of  this  ex- 
ceedingly conservative  estimate  the 
farmer  pays  more  than  $9  to  supj)ort  tlie 
drink  traffic  for  every  dollar  that  he 
receives  from  it;  and  when  it  is  consid- 
ered that  the  $9  paid  out  is  clear  loss  for 
which  absolutely  nothing  of  value  comes 
back,  while  the  dollar  received  is  not  clear 
gain  but  represents  simply  the  sum  paid 
by  the  liquor  manufacturers  in  exchange 
for  the  farmers'  commodities  and  labor — 
when  also  fair  allowance  is  made  for  the 
too  conservative  methods  of  calculation 
that  we  have  employed,  it  will  readily  be 
granted  that  the  farmer's  profit  and 
loss  in  his  account  with  the  liquor  traf- 
fic may  more  reasonably  be  supposed  to 
stand  in  the  ratio  of  $1  to  $20  than  $1 
to  $9. 

But  this  is  not  all.     The  extinction  of 
the  whole   liquor   business  would  indis- 


putably benefit  every  legitimate  produc- 
ing interest.  The  $800,000,000  or  $1,000,- 
000,000  now  expended  directly  each  year  in 
the  United  States  for  intoxicating  drink 
would  then  be  applied  to  other  purposes. 
Of  course  a  very  large  proportion  of  it 
would  be  hoarded  by  individuals,  deposited 
in  savings-banks,  etc. ;  but  a  great  propor- 
tion would  be  used  for  buying  necessaries 
of  life  for  the  poverty-stricken  families  of 
drinkers.  However  large  this  proportion 
would  be — whether  one-half,  two-thirds 
or  a  larger  or  smaller  percentage  of  the 
entire  $800,000,000  or  $1,000,000,000 
now  wasted  for  liquor, — immense  sums 
would  necessarily  be  added  to  those  now 
expended  for  the  farmer's  products. 
Besides  enabling  the  farmer  to  save  what 
he  is  now  forced  to  spend  for  the  support 
of  the  liquor  traffic  and  its  criminals, 
paupers.  Courts,  jails,  etc.,  Prohibition 
would  increase  the  market  for  his  goods 
and  swell  his  receipts. 

Fermentation. — The  chemical  phe- 
nomenon presented  by  the  so-called  spon- 
taneous decomposition  of  organic  mat- 
ter. Any  organic  substance,  acted  on  by 
water,  air  and  warmth — especially  when 
macerated  so  as  to  facilitate  the  decay  of 
its  particles — soon  begins  to  bubble  or 
effervesce;  its  chemical  composition 
changes,  gas  escapes  and  new  substances 
are  formed.  There  are  several  stages 
and  varieties  of  fermentatio.n :  the  sach- 
arine,  by  which  starch  is  converted  into 
sugar;  the  vinous,  changing  sugar  into 
alcohol;  the  acetic,  transforming  alcohol 
into  acetic  acid  or  vinegar,  and  the  pu- 
trefactive, converting  nitrogenous  or- 
ganic matter  into  putrid  substances.  A 
strictly  scientific  discussion  of  fermenta- 
tion, its  complex  chemical  aspects  and 
the  various  theories  advanced  by  differ- 
ent investigators,  does  not  fall  within  the 
scope  of  this  v.'ork. 

Vinous  fermentation  is  the  representa- 
tive stage.  Any  newly-extracted  fruit 
juice — as  of  grapes,  apples,  pears,  etc. — 
will,  if  left  exposed  to  the  air,  gradually 
begin  to  ferment.  Bubbles  appear  on  the 
surface,  caused  by  the  generation  of  car- 
bonic acid  gas.  The  escape  of  this  gas  is 
accompanied  by  the  accumulation  of  a 
scum  or  yeast,  which  increases  Avhile  the 
ebullition  in  the  liquid  becomes  more 
active.  When  finally  the  ebullition  ceases 
the  work  of  vinous  fermentation  is  com- 


Fermentation.] 


17. 


[Finch,  John  Bird. 


pleted,  the  yeast  is  deposited  at  the  bot- 
tom and  the  liquid  lias  lost  its  sweetish 
taste  and  innocuous  qualities  and  becomes 
an  alcoholic  and  intoxicating  liquor. 
The  change  is  due  to  the  conversion  of 
the  grape-sugar  of  the  fresh  juice,  by 
chemical  action,  into  carbonic  acid  gas 
and  alcohol.  This  change  is  indicated 
with  substantial  correctness  by  the  fol- 
lowing formula: 

CgH.eOfi       =     2  CO.,     +     2C,HfiO. 

Orape-tiugar.     Carbonic  Acid.      Alcohol. 

The  decomposition  of  the  grape-sugar  into 
these  elements  is  brought  about  by  the 
chemical  action  of  the  yeast  slowly  gene- 
rated in  the  natural  process  of  fermenta- 
tion; hence  if  a  quantity  of  yeast  be 
thrown  into  the  fermenting  liquor  the 
fermentation  will  be  greatly  accelerated. 
To  produce  the  vinous  fermentation  and 
obtain  an  alcoholic  decoction,  it  is  neces- 
sary that  the  substance  to  be  fermented 
sliall  (1)  contain  a  sufficient  percentage 
of  grape-sugar;  (2)  shall  contain  water  to 
dissolve  the  grape-sugar;  (3)  shall  be 
under  a  temperature  not  too  low  or  too 
high  to  arrest  fermentation — preferably 
a  temperature  of  from  68*^  to  75'^  F. ; 
(-1-)  shall  be  capable  of  generating  a  suffi- 
cient quantity  of  yeast,  and  (5)  shall  be 
exposed  to  the  air.  Substances  weak  in 
sugar  or  in  constituents  capable  of  con- 
version into  sugar  yield  but  little  alcohol. 
Cereals  containing  large  percentages  of 
starch,  by  special  treatment  become  rich 
in  sugar,  the  starch  being  transformed 
into  grajie-sugar  by  a  species  of  fermen- 
tation ;  and  thus  cereals  are  equally  avail- 
able with  fruits  for  tlie  production  of  in- 
toxicating liquors  -  in  fact  are  used  to  a 
much  greater  extent,  because  their  culti- 
vation on  a  large  scale  is  comparatively 
easier  and  because  the  beverages  made 
from  thflm  are  relatively  cheaper. 

Since  the  oxygen  of  the  air  is  an  indis- 
pensable element  of  successful  vinous  fer- 
mentation, freshly-expressed  juices  can 
be  preserved  in  the  unfermented  form  by 
jilacing  them  in  carefully  sealed  vessels. 
The  sealing  process  is  essential  to  the  pres- 
ervation of  "unfermented  wine."  The 
successful  preservation  of  canned  fruits 
is  due  to  the  same  circumstance — the  ex- 
clusion of  the  air. 

After  the  completion  of  the  vinous  fer- 
mentation the  alcoholic  product  is  guard- 
ed against  further  chemical  change  by 
storing  it  in  closed  barrels,  bottles,  etc., 


to  which  the  air  does  not  have  access.  Con- 
tinued exposure  of  wine,  cider,  etc.,  to  the 
air  would  gradually  cause  its  conversion, 
under  the  influence  of  another  fermenta- 
tion, into  vinegar.  This  is  true,  however, 
of  fermented  liquors  only:  beiiig  com- 
paratively weak  in  alcohol  they  are  readily 
oxidized.  A  wine,  no  matter  how  fine,  or 
a  beer,  however  carefully  prepared,  will 
become  sour,  flat  and  wholly  unpalatable 
if  left  unsealed  for  any  considerable  length 
of  time.  Distilled  spirits,  however,  being 
strong  in  alcohol  are  not  easily  changed  by 
oxygen,  although  under  certain  processes 
(with  suitable  conditions  of  temperature) 
pure  alcohol  can  be  oxidized  into  vinegar, 
and  in  practice  much  of  the  vinegar  of 
commerce  is  made  from  alcohol  direct. 

Fermented  Liquors. — See  Malt 
Liquors  and  Vinous  Liquors. 

Finch,  John  Bird. — Born  in  Linck- 
laen,  N.  Y.,  March  17,  1852,  and  died 
in  Boston,  Mass.,  Oct.  3,  1887.  Owing 
to  poor  health  he  did  not  attend  school 
until  ten  years  of  age.  He  taught  for 
several  years  and  was  at  one  time  princi- 
pal of  Union  School  at  Smyrna,  N.  Y. 
In  1871,  at  the  age  of  19,  he  was  married 
to  Retta  Coy,  who  died  four  years  later, 
Feb.  20,  1875.  Li  May,  1876,  he  married 
Frances  E.  Manchester.  He  studied  law 
and  was  admitted  to  practice  at  the  bar 
at  the  age  of  24.  When  15  years  old  he 
joined  the  Good  Templars,  and  early  in 
life  he  was  made  Grand  Lodge  Lecturer 
for  the  State  of  New  York.  In  1877  he 
removed  to  Lincoln,  Neb.,  and  lectured 
in  the  interests  of  the  Red  Ribbon  move- 
ment, securing  100,000  signers  of  the 
jiledge  in  12  months.  In  the  fall  of  1878 
he  gave  62  successive  lectures  in  Omaha, 
14,000  persons  signing  tlie  pledge  and  six 
Good  Templar  Lodges,  three  Red  Ribbon 
Clubs  and  one  Temple  of  Honor  being 
formed.  He  also  addressed  the  Nebraska 
Legislature  in  compliance  with  a  joint 
resolution  passed  by  both  Houses.  In 
1878  he  was  elected  Grand  Worthy  Coun- 
selor of  the  Nebraska  Grand  Lodge  bv 
the  Good  Templars,  and  the  next  year 
was  made  Grand  Worthy  Chief  Templar 
of  that  State.  In  1884  he  Avas  elected 
Right  Worthy  Grand  Templar  of  the 
Order  in  the  United  States,  and  he  set  to 
work  to  reunite  the  two  factions  into 
which   it   had   split   in    1876.     In   May, 


Finch,  John  Bird.] 


17  G 


[Fisk,  Clinton  Bowen. 


1887,  after  three  years  of  ceaseless  labor, 
he  saw  this  union  accomplished  at  a  con- 
vention at  Saratoga,  N.  Y.  Originally  a 
Democrat,  Mr.  Finch,  in  1880,  united 
witli  the  Prohibition  party;  and  he  be- 
came one  of  its  most  active  champions 
and  beyond  comparison  its  ablest  and 
most  judicious  leader.  In  1884  he  Avas 
elected  Chairman  of  the  National  Prohibi- 
tion Committee;  and  despite  his  fre- 
quently-expressed desire  to  retire  he  re- 
tained that  position  until  his  death.  On 
the  night  of  Oct.  3,  1887,  he  made  a 
speech  at  Lynn,  Mass.,  and  afterward 
took  the  train  to  Boston,  11  miles  dis- 
tant. As  he  stepped  from  the  car  to 
the  platform  in  the  Boston  depot,  he 
dropped  dead  from  heart  disease. 

Mr.  Finch's  addresses  were  remarkable 
for  eloquence  and  force.  His  debate 
with  Dio  Lewis  on  "Prohibition,"  and 
his  masterly  reply  to  D.  Bethune  Duffield 
at  Detroit,  are  among  the  best.  His 
book,  "  The  People  v.  the  Liquor  Traf- 
fic "  (New  York,  1887),  embraces  several 
of  these  addresses,  and  is  numbered 
among  the  standard  works  on  the  ques- 
tion of  Prohibition.  As  a  platform 
speaker  he  possessed  superb  powers,  and 
the  undivided  judgment  of  competent 
observers  pronounced  him  by  far  the 
greatest  of  all  political  Prohibition  ora- 
tors, in  the  same  sense  that  Gough  was 
the  greatest  of  moral  suasion  advocates. 
He  had  a  remarkably  handsome  face, 
strong  but  kind ;  a  noble  bearing,  a  very 
generous  and  magnanimous  disposition 
and  an  unflinching  will.  His  executive 
capacity  was  of  a  high  order,  and  his 
plans  i'or  promoting  tlie  interests  that 
he  had  in  charge  seldom  or  never  failed 
— at  all  events  were  never  seriously  op- 
posed by  his  associates.  Yet  he  carried 
his  projects  by  tact  and  not  by  force. 
Though  an  unbending  champion  of  the 
most  radical  Prohibition  policy,  he  recog- 
nized the  importance  of  educational 
work,  and  through  all  the  exciting  Pro- 
hibition campaigns  he  consistently  per- 
formed his  duty  as  the  head  of  the  Good 
Templar  Order.  Like  many  extreme 
Prohibitionists  he  did  not  at  first  foresee 
the  dangers  that  would  result  from  en- 
couraging High  License  and  other  com- 
promise legislation.  He  was  one  of  the 
framers  of  the  Nebraska  High  License 
law  and  did  as  much  as  any  man  to  place 
it   on    the    statute-books.     Yet    he  was 


quick  to  admit  its  utter  failure  as  a  tem- 
perance act,  and  he  repudiated  the  High 
License  idea  entirely.  He  steadily  re- 
fused to  become  a  candidate  for  office. 
There  is  no  doubt  that  his  untimely 
death  was  due  to  excessive  labor  in  the 
Prohibition  movement:  though  he  had 
been  warned  repeatedly  by  his  physicians 
and  had  suffered  from  alarming  attacks 
of  heart  disease,  he  could  not  be  persuaded 
to  abate  his  energies.  The  news  of  his 
death  stunned  the  temperance  public, 
and  the  greatest  grief  was  manifested 
throughout  the  country.  His  widow, 
with  the  co-operation  of  his  co-laborer, 
Frank  J,  Sibley,  has  published  an  interest- 
ing and  valuable  history  of  his  career. 
("  John  B.  Finch,"  New  York,  1888.) 

Fisk,  Clinton  Bowen,  fifth  candi- 
date of  the  Prohibition  party  for  Presi- 
dent of  the  United  States  ;  born  in 
Griggsville,  Livingston  County,  N.  Y., 
Dec.  8,  1828,  and  died  in  New  York, 
July  9,  1890.  His  father,  a  blacksmith, 
removed  to  Michigan  in  1830,  believing 
that  his  five  sons,  of  whom  Clinton  was 
the  youngest,  would  have  a  better  chance 
in  life  in  the  newer  country.  But  two 
years  after  the  removal  he  died,  and  each 
son  as  he  became  old  enough  was  put  out 
to  earn  his  own  living.  At  the  age  of 
nine,  Clinton  was  bound  to  a  farmer  to 
serve  until  21,  his  recompense  to  be  a 
horse,  a  saddle,  a  bridle,  two  suits  of 
clothes,  $200  and  three  months'  schooling 
each  year.  After  a  few  years  of  service 
his  release  was  procured  and  the  next  ten 
years  were  spent  in  hard  work  and  study. 
He  mastered  considerable  Latin  unaided. 
When  he  was  13  his  mother  married 
again,  but  just  as  preparations  had  been 
made  to  send  him  to  Wesleyan  Seminary, 
at  Albion,  Mich.,  his  step-father  died. 
He  removed  with  his  mother  to  Albion 
and  studied  and  taught  until  his  eye-sight 
failed  him,  and  he  v/as  obliged  to  give  up 
further  thoughts  of  education.  He  be- 
gan business  life  with  L.  D.  Crippen,  the 
leading  merchant  and  banker  of  Cold- 
water,  Mich.,  and  in  1850  was  married  to 
Mr.  Crippen's  daughter.  In  the  financial 
crises  of  1857  Mr.  Fisk  lost  most  of  his 
property  because  of  his  determination 
that  his  bank  should  pay  dollar  for  dollar 
instead  of  suspending.  In  1858  he  re- 
moved to  St.  Louis,  Mo.,  and  became 
Western  Financial  Agent  of  the  Etna  In- 


Fisk,  Clinton  Bowen.] 


177 


[Fisk,  Wilbur. 


siirance  Company.     At  the  outbreak  of 
the  Civil  War  he  enlisted  as  a   private 
soldier  for  three  mouths.     Wheu  the  St. 
liouis      Merchants'     Exchange     seemed 
likely  to  exert  its  influence  for  the  Con- 
federacy he  organized  a  rival  Exchange, 
the  Union   Merchants'  Exchange,  which 
soon  swallowed  up  the  old  organization. 
In  July,  ISG'l,  he  set  about  recruiting  a 
regiment,  which  was  soon  at  the  front. 
fjHter,  he  organized  a  brigade,  and  on  Nov. 
•i4,  1802,  he  was  commissioned  Brigadier- 
(Tcneral.     He   was   fo<r  some   months  in 
command   of    South-east    Missouri    and 
afterward   of   the  district  of  St.   Louis. 
Witli  a  small  force  he  repelled  the  attack 
made  upon  Jefferson  City  by  JVIarmaduke 
and  Shelby,  and   made  them  prisoners. 
In  February,  18G5,  he  was  commissioned 
Major-General   of  the   Missouri   militia, 
and   a   month   later   was    made    Major- 
(leneral   by   brevet,    "for    faithful    and 
meritorious    services    during    the   war." 
From  May,  18G5,  until  September,   1866, 
lie   was    Assistant-Commissioner    of  the 
Freedmen's  Bureau,  and  was  in  charge  of 
Kentucky,  Tennessee  and  parts  of  Ala- 
bama,   Arkansas   and    Mississippi.     The 
Fisk    University   for  colored   youth  was 
founded    at    Nashville,     Tenn.,    largely 
through  his  instrumentality.     Since  his 
resignation  from  the  army  in  the  fall  of 
1 866  he  was  engaged  until  his  death  in 
railroad  management  and   the   banking 
business.  He  was  for  eight  years  Treasurer 
of  the  Missouri  and  Pacific  Railroad  Com- 
pany.    A   Republican   in  politics  up  to 
1884,  Gen.   Fisk  that  year  gave  his  sup- 
port to  ex-Governor  St.  John,  the  Presi- 
dential   candidate    of    the    Prohibition 
party.     In  1886  he  was  the  candidate  of 
the   Prohibition   party   for  Governor  of 
New   Jersey.     During   the  campaign  he 
made  1"25  speeches,  traveling  5,000  miles, 
and   never  missed  an  engagement.     He 
received    19,808    votes,    three    times    as 
many  as  had  been  polled  by  St.  John  in 
New  Jersey  in  1884.     On   May  30,  1888, 
he  was  nominated  for  President  of  the 
United  States  by  the  Prohibition  Conven- 
tion at  Indianapolis.     His  personal  po^ju- 
larity,   high    character    and    recognized 
ability    contributed    materially     to    the 
strength  of  the  party.     His  feeble  health 
prevented  him  from  taking  a  very  active 
part  in  the  canvass,  but  he  made  a  few 
speeches.     His  aggregate   vote  in  the  na- 
tion reached  249,945.     After  the  election 


he  exhibited  undiminished  interest  in  the 
Prohibition  cause.  He  was  one  of  the 
most  generous  contributors  to  the  move- 
ment, made  numerous  speeches  in  Con- 
stitutional Prohibition  and  Local  Option 
campaigns,  and  heartily  supported  Gospel 
temperance  and  similar  work.  He  was 
active  and  prominent  in  other  good 
causes.  As  a  youth  and  young  man  he 
was  a  devoted  Abolitionist,  and  played  a 
part  in  "  Underground  Railroad  "  enter- 
prises. He  was  appointed  by  President 
Grant  a  member  of  the  Board  of  Indian 
Commissioners  and  was  immediately 
elected  President  of  the  Board;  and  he 
held  the  posit^ki  until  his  death.  He 
was  the  moat  Jm)minent  lay  member  of 
the  Methodiist  Episcopal.  Church  in  the 
United  vStates.  In  1874  hte  was  chosen 
delegate  to  the  General  Conference  at 
Louisville,  Ky.,  where,  for  the  first  time 
since  the  Civil  War,  the  Northern  and 
Southern  branches  of  the  church  ex- 
changed greetings.  He  became  a  member 
of  the  Methodist  Book  Committee  in 
1876  and  in  1881  was  appointed  delegate 
to  the  Ecumenical  Council  in  London. 
He  delivered  the  address  on  missions  be- 
fore the  Centennial  Methodist  Assemblage 
in  Baltimore  in  1884.  He  was  also  a 
member  of  the  Board  of  Managers  of  the 
American  Missionary  Association,  and 
Avas  identified  with  a  large  number  of  lo- 
cal  religious,  educational  and  charitable 
interests. 

Fisk,  Wilbur. — Born  in  Brattleboro, 

Vt.,  Aug.  31,  1792,  and  died  in  Middle- 
town,  Conn.,  Feb. '22,  1839,  Graduating 
from  Brown  University  in  1815  he 
studied  law,  but  afterwards  abandoned  it 
for  the  Christian  ministry.  In  1825  he 
w^as  chosen  the  first  principal  of  Wilbra- 
ham  Academy,  at  Wilbraham,  Mass ,  and 
in  1830  was  elected  the  first  President  of 
Wesleyan  University.  In  the  agitation 
for  freeing  the  Methodist  Episcopal 
Church  from  all  complicity  with  the 
liquor  traffic  and  from  all  fellowship  with 
liquor-traffickers,  he  took  a  very  radical 
stand,  and  in  consequence  encountered 
strong  opposition  and  even  misrepresen- 
tation and  persecution.  The  CJiristiaii 
Advocate  at  first  antagonized  him,  but 
afterwards  changed  its  attitude.  The 
fear  of  the  over-cautious  was  that  if  un- 
compromising hostility  to  the  liquor 
trade  were  made  a  test  of  church  mem- 


Florida.] 


178 


[Flournoy,  Josiah. 


bership,  there  would  be  a  si)lit  in  the  de- 
nomination, but  Dr.  Fisk  did  not  permit 
such  a  possibility  to  restrain  him.  To  a 
member  of  the  church  who  sought  to 
dissuade  him  from  making  a  radical  tem- 
perance address,  he  replied :  "  Sir,  if  the 
church  stands  on  rum,  let  it  go." 

The  following  is  an  extract  from  a 
speech  made  by  him  in  1S32 : 

"  My  Christian  brother,  if  you  saw  this  trade 
as  I  believe  God  sees  it,  you  would  sooner  beg 
your  hvc'dd  from  door  to  door  than  gain  money 
by  f-uch  a  traffic.  The  Christian's  dramshop  ! 
Sound  it  to  yourself.  How  does  it  strike  your 
ear?  It  is  doubtless  a  choice  gem  in  the  phrase- 
book  of  Satan!  But  how  paradoxical!  How 
shocking  to  the  ear  of  the  Christian!  How  of- 
fensive to  the  ear  of  deity!  Why.  the  dram- 
shop is  the  recruiting  rendezvous  of  hell!  And 
shall  a  Christian  consent  to  be  the  recruiting 
officer  ?  .  .  .  Say  not,  if  you  do  not  sell, 
others  will.  Must  you  be  an  ally  of  Satan  and 
a  destroyer  of  your  race  because  others  are? 
Say  not,  if  you  do  not  sell,  it  will  injure  your 
business  and  prevent  your  supporting  your 
family.  It  was  said  by  one  that  '  such  a  state- 
ment is  a  libel  upon  "the  divine  government.' 
Must  you,  indeed,  deal  out  ruin  to  your  fellow- 
men,  or  starve?  Then  starve  !  It  would  be  a 
glorious  martyrdom  contrasted  with  the  other 
alternative.  ".  .  .  The  church  must  free 
herself  from  this  whole  business  It  is  all  a  sin- 
ful work,  with  which  Christians  should  have 
nothing  to  do,  only  to  drive  it  from  the  sacred 
enclosures  of  the  church,  and,  if  possible,  from 
the  earth." 

Florida. — See  Index. 

Flournoy,  Josiah. — Born  in  Vir- 
ginia in  1790,  and  died  in  1842.  He 
removed  to  Georgia  when  young,  and  was 
so  successful  in  business  pursuits  that  he 
became  the  owner  of  a  large  plantation 
near  Eatontown.  As  a  temperance  leader 
he  is  remembered  for  his  connection  with 
the  Georgia  agitation  of  1839  known  as 
the  Flournoy  Movement,  whose  object 
was  to  secure  the  abolition  by  the  State 
Legislature  of  the  liquor  license  laws.  In 
the  spring  of  1839  a  meeting  of  citizens 
of  Putnam  County,  Ga.,  through  a  com- 
mittee of  which  Mr.  Flournoy  was  a 
member,  issued  an  address  to  the  people 
of  Georgia,  published  in  the  Atlanta 
Chrisftan  Index  for  March  21,  1839,  ask- 
ing whether  the  evil  of  the  legalized 
liquor  traffic  *'  ought  not  to  be  extermi- 
nated." A  })etition  to  the  State  Legisla- 
ture was  published  in  the  Index  in  March 
of  the  same  year,  signed  by  about  300 
citizens  of  the  county.  It  contained  the 
following  words : 


'•  The  undersigned,  citizens  of  this  State,  be- 
lieving that  the  retail  of  spirituous  liquors  is 
an  evil  of  great  magnitude  among  us,  come  to 
the  Legislature  by  petition  and  ask  you,  in  your 
wisdom,  to  pass  such  a  law  as  will  effectually 
put  a  stop  to  it.  .  .  .  Your  petitioners  come 
with  th'>  more  confidence  because  several  States 
in  this  Union  have  already  passed  such  a  law  as 
to  make  penal  the  retailing  of  intoxicating 
drinks." 

Mr.  Flournoy  canvassed  the  State  for 
signatures  to  the  petition,  visiting  nearly 
every  part  of  the  commonwealth.  His 
example  aroused  the  people  and  public 
meetings  were  called  everywhere.  When 
it  became  apparent  from  the  indifference 
of  the  politicians  that  the  Legislature 
would  probably  disrega^'d  the  petition, 
some  of  the  petitioners  began  to  nomi- 
nate independent  legislative  candidates. 
The  political  aspect  which  the  movement 
now  took  on  commanded  the  attention 
of  partisan  leaders  and  newspapers,  and 
in  the  contest  for  Governor,  which  was 
decided  by  a  majority  of  only  a  few  hun- 
dreds, party  spirit  ran  high.  Shortly  be- 
fore the  election  the  success  of  the  peti- 
tioners seemed  certain,  but  the  politicians 
appealed  to  prejudice  by  declaring 
that  party  interests  were  endangered,  and 
the  popular  movement  was  checked.  The 
Legislature  refused  to  act.  Mr.  Flour- 
noy's  deatli,  which  occurred  soon  after, 
was  attributed  to  disappointment  at  the 
defeat  of  the  caitse.  This  was  one  of  the 
first  agitations  conducted  on  political 
lines.  The  encouraging  and  discouraging 
conditions  were  thus  alluded  to  by  Mr. 
Flournoy : 

•'  I  have  addressed  thousands  in  public  meet- 
ings, and  spoken  to  hundreds  in  private.  1  find 
thenuml)erof  those  who  favor  the  plan  of  a 
law  to  banish  the  tippling-shops  from  the  land 
to  be  as  eight  or  nine  in  ten.  No  proposition 
can  be  offered  to  the  citizens  of  Georgia  that 
will  meet  with  the  same  unanimity,  nor  any  ten 
combined  can  produce  the  same  good.  I  have 
just  returned  from  a  trip  of  ten  days  to  the 
South.  In  one  of  the  lower  counties  I  believe 
every  man  would  sign  our  petition,  and  no- 
where, even  among  the  worst  drunkards,  do  I 
meet  with  opposition.  I  find  luore  difiiculty 
with  men  who  call  themselves  politicians  than 
any  others  ;  as  a  class  they  are  least  to  be  ex- 
pected to  do  anything  to  promote  the  morality 
of  the  country.  With  a  few  exceptions,  they 
seem  desirous  to  keep  back  all  that  would  ele- 
vate the  great  mass  of  society,  I  suppose,  for 
fear  they  will  lose  their  own  importance  I 
freely  warn  them  that  the  man  who  opposes 
this  law,  and  knows  what  he  is  doing  at  the 
same  time,  will  deserve  and  receive  th3  anath- 
emas of  the  country.  He  is  one  who  for  his 
own  honor's  exaltation  could  drink  the  tears  of 


Food.] 


1T9 


[Food. 


female  suffering  and  eat  the  bread  of  starving 
children." 

Food. — Is  alcohol  a  food  ?  The  ques- 
tion is  touched  upon  by  Dr.  B.  W.  Rich- 
ardson in  his  able  article  in  this  work. 
(See  Alcohol,  Effects  of.)  The  subject 
is  very  thoroughly  discussed  in  his  cele- 
brated "Ten  Lectures  on  Alcohol"  (New 
York,  1883,  pp.  94-122).  The  funda- 
mental considerations  which  must  precede 
any  inquiry  are  thus  admirably  outlined 
by  him  (pp.  95-7) : 

"  The  earth  yieMs  spontaneously  to  man, 
either  from  herself  directl}"^  or  from  the  vege- 
table kingdom  which  lies  between  her  and  man, 
all  ihe  requirements  for  his  existence.  What- 
ever, therefore,  man  invents,  though  it  may 
seem  to  be  a  great  necessity,  is  not  a  necessity 
except  to  those  who,  being  trained  to  its  use, 
have  been  led  artificially  to  believe  it  essential. 
Thus  nature  has  produced  water  and  milk  for 
man  to  drink,  and  they  are,  in  tntth,  all  the  flu- 
ids that  are  essential.  This  lesson,  which  na- 
ture treats  by  her  rule  of  provision  for  the  ne 
cessities  of  animal  life,  is  supplemented  by 
many  other  facts,  each  equally  authoritative. 
There  is  ever  before  us  ihe  great  experiment 
that  all  cla.sses  of  living  beings  beneath  man 
re  luire  as  drink  none  other  fluids  except  those 
Ihave  named.  We  see  the  most  useful  ot  these 
animals  performing  laborious  tasks,  undergoing 
extremes  of  fatigue,  bearing  vici-ssitudes  of  heat 
and  of  cold,  and  enduring  work,  fatigue  and 
vicissitudes  for  long  series  of  years,  sustained 
by  tneir  solid  food  with  no  other  fluid  than 
simple  water.  We  see  again  whole  nations  and 
races  of  men  who  labor  hard,  endure  fatigue 
and  exposure,  and  who  live  to  the  end  of  a  long 
and  healthy  life,  taking  with  their  solid  suste- 
nance water  only  as  a  beverage 

"  When  we  turn  to  the  physiological  construc- 
tion of  man  or  of  a  lower  animal,  we  discover 
nothing  that  can  lead  us  to  conceive  the  neces 
sity  for  any  other  fluid  than  that  which  nature 
has  supplied.  The  mass  of  the  blood  is  com- 
posed of  water,  the  mass  of  the  nervous  .'•ystem 
is  composed  of  water,  the  mass  of  all  the  active 
vital  organs  is  made  up  of  the  same  fluid  :  the 
secretions  are  watery  fluids,  and  if  in  any  of 
thtse  parts  any  other  agent  than  water  shoulel 
replace  it  the  result  is  au  instant  disturbance  of 
function  that  is  injurious  in  proportion  to  the 
displacement. 

"  When  we  turn  therefore  to  the  use  of  such 
a  fluid  as  alcohol  under  any  of  its  disguises — as 
spirit,  as  wine,  as  beer,  as  cider  as  perry,  as 
liqueur — we  are  driven  a  priori  to  look  upon  it 
as  something  superadded  to  the  necessities  of 
life,  to  look  upon  it,  in  a  word,  as  a  luxury.  In 
such  sense  it  has  always  been  received  amongst 
those  nations  which  have  most  ineiulgeel  in  it. 
It  is  something  added  to  the  ordinary  life, 
something  unnecessary  but  agreeable.  Wine, 
added  to  the  meal,  transforms  the  meal  into  a 
feast;  it  is  supposed  to  make  glad  the  heart,  but 
it  is  never  supposed  that  if  the  wine  were  not 
possesseel  the  life  would  be  shortened.  When 
now  we  offer  wine  it  is,  by  the  effect  of  habit 


and  education,  an  offering  of  a  thing  that  is 
siiper-uecer-sitous  and  in  such  wise  a  compli- 
ment, au  indication  of  a  desire  or  of  willingness 
to  be  exceedingly  hospitable. 

"All  the  evidence  of  u  general  kind  which 
can  be  gathered  from  these  observations  points 
to  the  uselessness.  for  man,  of  such  an  artificial 
agent  as  alcohol." 

The  main  conclusion  drawn  from  these 
general  truths  is  no  longer  very  seriously 
questioned  among  scientists.  The  claim 
is  still  championed  that  alcohol  has  some 
food  value,  but  always  cautiously  and 
with  material  qualifications.  Dr.  William 
A.  Hammond,  as  the  result  of  experiments 
performed  upon  himself,  says:  "There 
are  two  facts  which  cannot  be  laid  aside, 
and  these  are  that  the  body  gained  in 
weight  and  that  the  excretions  were 
diminished  when  alcoholic  fluids  were 
taken.  These  phenomena  were  doubt- 
less due  to  the  following  causes:  (l)the 
restoration  of  the  decay  of  the  tissues ; 
(2)  the  diminution  in  the  consunn> 
tion  of  fat  in  the  body,  and  (3)  the 
increase  of  the  assimilative  powers  of  the 
system,  by  which  the  food  was  more 
completely  appropriated  and  applied  to 
the  formation  of  tissues.  After  such 
results  are  we  not  justified  in  regarding 
alcohol  as  food  ?  If  it  is  not  food,  what 
is  it  ?"!■  Dr.  Hammond's  testimony  that 
alcohol  in  a  single  case  under  certain 
conditions  increased  the  weight  of  the 
body,  of  course  has  no  decisive  bearing; 
and  even  if  it  did  have,  it  might  be  ques- 
tioned whether  the  increased  weight  were 
not  due  to  deleterious  rather  than  benefi- 
cial action  of  the  alcohol  in  arresting  the 
legitimate  decomposition  of  tissue.  It  is 
generally  recognized  by  physicians  that 
the  apparently  florid  health  of  beer- 
drinkers  is  misleading.  "The  beer-drink- 
er," says  Dr.  T.  Lauder  Brunton  ("  Book 
of  Health,"  London,  1883),  "has  a  ten- 
dency to  become  fat  and  bloated  at  one 
time,  although  he  may  afterwards  become 
thin  and  emaciated,  from  his  digestion 
also  suffering  like  that  of  the  spirit- 
drinker.  Notwithstanding  the  apparent 
stoutness  and  strength  of  beer-drinkers, 
they  are  by  no  means  healthy.  Injuries 
which  to  other  people  would  be  but 
slight,  are  apt  to  prove  serious  in  them ; 
and  when  it  is  necessary  to  perform  sur- 
gical operations  upon  them  the  risk  of 
death  is  very  much  greater  than  in  others." 

'  Address  before  the  New  York  Neurological  Society, 

1«74. 


Food.]                                                  180  [Foreigners. 

Among   the   most   emphatic   opinions  entire   abandonment    of    alcohol    as    an 

concerning  the   nutritive   properties    of  article  of  diet,  the  moral  and  other  pow- 

alcohol,  that  of   the  great  German  chem-  erful  reasons  against  indulgence  in  alcohol 

ist  Liebig   is   jnstly    celebrated.     "  If  a  certainly    urge   with  great    strength  the 

man  drinks  daily  eight  or  ten  quarts  of  view  that  its  toleration  as  a  supposed  food 

the  best  Bavarian  beer,"  said  he,  *'  in  the  or  food-adjunct  has  become  altogether  in- 

course  of  12  months  he  will    have  taken  admissible.     The  acceptance  of  this  view 

into    his  system   the   nutritive    constit-  involves  the  responsibility  of  discounte- 

uents  contained    in  a  five-pound  loaf  of  nancing  by  every  means  the  use  of  alcohol 

bread."     And  again  Liebig  said:    "Wine  for  all  the  numerous  pseudo-food  purposes 

is  quite  superfluous  to  man.     ...     It  to  which  it  is  still  applied  by  the  creduli- 

is  constantly  followed  by  expenditure  of  ty  of  the  masses — especially  of  combating 

power."      Yet   Liebig  was  the  originator  the    fallacy    (so    widespread   among  the 

of  the  theory  that  alcohol  yields  heat  and  poor)   that  it  gives  strength  to  nursing 

force,  and  is  therefore  a  respiratory  food  mothers,  of  discoiiraging  resort  to  it  as  a 

— a  theory  that  has   been  the  ground  for  protection  against  cold,  and  of  entirely 

much  contention,  out  of  which  have  been  banishing  it  from  the  domestic  economy 

developed  various  other  theories  support-  as  a  culinary  agent, 
ing  the    general   claim  that  alcohol,  in 

some  way  and  to  some  extent  (howevi^r  Foreigners. — The  foreign-born  pop- 
limited),  performs  the  part  of  a  food,  if  ulation  of  the  United  States  has  been 
only  accessorily.  regarded  as  the  bulwark  of  the  opposi- 

These  battles  of  the  scientists,  how-  tion  to  temperance  reform  and  Prohibi- 
ever,  relate  to  theory  far  more  than  to  tion.  Well-nigh  all  the  adopted  citizens 
practice.  Even  those  who  cling  most  of  this  country  come  from  nations  where 
tenaciously  to  earlier  doctrines  declare  drink  and  the  drink  traffic  are  in  no  im- 
that  the  virtues  which  they  still  claim  for  portant  respects  discriminated  against  by 
alcohjl  are  virtues  only  under  certain  public  sentiment,  by  widespread  organi- 
carefully-guarded  conditions.  No  I'epu-  zations  or  by  legislation.  The  masses  of 
table  scientific  writer  ventures  at  this  day  these  people  have  acquired  but  little  educa- 
to  commend  alcohol  as  a  food  with  the  tion,  have  no  adequate  perception  of  the 
confidence  and  positiveness  exhibited  unmitigated  evil  of  drink,  and  are  exceed- 
when  the  belief  in  its  powers  was  nniver-  ingly  jealous  of  their  personal  rights,  real 
sal.  The  commendation  is  now  defen-  and  supposed.  Becoming  residents  and 
give  and  not  aggressive.  The  practical  naturalized  citizens  of  a  country  where 
experience  of  mankind  demonstrates  with  the  temperance  reform  is  carried  on  with 
constantly  increasing  impressiveness  the  zeal  and  radicalism,  they  are  not  willing 
negative  of  the  food  proposition.  When-  converts  to  a  movement  whose  rationale 
ever  great  feats  of  endurance,  skill,  resist-  is  unfamiliar  to  them.  It  is  natural  for 
ance  to  cold  or  heat,  etc.,  are  to  be  per-  the  large  majority  of  them  to  support  the 
formed — as  in  pedestrian  matches,  bil-  liquor  traffic  when  its  right  to  exist  is 
Hard  contests,  Arctic  voyages,  labor  in  questioned;  and  this  natural  disposition 
the  tropics,  etc., — total  abstinence  from  is  strengthened  by  the  counsels  and  in- 
alcohol  is  found  to  promote  success,  flnence  of  the  newspapers  printed  in  their 
Could  this  be  the  case  if  alcohol  were  a  native  tongues  and  of  such  of  their  com- 


as' 


legitimate  contributor  to  the  better  capa-  patriots  as   have  mastered  the  practical 

bilities  of  the  human  body  ?     With  the  methods  of  American  politics, 

verdict  wholly  made  up  against  alcohol  as  There   are   no   official   records  of  the 

a    necessary     agent    for    improving  the  numbers  of  immigrants  arriving  in  the 

welfare  of  the  physical  nature,  the  can-  United  States  previously  to   1820.     The 

tious    defensive   pleas  against  utter  and  following  table  shows  the  yearly  immigra- 

indiscriminate  condemnation  of    alcohol  tion  from  1820  to  1889: 
on  physiological  grounds  are  more  and 
more  regarded  as  belonging  peculiarly  to 

the  domain  of  hypothetical  discussion.         isfo'.'.'."^. 8,3S5 

Understanding,  then,   that   the   testi-  isda!!!.'!.'!!!'.."!.'."!     <5',!iii 

monyof  science  sanctions  (if  it  does  not     js^a M54 

yet  with  undivided  voice  command)  the  iso^.'.'.'. .'.'..'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.    lo.iuy 


Yearending  Immi- 

SEIT.  30,  GRANTS. 


Year  ending  Immi- 

SEPT.  30.  GRANTS. 

182(5 10,837 

18:i7 18,875 

1828 27,382 

1829 22,520 

1830 23,322 

1831 22,633 


Foreigners.] 


181 


[Foreigners. 


Year  eniiino  Immi- 

SKI'T.  30.  CUANT!?. 

J8;W (J0,482 

1833 58,040 

1834 65,3ti5 

1835 45,374 

1836 76,34^ 

1837 79,340 

1838 38,914 

1839 ()8,0G9 

1840 84,06() 

1841 80,289 

1842  104,565 

18432 52,49() 

1844 78,(il5 

1815  114,371 

1846 154,416 

1847 234,068 

1848  226,527 

1849 297,024 

18503 369,980 

1851 379,466 

1852 b71,603 

1853  368,645 

1854 427,8:^3 

1855'>   200,877 

1856 195,857 

1857 246,945 

1858 119,501 

1859 118,616 

I860.... 150,237 


Year  ending  Immi- 

tSEPT.  30,  GRANTS. 

1861 89,724 

1862 89,007 

1863  174,.524 

1864 193,195 

1865 247,4.53 

18666 163,.594 

1867 298,967 

1868 282,189 

1869  352,.569 

1870 387,203 

1871 321,350 

1872 404,806 

1873 4.59,803 

1874 .313,339 

1875  227,498 

1876 169,986 

1877 141,857 

1878 138,469 

1879 177,826 

1880 457,257 

1881 669,431 

1882 788,992 

1883 603,322 

1884 518,.592 

1885 39,5,346 

1886 S34,203 

1887 490,109 

1888 .546,889 

1889 444,427 


"  For  15  months  ending  Dec.  31,  1832. 

2  For  9  months  ending  Sept.  .30,  1843. 

a  For  15  months  ending  Dec.  31,  18.50. 

■*  Figures  from  1820  to  1855  inclusive,  are  for  all  foreign 
passengers  (including  visitors,  etc.)  arrived  iu  the  United 
States ;  figures  from  1856  to  1889  are  for  immigrants 
only. 

*  For  six  months  ending  June  30,  1866. 

The  Census  tables  for  1880  show  that 
the  foreigu-born  inhabitants  of  the 
United  States  in  that  year  were  contribu- 
ted by  different  countries  in  the  numbers 
indicated  below: 


Germany 1,966,742 

Ireland 1,854,571 

British  America 717,08-1 

England 662,(i76 

Sweden ]94,;337 

Norway 181,720 

Scotland 170,136 

France 106,971 

China  104,467 

Switzerland 88,621 

Bohemia 8.5,361 

Wales 8.3,302 

Mexico 68,390 

Denmarlv 64,196 

Holland 58,090 

Poland 48,.557 

Italy   44,2;30 

Austria 39,663 


Russia , 

Belgium 

Luxemborg 

Hungary  

West  India 

Portugal 

Cuba 

Spain 

Australia 

South  America. . . . 

India  

Turkey   

Sandwich  Islands. 

Greece 

Central  America... 

Japan 

Malta 

Greenland 


35,722 

15,.585 

12,836 

11, .526 

9,484 

8,138 

6,917 

5,121 

4,906 

4,.566 

1,707 

1,205 

1,147 

776 

77 

401 

305 

129 


The  aliens  have  shown  decided  pref- 
erence for  the  States  of  New  York, 
Pennsylvania,  Massachusetts,  Connecti- 
cut, Ohio,  Michigan,  New  Jersey,  Illinois, 
Wisconsin,  Minnesota  and  California; 
and  85  per  cent,  of  them  have  settled  in 
the  Northern  States. 

An  idea  of  the  strong  preponderance 
of  anti-Prohibition  feeling*  among  nearly 
all  classes  of  the  foreign-born  element  may 
be  obtained  from  a  study  of  the  county 
returns  of  elections  on  "the  question  of 
Constitutional  Prohibition.  In  the  first 
Amendment  contest,  in  the  State  of  Kan- 
sas, the  largest  anti-Prohibition  votes 
came  from  the  counties  bordering  on  the 


Missouri  River,  where  the  foreign  element 
was  strongest ;  and  similarly  in  Iowa,  two 
years  later,  the  river  counties  gave  decis- 
ive majorities  for  the  dramshop.  On  the 
other  hand,  Maine  (containing  a  com- 
paratively small  percentage  of  foreign- 
born  people)  showed  but  an  insignificant 
anti-Prohibition  sentiment.  In  Michigan 
the  majority  for  the  Prohibitory  Amend- 
ment in  82  of  the  83  counties  was  1G,G64; 
but  the  eighty-third  county  (Wayne),  em- 
bracing the  city  of  Detroit  with  its  im- 
mense alien  vote,  showed  a  balance  against 
the  measure  large  enough  to  neutralize 
this  16,6G4  and  leave  a  majority  of  5,645 
for  the  saloon  in  the  entire  State.  Rhode 
Island,  which  adopted  a  Prohibitory 
Amendment  while  the  law  restricting  the 
right  of  suffrage  among  foreign-born 
citizens  was  yet  on  the  statute-books,  re- 
pealed the  Amendment  after  that  re^ 
striction  had  been  removed.  Equally 
striking  instances  might  be  cited  in- 
definitely. 

Nevertheless  much  progress  has  been 
made  by  the  Prohibitionists  toward  culti- 
vating the  favor  of  foreigners.  The  Pro- 
hibition tendency  of  the  Swedes  and 
Norwegians  is  markedly  strong.  Some  of 
their  representative  newspaper  organs 
earnestly  advocate  Prohibitory  law;  and 
in  the  Northwestern  States — Minnesota, 
Wisconsin,  the  Dakotas,  etc., — where  the 
Scandinavians  are  most  numerous,  they 
give  exceedingly  valuable  support  to  the 
cause.  In  fact,  it  is  commonly  admitted 
that  without  the  Scandinavian  vote 
Constitutional  Prohibition  could  not  have 
carried  in  North  Dakota,  The  English, 
AVelsh  and  Scotch-Americans,  coming 
from  countries  where  the  work  of  tem- 
perance education  has  long  been  carried 
on,  exhibit  considerable  sympathy  for  the 
radical  movement-  in  this  country. 
Among  the  Irish  at  large.  Prohibition 
sentiment  makes  but  slow  progress;  yet 
the  aggressive  fight  against  the  liquor 
traffic  waged  by  many  eloquent  and  in- 
fluential Irishmen,  like  Bishops  Ireland 
and  Spalding,  T.  V.  Powderly,  Rev.  J, 
M.  Cleary  and  Father  Mahoney,  and  the 
educational  work  done  by  the  Catholic 
Total  Abstinence  Society,  are  winning 
converts.  The  Hungarians,  Poles,  Ital- 
ians, Bohemians,  French  and  Jews  seem 
to  oppose  the  movement  with  vigor  and 
practical  solidity,  although  encouraging 
exceptions   are  to  be  noted.     The  Hoi- 


Foreigners.] 


183 


[Fraizer,  Samuel. 


landers  appear  to  take  a  friendlier  atti- 
tude. 

Among  the  foreign-born  citizens  of  the 
United  States  none  have  sturdier  char- 
acteristics than  the  Germans.  While 
giving  credit  without  stint  and  most 
cheerfully  and  admiringly  to  the  Ger- 
man people  for  all  the  many  excellent 
traits  that  distinguish  them,  the  Pro- 
hibitionists recognize  that  the  German- 
Americans  as  a  class  constitute  probably 
the  most  formidable  anti-Prohibition 
factor  that  is  to  be  contended  against,  save 
only  the  factor  represented  by  the  or- 
ganized liquor  traffic.  The  "personal 
liberty"  argument  is  peculiarly  a  Ger- 
man's argument.  The  men  who  have 
established  powerful  German  newspajjors, 
like  the  New  York  t^taats-Zeitung,  Chi- 
cago Staats-Zeitung,  Cincinnati  Volks- 
blatt,  St.  Louis  Tribinie,  etc.,  seem  to 
consider  it  an  essential  and  important 
part  of  their  political  duty  and  responsi- 
bility to  share  in  the  leadership  of  the 
anti- Prohibition  element,  if  not  to  form- 
ally and  persistently  represent  the  dram- 
shop interests.  The  brewei's  of  the 
United  States  are  Germans  with  but  very 
few  exceptions,  and  the  proceedings  of 
the  brewers'  conventions,  as  well  as  of 
many  retail  liquor-dealers'  conventions, 
are  conducted  in  the  German  language. 
The  German  vote  being  largely  Repub- 
lican under  normal  conditions,  and  being 
always  ready  to  resent  party  concessions 
to  the  temperance  people,  it  exercises  a 
most  important  restraining  influence 
upon  Republican  policy,  especially  in  the 
States  (like  Ohio,  Illinois,  Wisconsin  and 
Missouri)  where  the  Germans  are  very 
strong.  But  there  is  a  constantly  in- 
creasing sympathy  for  Prohibition  among 
those  thoroughly  Americanized  Germans 
who  give  impartial  attention  to  the  merits 
of  the  question ;  and  when  Germans  are 
converted  to  Prohibition  ideas  they  be- 
come earnest  and  valuable  workers.  The 
English-sjieaking  branches  of  the  Luther- 
an Church  rank  with  the  most  aggressive 
denominations.  Several  German  news- 
papers, notably  the  Deutsclt-Atnerikaner 
of  Chicago  and  the  ChristUche  ApoJogde 
of  Cincinnati,  have  espoused  the  anti- 
saloon  cause.  The  German-American 
Prohibition  Association  (Henry  Rieke  of 
Chicago,  President)  is  one  of  the  most 
active  allies  of  the  Prohibition  party. 

It  is  an  undeniable  and  very  significant 


fact  that  the  liquor  traffic  of  the  United 
States  is  almost  exclusively  in  the  hands 
of  foreigners.  Inspection  of  any  rejDre- 
sentative  list  of  brewers  or  liquor-dealers 
reveals  a  strong  majority  of  foreign 
names. 

Tlie  Woman's  Christian  Temperance 
Union  is  entitled  to  warm  praise  for  the 
excellent  work  that  it  is  doing  in  behalf 
of  total  abstinence  and  Prohibition 
through  its  Foreigners'  Department, 
under  the  management  of  Mrs.  Sophie 
F.  Grubb.  This  and  similar  work  must 
be  relied  on  for  winning  the  co-operation 
of  our  adopted  citizens.  IMiough  stricter 
immigration  and  naturalization  laws  may 
be  and  should  be  advocated  by  every  one 
who  looks  with  concern  upon  the  baleful 
influence  exerted  by  the  great  mass  of 
ignorant  and  objectionable  foreigners,  the 
genius  of  our  institutions  as  well  as  the 
practical  attitude  of  general  public  senti- 
ment will  not  permit  our  Government  to 
apply  the  radical  remedy  that  is  favored 
by  some  extremists.  Incidental  discrim- 
inations and  not  arbitrary  and  sweeping 
prohibitions  against  alien  immigration 
and  su  If  rage  are  the  most  that  may  be 
reasonably  hoped  for. 

JOHX  SOBIESKI. 

Fraizer,  Samuel. — Born  in  North 
Carolina,  April  19,  1808,  emigrated  on 
foot  to  Indiana  in  1823  and  settled  on  a 
farm  in  Marion  County,  eight  miles  north- 
west of  Indianapolis.  He  was  one  of  the 
earliest  pioneers  of  temperance  and  total 
abstinence  in  the  West.  In  18;K),  he 
married  Martha,  a  daughter  of  Enoch 
Evens,  and  in  1834  he  and  five  of  his 
neighbors  organized  a  total  abstinence 
society,  thereby  pledging  themselves  not 
to  have  any  intoxicating  drinks  at  their 
house-raisings,  log-rollings  and  other 
gatherings.  Out  of  this  organization  grew 
a  strong  temperance  society,  which  ex- 
erted a  great  influence  for  good  through- 
out that  region.  Soon  after  the  forma- 
tion of  that  society  Samuel  Fraizer  began 
to  preach  and  lecture,  and  devoted  nearly 
40  years  of  his  life  to  the  cause  of  tem- 
perance. He  was  an  eloquent  speaker,  a 
man  of  fine  presence  and  goodly  counten- 
ance, a  bold  and  energetic  worker,  and 
wherever  he  went  he  shed  the  light  of  the 
gospel  of  temperance.  He  was  for  years 
what  might  be  called  a  temperance  circuit- 
rider,  going  everywhere  in  spite  of  bal 


France.] 


183 


[France. 


weather  and  bad  roads,  to  lecture  and 
circulate  total  abstinence  pledges  in  the 
worst  neighborhoods  he  could  find.  He 
had  a  fine  voice  for  singing,  and  an  ini- 
])ortant  feature  of  his  work  was  to  teach 
children  to  sing  temperance  songs  from 
books  which  he  always  carried  with  him. 
He  was  also  a  very  good  composer,  and 
composed  both  the  Avords  and  music  of 
several  of  the  best  temperance  songs  pub- 
lished at  that  time.  Of  these,  his  favorite 
and  one  which  he  always  sang  with  great 
effect,  began  with  the  words, 
"Touch  not  the  cup!  It  is  death  to  thy  soul!  " 
In  1859  he  removed  from  Indiana  to 
Jasper  County,  la.,  where  he  began  anew 
his  pioneer  work  in  the  cause  of  temper- 
ance. From  this  time  his  field  of  labor 
really  extended  from  Iowa  through  Illi- 
nois to  his  old  home  in  Indiana;  and  there 
are  now  living  thousands  of  young  and 
middle-aged  men  who  signed  the  pledge 
for  the  first  time  in  response  to 
his  teachings.  In  1875,  advancing  age 
compelled  him  to  rest  from  active  labor, 
and  he  died  at  Monroe,  Jasper  County, 
la.,  on  Jan.  15,  1887.  His  funeral  was 
attended  by  an  immense  concourse  of 
people,  and  the  text  of  the  funeral  dis- 
course, "  I  have  fought  a  good  fight," 
might  well  have  been  chosen  by  the 
patriarch  himself.         W.  T.  Hornady. 

France. — The  history  of  the  progress 
of  intemperance  in  France  during  the  lat- 
ter half  of  the  19th  Century  strikingly  il- 
lustrates the  fallacy  of  the  High  License 
project,  as  well  as  of  the  idea  that  the  al- 
cohol vice  can  be  eradicated  by  the  pro- 
motion of  education  alone.  AVitli  a 
thorough  system  of  free  parochial  schools 
and  the  enormous  circulation  of  popular 
newspapers,  the  population  of  the  larger 
French  cities  is,  on  the  whole,  better  in- 
structed and  certainly  less  illiterate,  in 
the  book-reader's  sense  of  the  word,  than 
that  of  any  other  portion  of  the  civilized 
world.  Yet,  as  an  American  reformer 
well  observes:  "  Education  is  the  cure  of 
ignorance,  but  ignorance  is  not  the  cause 
of  intemperance.  Men  who  drink  gen- 
erally know  better  than  others  that  the 
]U"actice  is  foolish  and  hurtful.  They 
drink  because  appetite,  when  stimulated 
by  temptation,  is  stronger  than  reason." 
In  the  absence  of  Prohibitory  laws,  the 
mere  restlessness  of  discontent  (incident 
to  personal  misfortune  or  public  calami- 


ties) may  fatally  strengthen  the  seductive- 
ness of  the  poison  vice,  and  it  is  a  sug- 
gestive fact  that  in  France  the  epidemic 
increase  of  intemperance  dates  from  the 
decadence  of  national  prestige.  During 
the  golden  age  of  French  literature,  up 
to  the  death  of  Louis  XIV,  the  French 
nobles  were  less  addicted  to  alcoholic  ex- 
cesses than  those  of  any  other  part  of  con- 
temporary Europe.  The  gross  intemper- 
ance of  their  eastern  neighbors  was  a 
topic  of  constant  raillery  to  the  upper 
classes  of  a  nation  which,  partly  by  favor 
of  climate  and  partly  by  the  instinct  of 
refinement,  had  learned  to  dispense  with 
the  revels  of  the  taproom.  During  the 
prime  of  the  1st  Empire  Frenchmen  were 
intoxicated  Avith  military  glory,  but  like 
their  idolized  leader  they  detested  drunk- 
enness; and  the  phenomenal  increase  of 
alcoholism  dates  only  from  the  middle  of 
the  present  century,  when  despotism  and 
the  enormous  increase  of  taxation  began 
to  foster  a  spirit  of  dissipation  which  has 
exploded  in  numerous  more  or  less  suc- 
cessful attempts  at  political  revolt,  but  in 
the  meanwhile  has  begotten  disposition 
to  drown  its  disappointments  in  the  Lethe 
of  the  poison  vice. 

The  humiliating  results  of  the  Franco- 
Prussian  War  have  done  much  to  increase 
that  tendency.  The  crushing  burden  of 
the  national  debt,  the  rapid  increase  iu 
the  price  of  all  necessaries  of  life,  the 
failure  of  colonial  enterprise  have  all 
co-operated  to  stimulate  the  fierceness  of 
industrial  competition  to  an  unparalleled 
degree  and  have  driven  millions  to  seek 
refuge  in  the  delusive  enjoyments  of  the 
rumshop,  through  want  of  leisure  for  bet- 
ter recreations.  If  evils  of  that  kind 
could  be  checked  by  High  License  the 
experiment  ought  to  have  triumphantly 
succeeded  in  Pa.ris,  where  liquor-vendors 
have  to  pay  an  exorbitant  tax,  or  rather  a 
variety  of  taxes,  under  all  possible  names 
— tax  for  the  liquor  itself,  for  the  right 
of  selling  it  to  customers  who  drink  their 
drams  at  the  bar,  for  the  privilege  of 
selling  spirits  with  other  refreshments, 
for  the  permission  to  attract  guests  by 
musical  entertainment,  etc.,  etc.  Yet  the 
number  of  those  jDoison-dens  steadily  in- 
creases, as  well  as  their  power  for  mischief, 
for  it  is  a  curious  fact  (conclusively  re- 
futing the  sophistry  of  the  advocates  of 
the  milder  alcoholics)  that  in  the  land  of 
cheap   and  abundant   wine,   strong  beer 


France.] 


184 


[France. 


and  absinthe  (wormwood  and  fusel 
brandy)  have  almost  eclipsed  the  popu- 
larity of  all  other  intoxicants.  "The 
drinking  of  absinthe,"'  says  a  correspond- 
ent of  the  London  Tdegrcvpli,  "threatens 
to  rank  with  the  chief  curses  of  France. 
Although  she  holds  the  first  place  among 
the  wine-growing  countries,  it  is  not  wine 
but  absinthe  which,  next  to  coffee,  is  be- 
coming the  favonte  drink  of  the  number- 
less caf'  s.  To  unaccustomed  palates  the 
taste  of  the  liquid  is  absolutely  revolting 
— at  once  bitter,  sickly,  nauseous,  like 
some  foul  decoction  of  the  sick-room. 
But  with  constant  use  the  bitterness  and 
the  sickly  odor  become  ambrosial  ele- 
ments. .  .  .  France,  indeed,  has 
more  reason  to  dread  absinthe  than  she 
has  to  fear  Prince  Bismarck." 

Thus  far,  restrictive  laws  are  applied  to 
the  suppression  of  the  symptoms,  rather 
than  to  the  removal  of  the  cause ;  heavy 
fines  are  exacted  for  drunkenness  and 
disorderly  conduct,  while  the  panderers  of 
the  drink  vice  are  permitted  to  multiply 
unhindered.  A  party,  strong  in  moral 
power  if  not  in  numbers,  is,  however,  be- 
ginning to  advocate  the  adoption  of  the 
"  Gothenburg  system  "  (Local  Option  and 
restrictive  by-laws),  and  their  influence 
is  strengthened  by  the  primitive  habits 
of  the  country  population,  especially  in 
the  south  and  srutheast  of  France,  where 
industry  and  economy  go  hand  in  hand 
with  a  degree  of  abstemiousness  un- 
equalled in  any  other  Christian  country, 
northern  Spain  perhaps  alone  excepted. 
Felix  L.  Oswald. 

Additional  Particulars. — In  the  article 
on  Consumption  of  Liqitors  are  given 
statistical  tables,  compiled  from  "Anuu- 
aire  Statistique  de  la  France,"  showing 
the  annual  production,  importation,  ex- 
portation, and  the  average  consumption 
per  capita  of  population  in  France,  dur- 
ing each  year  from  1870  to  1885  inclusive, 
of  distilled  spirits  and  wine,  respectively. 
These  tables  show  a  startling  increase  in 
the  consumption  of  distilled  spirits,  the 
annual  per  capita  consumption  having 
advanced  from  0.58  gallon  in  18'70  to 
1.24  gallon  in  1885;  whereas  the  average 
annual  consumption  of  wine  per  capita 
decreased  from  37.00  gallons  in  1870  to 
36.74  gallons  in  1886.  But  even  these 
figures  do  not  fully  exhibit  the  frightful 
develojjment    of    the    appetite  for  fiery 


liquors  in  the  greatest  wine-producing 
nation  of  the  earth.  In  1850,  according 
to  "Annuaire  Statistique"  for  1888,  the 
consumption  per  capita  of  distilled  spirits 
in  France  was  only  0.39  gallon.  There- 
fore the  per  capita  consumption  of  the 
stronger  liquors  increased  in  25  years 
from  less  than  two-fifths  of  a  gallon  to  a 
gallon  and  one-quarter — the  amount  per 
inhabitant  in  1885  being  more  than  three 
times  that  in  1850, 

Indeed,  statistical  authorities  are  agreed 
in  ranking  contemporary  France  T^ith  the 
most  drunken  of  nations.  Mulhall  (edi- 
tion of  1886)  actually  places  her  at  the 
head,  estimating  that  the  average  annual 
consumption  of  alcohol  per  inhabitant  in 
France  is  2.65  gallons,  as  against  2.60 
gallons  per  capita  in  Denmark,  which 
stands  second  on  Mulhall's  list. 

This  extraordinary  situation  in  France 
is  potent  if  not  conclusive  evidence 
against  the  claim  that  tempei'ance  will  be 
promoted  by  popularizing  Avines.  As  a 
matter  of  fact,  there  is  abundant  proof 
thiit  the  wine  habit  is  the  root  of  the 
evil  among  the  French.  Dr.  F.  R.  Lees, 
in  his  "Text-Book  of  Temperance"  (pp. 
151-2),  presents  the  following  striking 
information : 

"It  is  true  that  in  large  districts,  and  chiefly 
the  most  ignorant,  there  is  little  drunkenness 
and  crime  (a  fact  to  which  Quetelet  refers),  but 
tliat  is  owing  to  the  fact  of  tlie  extreme  rarity 
of  wine-shops,  and  to  the  extreme  poverty  of 
the  people.  In  the  rich  and  manufacturing  parts 
intemperance  and  its  resulting  evils  abound. 
Dr.  Morel  of  the  St.  Yon  Asylum  says  in  his 
work  '  On  the  Degeneracy  of  the  Human  Race,' 
that  'there  is  always  a  hopeless  number  of 
paralytic  and  other  insane  persons  in  our  hos- 
pitals whose  di.sease  is  due  to  no  other  cause 
than  the  abuse  of  alcoholic  liquors.  In  1,000 
patients  of  whom  I  have  made  special  note,  at 
least  200  of  them  owed  their  mental  disorder  to 
no  other  cause'  (p  109K  Many  more,  therefore, 
would  be  indirectly  affected  or  aggravated  by 
drink.  M.  Behic,  in  his  '  Report  on  Insanity,' 
says  :  '  Of  8  797  ma'c  and  7  069  female  hmatics, 
34  per  cent,  of  the  men  and  6  of  the  women  were 
made  insane  by  intemperance.  This  is  the 
most  potent  and  frequent  cause.' 

"  French  journals  note  that  years  of  plenty 
in  the  wine  districts  are  years  of  disorder  and 
crime  for  th.e  country  at  large.  The  '  An:  aLs  of 
Hygiene  '  for  186-!  observes  that  in  wine-grow- 
ing countries  delirium  tremens  and  alcoholism 
are  most  fnquent.  The  plain  fact  is,  that 
though  partly  owing  to  the  temperament  of  the 
people,  and  partly  to  the  better  arrangements 
of  the  police,  outrageous  and  besotted  drunken- 
ness may  be  less  frequent  or  less  apparent,  yet 
the  serious  and  essential  evils  are  as  great  there 
as  iu  any  country.    Sensuality  pervades  their 


France] 


185 


[France. 


life,  crime  is  verj^  prevalent,  suicides  arc  in  ex- 
cess, population  is  arrested  and  extreme  longev- 
ity is  rarer  than  in  almost  any  other  land. 

"  In  France  everybody  driulcs,  young  and 
old,  male  and  female,  and  wn  find  one  centen- 
arian amongst  360,0'vO  persons  ;  in  the  United 
States  of  America,  one  in  every  9,000.  Sixteen 
years  ago  Dr.  Eell  estimated  the  whole  of  the 
alcohol  drank  in  France,  in  the  shape  of  spirit, 
wine  and  cider,  as  equal  to  four  gallons  of 
proof  spirit  per  head  annually,  for  all  ages, 
men,  women,  and  infants.  It  is  certainly  not 
less  now.  ...  In  France,  in  lb5t),  there 
were  360  000  drink-shops  besides  inns,  cafes, 
etc.;  over  all  France,  one  drinkery  to  100  per- 
sons of  all  ages.  De  Watteville.  the  economist, 
puts  drinking  third  in  order  among  15  direct 
causes  of  pauperism.  .  .  .  With  such  habits 
and  temptations  and  examples,  can  we  wonder 
that  every  third  birth  in  Paris  is  illegitimate, 
and  that  there  are  60,000  criminals  permanently 
residing  in  the  prisons  of  the  Seme?  Mr. 
Dickens's  '  Household  Words,'  while  defending 
the  beer- shop  at  home  [England],  thus  dis- 
courses of  its  counterpart  abroad:  '  The  wine- 
shops are  the  colleges  and  chapels  of  the  poor 
in  France.  Histoiy.  morals,  politics,  jurisprud- 
ence and  literature,  in  iniquitous  forms,  are  all 
taught  in  these  colleges  and  chapels,  where 
professors  of  evil  continually  deliver  these 
lessons,  and  where  hymns  are  sung  nightly  to 
the  demon  of  demoralization.  In  these  haunts 
of  the  poor  theft  is  taught  as  the  morality  of 
property,  falsehood  as  the  morality  of  speech, 
and  assassination  as  the  justice  of  the  people. 
It  is  in  the  wine-shop  the  cabman  is  taught  to 
think  it  heroic  to  shoot  the  middle-class  man 
who  disputes  his  fare.  It  is  in  the  wine  shop 
that  the  workman  is  taught  to  admire  the  man 
who  stabs  his  faithless  mistress.  It  is  in  the 
wme  shop  the  doom  is  pronounced  of  the  em- 
ployer who  lowers  the  pay  of  the  employed. 
The  wine-shops  breed — in  a  physical  atmos- 
phere of  malaria  and  a  moral  pestilence  of  envy 
and  vengeance— the  men  of  crime  and  revolu- 
tion. Hunger  is  proverbially  a  bad  counsellor, 
but  drink  is  a  worse.'  " 

In  France  the  taxes  on  liquor  licenses 
constitute  the  largest  single  item  in  that 
part  of  the  Government  income  derived 
from  special  internal  taxes  on  occupa- 
tions, etc.  In  1 885,  according  to  "  Annu- 
aire  Statistiqne "  for  1888  (p.  440),  the 
Government  revenue  from  liquor-dealers', 
brewers'  and  distillers'  licenses  was  12,- 
636,79-2.95  francs,  or  about  12,500,000; 
this  did  not  include  the  revenue  from 
duties  levied  on  alcoholic  liquors  them- 
selves. In  the  same  year  the  revenues  of 
the  Government  from  import  and  inland 
duties  on  wines,  ciders,  perries  and  meads 
aggregated  149,282,522.14  francs  (about 
$29,400,000). 

The  municipal  governments  of  France, 
besides  obtaining  large  revenues  from  the 
drink-sellers  licensed  by  them,    impose 


special  duties,  called  octroi  duties,  on  all 
liquors  brought  into  uheir  respective 
communities.  The  principle  of  octroi 
duties  is  the  same  as  that  of  customs  du- 
ties, save  that  octrois  are  levied  by  the 
local  instead  of  the  national  authorities, 
and  are  assessed  upon  all  taxable  mer- 
chandise, whether  foreign  or  domestic. 
The  octroi  returns  of  the  citj^of  Paris  for 
1385  show  that  there  Avere  brought  into 
Paris  in  ^hat  year  4,409,779  hectoliters 
(about  116,400,000  gallons)  of  wine,  yield- 
ing a  total  octroi  duty  of  46,836,125 
francs  (about  $9,225,000);  260,600  hecto- 
liters (about  6,880,000  gallons)  of  cider, 
perry  and  mead,  yielding  an  octroi  duty 
of  l"042,401  francs  (about  1205.400),  and 
143,269  hectoliters  (about  3,800,000  gal- 
lons) of  spirits,  yielding  an  octroi  of  11,- 
433,041  francs  (about  $2,250,000).  There- 
fore from  the  octroi  on  liquors  alone  the 
city  of  Paris  realized  nearly  111,700,000 
in  1885;  meanwhile  in  the  same  year  the 
total  octroi  duty  of  Paris  from  all  sources 
was  134,509,900  francs  (about  $26,500,- 
000),  so  that  more  than  44  per  cent,  of 
the  revenue  from  this  species  of  taxation 
was  due  to  liquors.  In  the  whole  of 
France  outside  of  Paris  the  total  octrois  of 
all  the  communities  from  liquors  were  as 
follows  in  1885:  wines, 24,480,823  francs; 
cider,  perry  and  mead,  3,262,644  francs: 
spirits,  9,322,859  francs— total  from  all 
liquors,  37,066,326  francs  (about  $7,300,- 
000) ;  total  octrois  from  all  sources  in  the 
same  communities,  141,523,244  francs 
(about  $27,900,000) ;  so  that  in  the  whole 
of  France  outside  of  Paris  the  octrois 
from  liquors  constituted  more  than  26 
percent,  of  those  from  all  sources.^  These 
figures,  when  it  is  remembered  that  they 
represent  the  revenue  from  only  one 
branch  of  purely  local  liquor  taxation, 
give  an  idea  of  the  enormous  property 
interests  involved  in  the  liquor  traffic  in 
France ;  and,  when  considered  in  connec- 
tion with  the  ratio  between  the  octrois 
from  liquors  and  those  from  all  sources, 
they  show  to  how  great  an  extent  the  ex- 
penses of  the  French  municipal  govern- 
ments are  defrayed  from  the  products  of 
liquor  taxation. 

No  important  remedial  work  against 
intemperance  has  been  attempted,  al- 
though the  Government  has  prohibited 
the  use  of  absinthe  in  the  army  and  navy 

'  Annuaire  Statistique  for  1888,  pp.  462-5. 


Free  Baptists.] 


186 


[Gambrell,  Roderick  Dhu. 


and  has  conducted  inquiries  concerning 
the  evils  produced  by  the  liquor  traffic. 
The  alcohol  question  has  excited  the  in- 
terest of  scientists  more  than  of  philan- 
thropists in  France.  The  Societe  Fran- 
caise  de  Temper nnce  does  not  enforce 
abstinence  even  from  spirits,  but  enjoins 
moderation. 

Free  Baptists. — Their  General  Con- 
ference, at  Harper's  Ferry,  W.  Va.,  Oc- 
tober, 1889,  declared,  in  part: 

"  We  believe  that  the  traffic  in  intoxicating 
liquors,  as  a  beverage,  is  of  such  a  characlcT 
that  its  license  by  government,  under  any  con- 
ditions or  restrictions  vs^hatsoever,  is  wrong  in 
principle,  and,  therefore,  to  be  refused  by  Chris- 
tian people;  that  the  conscience  of  the  liquor 
dealer  is  so  debauched  that  he  cannot  be  trusted 
to  abide  by  the  condiiious  of  his  license,  pro- 
vided it  is  granted  him ;  that  the  Prohibitory 
features  of  a  license  law  are  more  difficult  to 
enforce  than  a  strictly  Prohibitory  law;  that 
the  palace  saloon  with  its  sanction  of  law,  is  a 
greater  peril  to  the  young,  especially,  than  the 
outlawed  low  groggery,  which  High  License 
claims  to  suppress.  We  demand,  nevcrthele'^s, 
of  the  officers  of  the  law  the  enforcement  of  the 
Prohibitory  fentures  of  existing  license  laws, 
and  most  heartily  commend  the  work  of  Law 
and  Order  Leagues.  As  it  is  only  through  the 
ballot  that  the  church  can  directly  introduce  its 
principles  into  State  life,  it  becomes  our  duty 
in  national,  State  and  local  elections  to  use  this 
great  power  for  the  advancement  of  Prohibition, 
and  for  the  election  to  office  of  men  committed 
to  this  principle  and  practice." 

Free  Methodists —The  last  Gen- 
eral Conference  of  this  denomination  de- 
clared, in  part : 

"  This  is  our  motto  :  Total  abstinence  for  the 
individual  moral  suasion  for  the  drunkard  and 
Prohibition  from  shore  to  shore.  Our  Discipline 
commits  us  to  Prohibition.  We  believe  we 
should  not  only  support  the  principle  of  Pro- 
hibition but  the  party  that  is  the  chief  exponent 
of  that  principle.  To  advocate  the  principle  of 
Prohibition  without  a  party  to  carry  it  into 
force,  is  like  having  a  soul  without  a  body  in 
which  it  can  dwell.  Foremost  on  every  other 
work  of  reform,  we  cannot  afford  to  be  behind 
here.  The  same  reasons  which  are  brought 
against  party  action  argue  strongly  against  our 
existence  as  a  church.  In  the  onward  march  of 
truth,  God  has  ever  had  to  thrust  out  men  who 
would  take  up  the  new  idea  and  push  it  on  to 
victory.  To  reform  dead  churches  and  corruj)! 
political  organizations  is  impossible.  Reforms 
never  go  backward;  Onward  is  the  watchword. 
.  .  .  While  we  recognize  the  fact  that  there 
are  good  men  in  the  old  politi.-'al  organizations, 
we  are  not  blind  to  the  fact  that  the  parties,  as 
such,  are  under  the  iron  heel  of  the  rum  power 
We  cannot  gain  Prohibition  through  either  of 
them." 


Friends. — The  Friends,  or  Quakers, 
while  not  represented  by  national  gather- 
ings, hold  Yearly  Meetings  throughout 
the  country.  These  Yearly  Meetings 
when  touching  upon  the  liquor  question 
invariably  take  radical  ground.  The 
Friends  are  among  the  most  earnest  ad- 
vocates of  Prohibition  and  opponents  of 
compromise  measures. 

Gambrell,  Roderick  Ehu. — Born 
in  Nansemond  County,  Va  ,  Dec.  21, 1865, 
and  v/as  assassinated  in  Jackson,  Miss., 
May  5,  1887.  His  parents  soon  after  his 
birth  removed  to  Mississippi,  where  his 
father,  J.  B.  Gambrell,  became  prominent 
as  a  Baptist  clergyman,  editor  and  Pro- 
hibitionist. Roderick  studied  at  the  State 
University  at  Oxford,  and  afterwards  at 
Mississippi  College  at  Clinton.  Both  his 
parents  were  enthusiastic  temperance 
workers.  When  Roderick  was  19  years 
old  his  father  and  uncle  bought  the  State 
organ  of  the  Prohibitionists,  the  Argus, 
and  continued  it  under  the  name  of  the 
Sword  and  Shield,  with  Roderick  as  its 
editor.  His  vigorous  paragraphs  soon  at- 
tracted attention.  He  removed  the  paper 
to  Jackson,  the  State  capital.  Soon  after- 
wards a  saloon-keeper  near  his  office,  to 
whose  violations  of  law  he  had  called 
notice,  visited  the  editor  and  undertook 
to  terrorize  him.  The  attempt  was  not  a 
success,  but  this  affair  culminated  in  the 
destruction  of  the  office  and  outfit  by  fire. 
In  two  weeks'  time  the  publication  of  the 
Sword  and  Shield  was  resumed.  Roder- 
ick read  the  legislative  journals,  covering 
12  years,  and  familiarized  himself  with 
the  political  history  of  that  period  and 
the  record  of  every  public  man.  His 
fearless  exposures  of  political  rascals  and 
law-breaking  saloon-keepers  led  to  numer- 
ous threats  against  his  life;  but  he  paid 
no  attention  to  tiiem.  He  received  but 
meagre  financial  support,  and  he  fre- 
quently worked  night  and  day  to  get  out 
his  paper,  performing  both  the  literary 
and  the  mechanical  work. 

In  the  Hinds  County  Local  Option  con- 
test of  1886  the  whiskey  element  was 
led  by  Col.  J.  S.  Hamilton  of  Jackson, 
whose  policy  was  to  mass  the  negroes  on 
the  side  of  the  saloon.  During  the  cam- 
]iaign,  wliich  was  the  most  exciting  one 
ever  conducted  in  tlie  State,  Roderick 
Gambrell  and  John  Martin  edited  a  daily 
Prohibition  paper,  and  Hamilton  issued 


Gambrinus.] 


18'] 


[Germany. 


an   anti-Prohibition   jonrnal.     The  fight 
resulted  in  a  victory  for  temperance  and 
weakened  Hamilton's  influence  in  Missis- 
sippi.    In  April,  ISST,  Col.  Hamilton  was 
named  for  renomination  to  the  State  Sen- 
ate.    The  Sword  and  Shield  opposed  liis 
candidacy  on  the  ground  that  he  was  the 
leader  of  the  worst  element   of   society, 
that  he  was  a  defaulter  to  the  State  in  the 
sum  of  180,000,  and  that  he  had  peisonal 
interests  depending  upon  legislation.     It 
was  Gambrell's  purpose  to  force  him  to 
face  his  record,  but  when  told  that  Ham- 
ilton would  not  be  a  candidate  he  said: 
"  That  ends  it ;  I  have  no  disposition  to 
say  a  word  about  him  except  as  the  public 
Avelfare  demands  it."  Between  9  and  10  on 
the  evening  of  May  5,  1887,  as  Gambrell 
was  on  the  way  to  his  home,  he  was  shot 
down.     A  number  of  pistol  shots,  a  cry 
of   "Murder!"  and  the  sound  of  heavy 
l)lows  were  heard  by  wayfarers,  and  run- 
ning up  they  found  the  young  man  dying, 
while  standing  about  him  were  Hamilton, 
with  his  coat-sleeve  on  fire  and  two  pistol 
wounds  in  his  body ;  Albrecht,  a  saloon- 
keeper and  gambler,  holding  in  his  hand 
a  large  pistol  dripping  witii  blood;   Eu- 
banks,  a   man   employed    by   Hamilton; 
Figures,  a  gambler,  and   Carraway,  City 
Marshal     of    Jackson,    and    Hamilton's 
special  friend.     Gambrell's  face  was  mu- 
tilated  by   blows  from  the   butt  of  the 
pistol.     The  evidence  before  the  coroner 
pointed  clearly   to  assassination.     There 
Avere  threats  made  of  lynching,  but  Kev. 
J.  B.  Gambrell,  the  boy's  father,  published 
an   appeal  for  a  lawful  trial.     The  first 
trial  resulted  in  the  sentence  of  Hamilton 
and  Eubanks  to  jail,  the  release  of   Al- 
brecht  on    bond   and  the  unconditional 
release   of   Figures.     The   final   trial   of 
Hamilton   was    held    in    the    adjoining 
county  of   Rankin,  before   a   jury  sum- 
moned by  a  Deputy  Sheriff,  himself  under 
indictment  for  felony,  who  boasted  that 
he  was  Hamilton's  friend  and  that  he  had 
"  fixed  "  four  of  the  jurors.    The  acquittal 
of  the  prisoner  Avas  a  foregone  conclusion. 
Upon  his  release  his  partisans  escorted 
him   to  Jackson   with  noisy  demonstra- 
tions. 

Gambrinus. — A  fabled  king  of  Bra- 
liant,  a  duchy  in  the  Netherlands.  He  is 
reputed  to  have  discovered  the  secret  of 
brewing  beer;  and  for  this  discovery  he 
is  honored  in  Germanv  and  Holland  as 


the  patron  saint  of  the  brewers.  He  is 
commonly  pictured  as  a  Flemish  cavalier 
of  the  Middle  Ages,  Avith  the  insignia  of 
his  rank  as  king  and  duke,  and  holding 
in  his  hand  a  glass  of  foaming  beer. 

Georgia. — See  Index. 

German   Baptists    (Dunkards)  — 

For  more  than  a  liundred  years  the 
manufacture,  sale  and  use  of  intoxicants 
as  beverages  have  been  unsparingly  con- 
demned by  this  denomination.  It  claims 
to  have  been  the  first  —after  the  Quakers 
— to  make  Prohibition  a  test  of  fellow- 
ship. The  Dunkards  take  no  part  in 
politics  beyond  quietly  depositing  their 
ballots.  Hence  their  caution  against 
"  public  agitation,"  by  which  they  mean 
political  demonstrations.  Their  last  Na- 
tional Conference,  which  met  at  Harrison- 
burgh,  Va.,  June  12,  1889,  passed  the 
following  resolution : 

'■  Resolved,  That  this  Annual  Conference 
recommend  that  all  our  brethren  carefully  main- 
tain our  position  against  the  use  or  toleration  of 
intoxicants  Avhe:her  to  manufacture,  to  sell  or 
use  as  a  beverage,  and  to  the  extent  of  our  influ- 
ence contribute  our  part  to  secure  practical 
Prohibition  ;  but  that  we  be  advised  against 
taking  part  in  the  public  agitation  of  the  sub- 
ject." 

German  Reformed  Church. — The 

General  Synod,  convened  at  Akron,  0., 
June,  1887,  incorporated  in  its  declara- 
tions the  f olloAving : 

"Resolved,  That  we  view  with  profound 
regret  and  sorrow  the  great  evil  of  intemperance, 
and  especially  its  sad  and  deadly  fruits  —crime, 
poverty,  and  temporal  and  eternal  death, — and 
that  we  here  and  now,  before  Gol  and  the 
nation,  record  our  protest  against  it  and  earnestly 
call  upon  our  Synods,  classes  and  churches  to 
unite  with  us  in  zealous  and  persistent  Christian 
efforts  looking  towards  its  speedy  extermina- 
tion." 

Germany,  the  perfect  type  of  a  beer- 
drinking  country,  lias  had  a  liquor  ques- 
tion to  deal  Avitli  from  the  dawn  of  her 
history.  Csesar  makes  no  mention  of  the 
German  national  drink,  but  Tacitus  and 
Diodorus,  Avho  Avrote  but  little  later,  give 
us  some  idea  of  the  extent  and  results  of 
beer-drinking. 

The  consumption  of  liquor  has  been 
growing  from  bad  to  worse  until  there 
are  to-day  in  Germany  about  90,000  ^  dis- 

'  All  figures  herein  cited,  if  nothing  is  said  to  the  con- 
trary, are  taken  from  the  "  StatistischC'^  .Jahrbuch  fiir 
das  Doutche  Reich,"  and  the  "  Mouatshefte  zur  Statistili 
ues  Dcutschen  Reiches"  (1889). 


Germany.] 


188 


[Germany. 


tilleries,  large  and  small,  producing  be- 
tween tiO,00().000  and  80,000,000  gallons 
of  alcohol,  of  which  about  one-fourtii  is 
used  for  scientific  and  mechanical  pur- 
poses, and  the  remaining  three-fourths  is 
drunk  by  the  people  or  exported.  This 
pure  alcohol  when  put  in  drinkable  form 
would  show  many  times  larger  figures  if 
the  statistics  could  be  had.  In  addition 
to  the  distilleries  there  are  between  9,000 
and  10,000  breweries,  which  annually 
furnish  the  German  Empire  with  up- 
wards of  1,100,000,000  gallons  of  beer, 
entailing  an  annual  waste  of  over  600,- 
000  tons  of  grain.  And  the  manufacture 
is  ever  on  the  increase  in  order  to  keep  up 
with  the  increase  in  demand.  Besides 
distilled  and  malt  liquors  there  are  native 
and  imported  wines.  Tlie  yearly  produc- 
tion of  native  wines  amounts,  approxi- 
mately, to  76,000,000  gallons, '  of  which 
only  1,150,000  gallons  are  exported,  and 
there  are  foreign  wines  imported  to  the 
amount  of  18,000,000  gallons  yearly. ^ 

These  liquors  are  sold  to  the  German 
public  in  more  than  259,600  public  houses, 
a  proportion  of  one  drinking-place  to  less 
than  175  of  the  whole  population.  The  fig- 
ures do  not  take  into  account  the  numer- 
ous places  where  wine  and  beer  are  sold  in 
bottles  and  not  consumed  on  the  premises. 
In  the  larger  cities  the  number  of  inhabit- 
ants to  one  dramshop  is  much  smaller: 
for  instance,  Pforten  has  one  to  every  55 
of  population,  Hamburg  one  to  every  70, 
and  Berlin  one  to  every  90.^  And  the 
number  of  drinking-places  is  increasing 
in  a  much  greater  ratio  than  the  popula- 
tion; in  some  of  the  States  the  number 
has  been  known  to  more  than  double  it- 
self in  five  years.  These  "  saloons  "  -  for 
by  this  name  they  may  be  called,  whether 
with  or  without  screens — have  as  many 
peculiarities  as  those  in  America,  and  they 
may  be  divided  into  exactly  the  same 
classes.  The  keepers,  too,  closely  resem- 
ble their  brethren  in  trade  in  the  United 
States,  the  majority  being  systematic  law- 
breakers. They  see  men  being  ruined  by 
their  traffic,  but  shut  their  eyes  and  do 
not  hesitate  to  fill  again  and  again  the 
drunkard's  glaSs.  If  cash  is  not  given 
they  are  not  unwilling  to  take  anything 
that  may  be  offered  as  security;  for  he 

»  The  average  yearly  production  is  over  116,600,ODO  gal- 
lons, accordint?  "to  Meyer's  "  Konversations  Lexikon  " 
(article  on  "Wein"). 

'-  For  detailed  statistics,  see  Consumption  of  Liquors. 

*  A.  LammerB,  iu  "Deutsche  Zeit  und  Streitfragen." 


who  is  once  in  their  debt  must  come 
again.  And  when  money  and  credit 
both  are  gone  they  get  satisfaction  with 
fist  and  boot. 

The  power  of  granting  licenses  is 
vested  in  the  city  governments ;  and  in  most 
cities  licenses  are  issued  almost  without 
discrimination.  In  some  places  ordi- 
nances are  in  force  which  make  the  grant- 
ing depend  upon  the  "  need."  Practically, 
however,  a  new  saloon  is  "needed  "  when 
there  is  no  other  upon  the  same  premises. 
The  wisii  of  the  residents  or  the  distance 
from  another  dramshop  does  not  enter 
into  the  question  of  need.  The  license 
fee  is  nowhere  more  than  $12,  and  this 
fee,  when  paid  at  the  opening  of  the 
drinking  estahlishment,  entitles  the  pro- 
prietor to  do  business  without  paying 
subsequent  annual  fees.  Tliis  license 
holds  good  as  long  as  the  licensed  saloon 
continues  in  the  same  place  and  under 
the  management  of  the  same  licensee 
or  his  heirs. 

Who  drinks  all  this  liquor  ?  Practically 
all   the   people,  high   and   low,  old   and 
young,  men  and  women,  educated  and  un- 
educated,   participate   in   the    drinking. 
The  university  professor,  at  the  close  of 
the  hour's  session,  often  invites  the  stu- 
dents to  go  and  take  beer  with  him.   The 
students'  societies   invariably  hold   their 
meetings  in  saloons ;  the  duels  are  fought 
in  saloons ;  it  is  a  common  saying  among 
students  that  beer  is  more  important  to  a 
university   than    either   students  or  pro- 
fessors.    All  the   student's  pleasures  and 
recreations   center   around    his   foaming 
glass.     In  student  life  it  is  beer  first,  last 
and  all  the  time,  and  it  is  said  with  truth 
that  students  drink  more  beer  than  any 
other    class   in    the    Empire.     Many    a 
Munich  student  has  boasted  of   swallow- 
ing his  30  glasses — i.  e.,  quarts^of  beer 
in  one  night,  and  yet  not  found  it  neces- 
sary to  be  carried  home.     Even  the  boys 
in  school  by  classes  set  apart  one  evening 
in  the  week  for  beer-drinking.    However, 
no   such   ruinous   custom   as   treating  is 
known,     and    thus    much    drunkenness, 
which   otherwise  would  certainly  follow, 
is  prevented. 

The  working  classes  drink  more  whis- 
key than  beer,  for  the  simple  reason  that 
it  is  much  cheaper."    Almost  every  work- 

*  The  liter  (quart)  of  beer  costs  from  '714  cents  to  12>^ 
cents,  while  the  liter  of  whiskey  costs  20  cents;  but  nc/lasii 
of  whiskey  costs  only  one  cent,  while  a  glass  of  beer  coslB 
from  four  to  six  cents. 


Germany.] 


189 


[Germany. 


man  carries  his  penny  flask  of  poison 
with  him,  and  has  recourse  to  it  many 
times  during  the  day.  Most  of  those  who 
have  no  houses  of  their  own  content  them- 
selves with  a  dinner  of  weak,  innutritions 
food,  costing  less  than  ten  cents,  and  in- 
dulge in  the  luxury  of  a  glass  of  beer 
costing  four  or  five.  The  entire  sum 
would  buy  a  good,  wholesome  dinner,  but 
the  mere  suggestion  that  men  would  do 
better  to  live  by  food  without  intoxicating 
drink  would  be  resented  as  a  proposition 
to  starve  the  laborer. 

Worse  than  this  is  the  drinking  in 
the  home.  Liquor  in  bottles  and  casks 
is  brought  into  the  houses  of  rich  and 
jioor  alike,  and  a  species  of  drunkenness 
a  hundred  times  worse  than  that  of  the 
street  too  often  destroys  domestic  happi- 
ness.' Especially  on  Sundays  do  people 
in  the  country  get  together  and  drink 
liquor  by  the  cask;  and  no  ceremony,  be 
it  a  birthday  celebration,  a  baptism,  a 
marriage  or  even  a  funeral,  is  com- 
])lete  without  free  alcoholic  indulgence. 
Prunken  pall-bearers,  drunken  mourners, 
drunken  wedding-guests,  drunken  bride 
and  groom  even,  and  drunken  sponsors 
desecrate  the  holy  services.  And  even 
babes  in  their  cradles  are  given  whiskey 
to  keep  them  still. ^  Among  profes- 
sional men  there  is  less  indiscriminate 
'•■  swilling  "  of  intoxicants.  Some  of  the 
best  doctors  drink  beer  only  in  the  even- 
ing, after  their  professional  duties  are 
done,  so  that  they  may  have  an  opportu- 
nity to  sleep  off  the  dulling,  stupefying 
effects  of  it.  The  same  is  true  of  literary 
men.  But  they  all  set  wine  before  their 
guests,  and  drink  more  or  less  of  it  when 
alone. 

What  are  the  immediate  results  of  so 
much  drink  ? 

1.  Drunkenness. — Xot  only  Grerman 
whiskey  but  also  German  beer  makes  peo- 
ple drunk.  It  is  undoubtedly  incompara- 
bly better  and  less  injurious  than  Ameri- 
can beer,  but  it  is  also  unquestionably  in- 
toxicating, and  many  a  man,  accustomed 
to  it  from  his  childhood,  can  not  drink  so 
much  as  three  glasses  of  "  good  beer " 
and  pretend  to  be  sober.  It  is  often  said 
that  among  beer-drinking  people  there  is 
but  little  intoxication.  This  statement 
may  be  accounted  for  by  the  elasticity  of 


'  Lammere,   "Deutsche  Zeit  und  Streitfragen,"  x.,  p. 
182. 
*  See  also  Dr.  Baer,  "  Der  Alcoholismua,"  etc. 


the  term.  Many  will  not  admit  that  a 
man  is  drunk  until  he  falls  down  and 
•'•  reaches  up  for  the  ground,"  or  that  a 
man  can  be  a  drunkard  until  he  reaches 
the  stage  of  delirium  tremens.  Even  the 
President  of  the  only  active  "temper- 
ance "  society  in  Germany  declares  that 
"a  man  may  get  drunk  a  good  many 
times  without  being  in  the  least  addicted 
to  drink  or  in  danger  of  bea)ini/i(j  so.'-  => 
The  most  serious  obstacle  in  the  way  of 
proof  on  this  point  is  that  there  are  abso- 
lutely no  statistics  about  drunkenness. 
There  are  no  arrests  made  for  ''drunken- 
ness," or  for  "■  drunkenness  and  disor- 
derly conduct."  The  public  conscience 
is  so  indifferent  to  such  offences  that  a 
law  against  them  is  not  warranted.  The 
only  official  statistics  to  be  mentioned  are 
the  reports  of  insane  asylums  for  Prus- 
sia. Of  28,300  patients  treated,  2,558, 
or  nearly  10  per  cent.,  had  delirium  tre- 
mens, and  a  majority  of  the  rest,  the  phy- 
sicians declare,  came  there  through  the 
immediate  use  of  alcoholic  drink.  Who- 
ever says  that  drunkenness  is  not  wide- 
spread in  Germany  cither  wilfully  mis- 
represents or  is  densely  ignorant  of  the 
facts.  The  streets  are  crowded  with  per- 
sons in  all  stages   of  drunkenness. 

2,  Inmnity. — (See  the  figures  above.) 

3.  Crime. — Here,  again,  accurate  statis- 
tics are  wanting.  It  is  safe  to  sav  that  in 
a  country  where  drinking  is  so  general 
very  few  crimes  are  committed  by  men 
free  from  the  iiifluence  of  liquor.  Those 
who  are  in  position  to  know  declare  that 
liquor  is  directly  responsible  for  a  large 
part  if  not  a  majority  of  all  violations  of 
law.*  The  classification  of  crimes  as 
given  in  the  criminal  statistics  for  1889 
seems  fully  to  bear  out  this  statement. 

4,  Domestic  Misery. — -Homes  are  de- 
stroyed and  happiness  is  changed  to  woe, 
here  as  everywhere  else  where  intoxicat- 
ing liquors  are  tolerated.  The  work- 
worn,  care-worn  wives  often  tell  the  story, 
not  by  their  faces  only  but  in  sad  w^ords 
as  well. 

5.  Poverty. — The  wretched  condition 
of  the  poor  in  Great  Britain  can  be  du- 
plicated in  but  few  parts  of  the  German 
Empire.     But  poverty  and  want  are  vis- 


5  Lammers   "  Deutsche  Zeit  und    Streitfragen,"  x.,  p. 

\m. 

*  See  "Deutsche  Zeit  und  Streitfragen."  x.,  p.  179; 
and  also  the  report  of  the  "  Jahresvergammhing  des 
Deutschen  Yereins  gegen  Misbrauch  geistiger  Getranke" 
(1887). 


Germany,] 


190 


[Germany. 


ible  oil  every  hand.  He  who  looks  for 
the  causes  of  poverty  here  will  find 
at  least  nine  cases  in  every  ten  due  to 
immoderate  whiskey-drinking.'  If  that  is 
true,  probably  9  per  cent,  more  are 
chargeable  to  immoderate  beer-drinking. 
Inside  the  almshouses  are  32,424  people 
brought  there  by  their  own  drinking,  be- 
sides the  hundreds  of  thousands  left 
helpless  by  the  drunkenness  of  those  who 
should  have  been  their  supporters. 

G.  Inimnralif//. — Prostitution  is  recog- 
nized and  licensed  by  the  Government. 
It  goes  hand  in  hand  with  the  saloon. 
In  Eeiiiii  more  than  10,000  fallen  women 
are  immediately  connected  with  the  rum- 
shops.  Drink  rouses  the  passions,  and 
herein  we  find  at  least  one  reason  why 
a  considerable  proportion  of  all  the  chil- 
dren born  in  Germany  are  illegitim.ate. 

7.  The  most  patent  result  of  all  is 
stupefaction.  In  no  country  are  the  com- 
mon people,  on  the  average,  so  stupid  and 
dull  as  in  Germany.  The  common 
laborer  is  the  embodiment  of  stupidity. 
The  German  public  schools  are  said  to 
stand  first  in  the  world  ;  primary  educa- 
tion is  compulsory  for  all;  but  the  effects 
of  so  much  beer  consumed  by  the  fathers 
and  the  children  for  so  many  generations 
cannot  fail  to  neutralize  these  advantages. 

With  so  many  evidences  of  the  evils 
resulting  from  drink  in  Germany,  the 
continued  apathy  of  the  people  seems 
remarkable.  The  women,  who  in  Amer- 
ica exercise  so  powerful  an  influence  for 
reform,  are  indifferent  or  hostile  in  Ger- 
many. Very  few  of  the  German  women 
are  tota^  abstainers  or  favor  total  absti- 
nence. They  are  at  the  best  a  negative 
factor.  The  clergy,  as  a  rule,  are  inert. 
At  the  universities  the  theological 
students  frequently  rank  with  the 
freest  drinkers,  and  they  manifest  lit- 
tle sympathy  for  radical  temperance 
principles  when  they  come  to  the  pulpit. 
The  vast  majority  of  the  people  regard  the 
saloon  as  a  necessary  contributor  to  their 
comfort  and  convenience,  and  are  opposed 
to  any  interference  with  it  by  legislation 
or  by  moral  suasion.  There  is,  however, 
a  so-called  "  Society  Against  the  Abuse 
of  Spirituous  Liquors,"  which  claims  to 
be  the  only  national  temperance  organi- 
zation. It  has  between  11,000  and  12,000 
members,  who   are   not,   however,   total 

'  See  "  Volkswirthschaftliche  Zeitfragen,"  iv.,  essay 
4,  p.  4. 


abstainers.  Meetings  are  too  frequently 
held  in  drinkshops,  and  beer  is  indulged 
in.  The  Society's  fight  is  chiefly  against 
whiskey,  and  moderation  is  the  only 
thing  preached.  The  President,  in  an 
essay  in  "  Deutsche  Zeit  und  Streitfra- 
gen "  X.,  p.  179),  laments  over  the 
"'■  thousands  or  rather  millions  of  drunk- 
ards in  the  nation,"  and  arraigns  drink 
as  the  parent  of  '"the  majority  of  all 
crimes  and  offenses,  of  all  pauperism  and 
wrong ;"  yet  on  the  same  page  declares 
for  "  the  old  national  German  drink,  beer." 
"  It  is  not  necessary,"  he  says  (Ibid,  p. 
185),  "  that  the  jolly,  harmless  carousal, 
accompanied  by  song,  shall  be  eliminated 
from  our  national  life,  to  which  it  lends 
one  of  the  peculiar  and  inexpressible 
charms ;"  and  "  total  abstinence,  un- 
less recommended  by  a  physician,  is  not 
a  moral  precept."  A  temperance  society 
founded  on  such  beliefs  has  of  course 
accomplished  nothing  of   real  advantage. 

At  one  time  there  were  progressive 
temperance  organizations  in  Germany. 
They  were  introduced  from  America  by 
Robert  Baird  in  1837,  but  their  roots 
never  went  deep,  the  soil  not  being  con- 
genial; and  when  the  troubles  of  1848 
came  the  total  abstinence  movement  died 
a  natural  death.  It  is  seldom  heard  of 
now,  although  some  individual  efforts  are 
being  made.  It  seems  well-nigh  hope- 
less to  preach  abstinence  in  a  nation  of 
drinkers,  where  in  almost  every  block,  in 
every  railway  station,  on  every  road,  at 
every  point  of  interest  the  open  saloon  is 
not  only  tolerated  but  not  combated. 

The  only  serious  undertaking  of  any 
breadth  was  that  inaugurated  in  1884  by 
the  Society  Against  the  Abuse  of  Spirit- 
uous Liquors,  which  appointed  a  commit- 
tee to  inquire  into  the  results  of  reform 
movements  in  foreign  countries  and  to 
recommend  a  policy  for  Germany.  This 
committee  found  its  ideal  not  in  Kansas 
or  Maine  (for  such  an  ideal  would  ex- 
clude the  beloved  beer  and  wine)  but  in 
the  Swedish  and  Norwegian  method  of 
dealing  with  the  whiskey  curse — the  so- 
called  Gothenburg  system.  It  proposed 
by  education  and  legislation  to  take  the 
whiskey-selling  business  out  of  the  hands 
of  the  lower  classes  and  give  it  over  to 
the  cultivated,  well-to-do,  and  generally 
best-meaning  classes,  who  will  control  it 
for  the  "common  good."  Then  the 
"  tempters  "  are  to  be  removed  by  placing 


Gin.] 


191 


[Goodell,  William. 


disinterested  persons  in  charge  of  the  sale, 
so  that  no  one  ah'cady  drunk  and  no  minor 
may  obtain  drink;  and  suitable  penalties 
are  to  be  provided.  The  committee 
argued  that  with  the  whole  business  un- 
der the  supervision  of  one  authority  the 
number  of  whiskey-shops  would  be  ma- 
terially reduced.  Further  restrictions 
would  be  imposed  by  compelling  these 
establishments  to  open  late  in  the  morn- 
ing and  close  early  at  night,  and  by 
requiring  that  no  sales  be  made  on  Sun- 
day save  a  single  glass  per  individual  at 
dinner  time,  that  the  rest  and  sanctity  of 
the  Sabbath  might  be  protected.  The 
profits  (the  committee  intimated)  should 
be  devoted  to  the  common  welfare  and  to 
reducing  taxation. 

The  Society  has  founded  some  coffee- 
houses, but  beer  is  offered  for  sale  in 
nearly  all  of  them.  Even  the  Y,  M.  C. 
A.  rooms  in  many  cities  have  drin king- 
bars.  It  is  suggested  that  "  the  begin- 
ning of  the  reform  must  be  made  by  the 
Government,  which,  as  it  owns  the  rail- 
ways, can  make  an  end  of  the  evils  of 
drink  by  offering  in  the  railway  lunch- 
rooms only  good  fermented  liquors,  cof- 
fee, tea  and  chocolate."  Another  plan  is 
to  restrict  the  number  of  saloons  on  the 
basis  of  population,  as  is  done  in  Holland. 
The  advocates  of  Governmental  action 
have  no  real  hope,  however,  of  securing 
even  these  slight  and  illusive  benefits. 
The  German  Government  derives  a  yearly 
income  of  nearly  130,000,000  from  spirits 
alone,  and  fully  as  much  from  beer,  and 
its  whole  policy  is  to  encourage  the  drink 
trade.  As  things  stand  at  present  it  is 
safe  to  say  that  not  one  member  of  the 
Reichstag  would  vote  for  any  measures 
aimed  at  beer  and  wine.  Even  the  Courts 
appear  to  encourage  drunkenness;  for 
the  tendency  of  German  jurisprudence 
is  to  recognize  that  intoxication  is  a  cogent 
excuse  for  acquitting  a  criminal  or  miti- 
gating the  severity  of  the  sentence.  ^  But 
the  military  law  punishes  acts  of  insubor- 
dination or  neglect  of  duty  while  under 
the  influence  of  liquor  by  sentencing  the 
guilty  to  five  years  of  hard  labor. 

Walter  Miller. 

(Leipzig.) 

Gin. — See  Spirituous  Liquors. 


»  This  tendency  of  the  German  Courts  is  discussed  at 
length  in  the  report  for  1887  (pp.  41-3)  of  the  "  Jahresver- 
eammlung  des  Deutschen  Vereins  gegen  den  Misbrauch 
gelstigen  Getranke." 


Goodell,  William. — Born  in  Coven- 
try, N.  Y.,  in  1792,  and  died  in  Janes- 
ville.  Wis.,  Feb.  14,  1878.  In  his  youth 
he  worked  as  a  clerk,  farm-hand  and 
school-teacher;  and  while  employed  as  a 
bookkeeper  in  New  York  he  assisted  in 
founding  the  Mercantile  Library  Asso- 
ciation of  that  city.  In  1827  he  started 
the  Livesti gator  in  Providence,  E.  I.,  the 
second  paper  devoted  to  the  temperance 
cause  in  the  history  of  the  movement.  In 
18'29  he  removed  to  Boston  and  united 
the  Investigat,or\ir\i\\t\\e  National  PMlan- 
tliropist,  which,  started  in  1826,  was  the 
pioneer  temperance  journal.  In  1830  he 
removed  to  New  York  and  with  the  assist- 
ance of  Phineas  Crandall  began  the  pub- 
lication of  the  Genius  of  Temperance.  He 
edited  the  Youth's  Temperance  Lecturer 
also,  and  published  the  Female  Advocate, 
sustained  by  Christian  women  and  de- 
voted to  social  and  moral  purity.  The 
publication  of  the  Emancipator  in  the  in- 
terest of  the  Anti-Slavery  cause  (com- 
menced in  1834)  brought  the  bitterest 
persecution  upon  him.  He  assisted  in 
forming  the  American  Anti-Slavery  So- 
ciety and  the  Liberty  party.  In  1836  he 
removed  to  Utica,  N.  Y.,  and  became 
editor  of  the  Friend  of  Man,  State  organ 
of  the  Jjiberty  party.  He  also  labored  as 
a  lecturer  and  a  minister  of  the  gospel. 
He  endeavored  to  induce  the  churches  to 
take  a  radical  stand  against  slavery,  and 
he  was  for  nine  years  pastor  of  a  church  at 
Honeoye  Lake,  N.  Y.  While  holding 
this  pastorate  he  published  in  two  volumes 
his  "  Democracy  of  Christianity,"  and 
also  issued  a  constitutional  argument 
against  slavery.  Later  on  he  published 
"Our  National  Charter,"  the  "American 
Slave  Code  "  and  a  "  History  of  Slavery 
and  Anti-Slavery."  AVhile  residing  at 
Honeoye  Lake  he  was  nominated  by  the 
Liberty  party  for  Governor  of  New  York. 
In  1853  he  removed  to  New  York  City  to 
become  editor  of  the  Radical  Abolitionist. 
He  was  one  of  those  present  with  Mr. 
Lincoln,  strengthening  and  encouraging 
him,  on  the  night  before  the  famous  Proc- 
lamation of  Emancipation  was  issued. 
After  the  war  Mr.  Goodell  wrote  for  vari- 
ous papers  in  advocacy  of  total  abstinence 
and  Prohibition.  He  aided  in  organizing 
the  Prohibition  party  at  Chicago  in  1869. 
In  1870  he  removed  with  his  wife  to 
Janesville,  Wis.  In  June,  1874,  he  at- 
tended  the  reunion  of  Abolitionists  at 


Good  Templars.] 


193        [Gough,  John  Bartholome-w. 


Chicago,  and  from  that  time  until  his 
death  he  continued  to  write,  preach  and 
lecture  in  behalf  of  temperance. 

Go  3d    Templars. — See    Ixdepend- 
EifT  Ordek  of  Good  Templars. 

Gospel  Temperance. — A  name 
commonly  applied  to  temperance  work 
and  workers  whose  methods  are  distinc- 
tively evangelistic  or  persuasive,  relying 
upon  the  influence  of  exhortation,  prayer, 
song,  the  pledge,  the  church,  etc.  Gos- 
pel temperance  efl'ort  is  but  another  name 
for  moral  suasion  effort,  the  object  being 
to  reform  inebriates  and  enlist  supporters 
for  the  temj)erance  cause  by  appealing 
especially  to  the  emotional  nature  of  in- 
dividuals, their  consciences,  their  religious 
feelings  and,  in  short,  all  their  better  in- 
stincts. Gospel  temperance  movements 
have  been  crowned  with  great  success  in 
the  United  States,  Canada,  Great  Britain, 
Australia  and  other  countries,  multitudes 
having  been  reclaimed.  They  have  fre- 
quently awakened  the  public  sentiment 
necessary  for  giving  success  to  Prohibi- 
tory campaigns  and  laws,  and  many  of 
the  most  valuable  Prohibition  agitators 
have  been  developed  from  such  move- 
ments. Indeed,  with  very  few  exceptions 
the  gospel  temperance  laborers  frankly 
recognize  that  their  work  is  essentially 
preliminary  and  preparatory;  that  it  is 
impossible  to  reform  drunkards  as  rapidly 
as  the  saloons  manufacture  them;  that 
of  those  who  do  reform,  comparatively 
few  are  able  to  permanently  resist  tempta- 
tion so  long  as  the  legalized  saloons  ex- 
ist; that  the  results  of  rescue  effort, 
however  noble  and  gratifying,  are  really 
insignificant  when  measured  with  the 
conditions  ever  presented  by  the  fact  that 
multitudes  relapse  and  greater  multi- 
tudes are  never  rescued ;  that  the  organ- 
ized drink  system,  which  is  the  root  of 
the  drink  evil,  can  never  be  exterminated 
by  entreaty  however  loving  or  by  argu- 
ment however  logical.  On  the  other 
hand  there  are  very  few  Prohibitionists 
who  do  not  look  with  unqualified  ap- 
proval upon  gospel  temperance  work  and 
encourage  it  by  influence  and  contribu- 
tions, understanding  that  every  whole- 
some educational  agency  promotes  re- 
form. 


Gothenburg    System. 

DEN. 


-See     SwE- 


Gough,    John    Bartholomew. — 

Born  in  Sandgate  in  Kent,  Eng.,  Aus:.  22, 
1817;  died  in  Frankford,  >a,  ^Feb. 
18,  1886.  Tlis  family  was  supported 
by  the  earnings  of  his  mother  as  village 
school-teacher,  and  a  pension  of  £20  per 
annum  received  by  his  father  for  services 
in  the  Peninsular  War.  He  was  kept  at 
school  until  his  twelfth  year,  when  he 
emigrated  to  America  with  a  neighbor's 
family.  After  working  two  years  with 
these  people  on  a  farm  near  Utica,  N.  Y., 
he  went  to  New  York  City  and  obtained 
employment  in  the  book-binding  depart- 
ment of  the  Methodist  Book  Concern, 
wliere  he  learned  his  trade.  In  1833  he 
had  saved  sufficient  money  to  send  for 
his  mother  and  sister — his  father  having 
died, — but  in  July,  1834,  a  little  less  than 
a  year  after  her  arrival  in  America,  his 
mother  died  also. 

Young   Gough  now   fell   in  with  evil 
associates,  and  entered  on  a  career  of  dis- 
sipation which  his  marriage  in  1839  and 
the  setting  up  of  a  small  book-bindery  on 
his  own  account  did  not  check.     At  the 
age  of  24  he  was  a  hopeless  sot.     He  went 
to    Bristol,    R.    I.,    Providence,    Boston, 
Newburyport  and  Worcester,  eking  out  a 
scant  subsistence  by  doing  small  jobs  at 
his  trade  or  by  comic  acting  and  singing 
in  low  theatres  and  resorts.  "  I  was  now," 
he  writes,  "the slave  of  a  habit  which  had 
become  completely  my  master,  and  which 
fastened  its  remorseless  fangs  in  my  very 
vitals.     .     .     .     I  drank  during  the  whole 
day.     ...     So  entirely  did  I  give  my- 
self up  to  the  bottle  that  those  of  my 
companions  who  fancied  they  still  pos- 
sessed some  claims  to  respectability  grad- 
ually withdrew  from  my  company.       At 
my  house,  too.  I  used  to  keep  a  Imttle  of 
gin,  which  was   in   constant   requisition. 
.     .     .     A  burning  sense  of  shame  would 
flush  my  fevered  brow  at  the  conviction 
that    I  was   scorned  by  the  respectable 
portion  of   the   community.     But  these 
feelings   passed   away  like  the  morning 
cloud  or  the  early  dew,  and   I  pursued 
my  old  course."  '     At   Newburyport  he 
was   induced    to    attend    a    temperance 
meeting  addressed  by  Mr.  J.  J,  Johnson, 
a  reformed  drunkard.     "'  My  conscience 
told  me  that  the  truth  was  spoken  by  the 
lecturer.     As  I  left  tlie  chapel  a  .young 
man   offered  me   the  pledge  to  sign.     I 

•  Autobiography  (Boston,  1847),  pp.  38,  40,  42. 


Gough,  John  Bartholome-w.] 


193 


[Qough,  John  Bartholonie\;7. 


actually  turned  to  sign  it,  but  at  tlmt 
criLical  moment  the  appetite  for  strong 
drink,  as  if  determined  to  have  the  mas- 
tery over  me,  came  in  all  its  force;  v.nd 
remembering  too,  just  then,  that  I  had  a 
pint  of  brandy  at  home,  I  deferred  sign- 


ing, 


"  1 


In  Worcester  his  wife  and  child  died 
from  the  consequences  of  want  and  ex- 
posure, but  even  then  he  did  not  reform 
his  habits.  "  Soon  it  was  whispered  from 
one  to  another  until  the  whole  town  be- 
came aware  of  it,"  he  confesses,  "  that  my 
wife  and  child  were  lying  dead,  and  that 
I  was  drunk !  .  .  .  There  in  the  room 
where  all  who  had  loved  me  were  lying  in 
the  unconscious  slumber  of  death,  was  I 
gazing,  with  a  maudlin  melancholy  im- 
printed on  my  features,  on  the  dead  forms 
of  those  who  were  flesh  of  my  flesh  and 
bone  of  my  bone.  During  the  miserable 
hours  of  darkness  I  would  steal  from  my 
lonely  bed  to  the  place  where  my  dead  wife 
and  child  lay,  and  in  agony  of  soul  pass 
my  shaking  hand  over  their  cold  faces,  and 
then  return  to  my  bed,  after  a  draught 
of  rum,  which  I  had  obtained  and  hidden 
under  the  pillow  of  my  wretched 
couch."  2 

Not  long  after  this,  in  October,  1842, 
when  he  "  had  no  hope  of  ever  becoming 
a  respectable  man  again  -  not  the  slight- 
est " — "  believing  that  every  chance  of 
restoration  to  decent  society  and  of  ref- 
ormation was  gone  forever,"  and  when 
he  often  contemplated  suicide  and  even 
*•'  stood  by  the  rails,  with  a  bottle  of  lauda- 
num clattering  against "  his  lips,^  he  was 
persuaded  by  Joel  Stratton,  a  Quakei-,  to 
go  to  a  temperance  gathering  and  sign 
the  pledge.  Encouraged  by  Mr.  Stratton 
and  others  he  kept  his  pledge  for  several 
months  in  spite  of  the  most  terrible  crav- 
ings for  liquor.  "  Knowing  that  I  had 
voluntarily  renounced  drink,  I  endeavored 
to  support  my  sufferings  and  resist  the 
incessant  craving  of  my  remorseless  ap- 
petite as  well  as  I  could ;  but  the  struggle 
to  overcome  it  was  insupportably  pain- 
ful. When  I  got  np  in  the  morning, 
my  brain  seemed  as  though  it  would 
burst  with  the  intensity  of  its  agony,  my 
throat  appeared  as  if  it  were  on  fire,  and 
in  my  stomach  I  experienced  a  dreadful 
burning  sensation,  as  if  the  fires  of  the 
pit  had   been  kindled  there.     ...     I 


I  Ibid,  pp.  40-1. 
s  Ibid,  p.  57. 


2  Ibid,  pp.  52-3. 


craved,  literally  gasped,  for  my  accus- 
tomed stimulus,  and  felt  that  I  should 
die  if  I  did  not  have  it.  .  .  .  Still, 
during  all  this  frightful  time,  I  experi- 
enced a  feeling  somewhat  akin  to  satis- 
faction at  the  position  I  had  taken.  I 
had  made  at  least  one  step  towards  ref- 
ormation, I  began  to  think  that  it  was 
barely  possible  that  I  might  see  better 
days."  *  After  a  few  months  of  success- 
ful resistance  to  his  enemy,  he  succumbed, 
but  only  to  confess  his  weakness  in  a 
public  meeting  and  sign  the  pledge  once 
more.  In  1845  he  was  again  under  the 
influence  of  liquor  through  a  dastardly 
trick  of  his  enemies,  who  contrived  to 
have  him  take  a  drugged  drink  in  the 
hope  of  putting  an  end  to  his  career  as  a 
reformer. 

In  1843  he  married  Mary  Whitcombe. 
Determining  to  devote  his  life  to  the  work 
of  rescuing  drunkards,  he  set  out  on 
foot,  with  a  carpet-bag,  through  New 
England,  delivering  lectures  or  telling 
his  experiences  wherever  he  went,  and 
thankful  at  the  start  for  so  much  as 
75  cents  for  a  night's  labor.  But  his 
remarkable  gift  of  oratory  rapidly  de- 
veloped until  he  was  the  best-known  tem- 
perance speaker  in  America.  In  Eng- 
land, which  he  visited  in  1853  upon  aii 
invitation  from  the  London  Temperance 
League,  his  success  was  equally  brilliant, 
and  he  prolonged  his  stay  through  two 
years.  In  1854  a  volume  of  his  "  Ora- 
tions "  was  issued  in  England,  and  soon 
after  there  was  published  in  London  an 
edition  of  his  "Autibiography,"  of  which, 
when  first  printed  in  I3oston  (in  1847), 
20,000  copies  had  been  sold  within  a  year. 
In  August,  1855,  Gough  returned  to 
America.  In  1857  he  made  his  second 
visit  to  G-reat  Britain,  and  remained  there 
for  three  years.  In  1878  he  visited  Eng- 
land for  the  third  time.  For  17  years 
he  lectured  exclusively  on  temperance, 
but  in  later  years  he  gave  many  addresses 
on  miscellaneous  subjects.  In  his  work 
he  traveled  450,000  miles  and  delivered 
8,606  addresses  before  more  than  9,000,- 
000  people. 

He  was  the  great  exponent  of  moral 
suasion,  but  he  also  believed  in,  and  dur- 
ing his  last  years  especially  emphasized, 
the  necessity  of  political  action  to  pro- 
hibit the  liquor  traffic.  "  Prevention  is 
better  than  cure,"  he  wrote.  "  It  is  worth 

*  Ibid,  pp.  52-3. 


Gough,  John  Bartholomew.] 


194 


[Great  Britain. 


a  life-ejBfort  to  save  a  drunkard,  to  lift  a 
man  from  degradation.     It  is  worth  some 
self-sacrifice  to   free  a  man  from  moral 
slavery  and  debasement;  but  to  prevent 
his  fall  is  far  better.     We  may  reform  a 
man  from  drunkenness,  but  I  believe  no 
man   can   ever   fully    recover   from   the 
effects  of  dissipation  and  intemperance."' 
Again,  he  said :  "  I  rejoice  in  every  effort 
that  prohibits,  cripples  or  lessens  in  any 
way  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquor.   ,    .    . 
While  I  stand  unflinchingly  on  the  plat- 
form   of   total   abstinence   and   absolute 
Prohibition,  combining  their  forces   for 
the  entire  abandonment  of  the  drinking 
customs   and    the    annihilation    of    the 
manufacture  and  sale  of  alcoholic  bever- 
ages, I  hold  out  my  hand  to  every  worker 
a3  far  as  he  can  go  with  me,  if  it  is  but  a 
step."  ^     During  the  last  two   years  of 
his   life   he  acted  with  the    Prohibition 
party.     The  conduct  of  the  politicians  in 
many   States   in   withholding   from   the 
people  the  opportunity  to  vote  on  Consti- 
tutional Prohibition  completely  disgusted 
him.     "'  For  42  years,"  he  said  in  1884, 
"  I  have  been  fighting  the  liquor  trade — 
the  trade  which  robbed   me  of  seven  of 
the  best  years  of  my  life.     I   have  long 
voted  the  Republican  ticket,  hoping  al- 
ways  for   help  in  my  contest  from   the 
Republican  party.     But  we  have  been  ex- 
pecting  something   from   that  party   in 
vain,  and  now,  when   they  have  treated 
the    most   respectful    appeal,   from    the 
most  respectful  men  in  this  country,  with 
silent  contempt,  I  say  it  is  time  for  us  to 
leave   off  trusting   and   to   express    our 
opinion  of  that  party."     In  a  letter  pub- 
lished   in  the    Voice  (Oct.  23,  1884),  de- 
claring his  intention  to  support  the  Pro- 
hibition Presidenuial  ticket,  lie  said:  "I 
have  one  vote  to  be  responsible  for.  That 
has  always  been  given  for  the  Republican 
party  from  its  existence  to  this  present 
year.     ...     I   hoped  to   find   in  the 
Republican  party,   as   a    party   of   high 
moral  ideas,  protection  against  the  liquor 
traffic  instead   of  protection  for  it,  and 
liave   been   unwilling  to  aid  in   making 
this  grand  cause  a  foot-ball  to  be  tossed 
between  political  parties.     .     .     .     This 
year,  however,  has  seen   strange  things. 
Surprising  disintegrations  have  been  go- 
ing on  in  the  two  old  parties.    Both  have 
either  open  affiliations  with,  or  a  cowardly 

'  Suiisliine  and  Shadow  (London,  1831),  p.  SPA. 
s  Ibid,  pp.  35o-G. 


and  shameful  servility  to  the  arrogant 
set  of  rings  and  lobbies  of  this  drink 
trade,  which  lifts  its  monstrous  front  of 
$750,000,000  of  money  spent  directly  in 
it,  with  an  equal  sum  in  addition  taxed 
upon  the  people  to  take  care  of  its  miser- 
able results."  In  a  letter  dated  Jan.  30. 
1886 — 19  days  before  his  death, — pub- 
lished in  the  Voice  for  Feb.  11,  he  denied 
the  charge  that  he  had  repudiated  the 
Prohibition  party  policy  in  a  recent  in- 
terview. ''  I  have  for  two  years,"  he 
wrote,  "voted  Avith  the  third  party;  for 
I  do  believe  in  prohibiting  and  annihilat- 
ing the  liquor  traffic." 

Whib  delivering  a  lecture  in  Frank- 
ford,  Pa.,  Feb.  15,  1886,  he  was  pros- 
trated with  a  paralytic  stroke.  Two  days 
later  he  became  unconscious,  and  he  died 
on  Feb.  18.  Among  the  last  words 
uttered  by  him  in  his  Frankford  address 
were,  "  Young  man,  keejo  your  record 
clean !  "  In  addition  to  his  works  already 
alluded  to  he  published  "  Platform 
Echoes,"  and  "  Autobiography  and  Per- 
sonal Recollections"  (1871). 

Grain.— Any  species  of  grain  may  by 

fermentation  under  suitable  conditions 
1)0  made  to  yield  an  alcoholic  beverage, 
from  which  by  the  process  of  distillation 
strong  spirits  may  be  obtained.  The 
cereals  most  commonly  used  by  liquor 
manufacturers  in  the  United  States  are 
barley,  corn  and  rye — the  ones  contain- 
ing the  largest  percentages  of  sugar  or 
starch. 

Great   Britain. — Although  temper- 
ance  reform  lias  made  great  progress  in 
the  United  Kingdom,  has  won  to  total 
abstinence  multitudes  of  converts  and  to 
the  Prohibition  idea   many  thousands  of 
more   or   less   active   sympathizers,    has 
commanded  the  championship   of  hosts 
of  able  and  eminent  men   in  all  depart- 
ments of  thought  and  endeavor,  has  com- 
pelled other  hosts  to  bestow  encouraging 
recognition   or  to   utter  words    of  deep 
significance,  and  has  left  some  impressions 
upon   public  policy,  the  liquor   traffic  is 
still   supreme   as  a  national    institution 
and  has  not  even  suffered  incidental  dis- 
turbances of  real  magnitude,   while  the 
fiscal   interests   of  the    Government  are 
linked  to  it  by  the  strongest  license  and 
revenue  bands.     Conditions   as  now  ex- 
isting are  briefly  summarized  as  follows 


Great  Britain.] 


195 


[Great  Britain. 


for   this   work   by   the   well-known    Dr. 
Dawsou  Burns: 

"The  liquor  traffic  of  Great  Britain  and  Ire- 
land consists  of  the  two  great  departments  of 
manufacture  and  importation,  and  wholesale 
an  1  retail  sale.  On  ardent  spirits  made  or  im- 
ported there  is  a  tax  of  l0.s'  per  gallon  ;  on  beer 
a  tax  of  Os  M  per  barrel ;  and  wine  imported  is 
taxed  according  to  alcoholic  strength.  There  is 
also  a  brewers'  license  when  the  beer  is  brewed 
for  sale.  Wholesale  dealers  and  all  retailers 
pay  license  duty.'  and  the  entire  revenue  from 
liquor  in  the  United  Kingdom  is  about  $145,- 
000,000  per  annum.  Wholesale  dealers  in 
spirits  and  wine,  beer-house-keepers  licensed 
before  1869,  and  holders  of  wine  and  spirit 
licenses  for  consumption  off  the  premises  ob- 
tain Excise  licenses  on  certain  conditions  and 
payments,  but  all  public  house  (/.  e.,  saloon) 
licenses,  all  beer-houses  licensed  since  1869,  and 
all  beer  off-licenses  are  subject  to  magisterial 
control  and  cannot  be  obtained  without  annual 
certificates  from  local  licensing  benches.  The 
retail  licenses  in  England  of  all  kinds  number 
about  180,0i)0,  and  in  Scotland  and  Ireland 
about  30.000.  Until  1830  all  retail  licenses  were 
issued  subject  to  magisterial  certificates  which 
could  be  withheld  at  discretion.  All  payments 
have  respect  only  to  the  Excise  Department, 
and  tiie  magisterial  certificates  are  never  paid 
for.  but  are  given  or  withheld  with  a  supposed 
regard  for  the  public  interest.  The  Courts  of 
law  have  recently  decided  that  the  magistrates 
have  the  power  to  refuse  annual  licenses  to 
those  who  have  been  previously  licensed,  so 
that  there  is  no  '  vested  interest '  in  such  licen- 
ses." 

The  quantities  of  distilled  spirits,  wine 
and  beer  consumed  in  the  United  King- 
dom annually  are  presented  in  the  article 
on  (Consumption  of  Liquors. 

The  vast  importance  of  the  drink 
traffic  as  a  source  of  revenue  is  shown  by 
a  glance  at  the  receipts  of  the  Govern- 
ment for  the  year  ending  Marcli  31, 1889. 
The  entire  revenue  was  £89,883,331,  of 
which  the  largest  single  item  was  the  in- 
come from  domestic  liquors  and  licenses, 
£23,028,858,  or  considerably  more  than 
one-fourth  the  whole.  In  addition  to 
this  inland  revenue  from  liquors,  the 
customs  duties  on  liquors  yielded  £5,518,- 
762,  or  more  than  one-fourth  the  entire 
customs  receipts  from  all  sources. ^ 

From   calculations   made   by  the  late 


'  The  saloon  or  publican's  license  (i.  e.,  license  to  sell 
spirits,  beer  and  wine  to  be  consumed  on  the  premises) 
varies  from  £4  lO.y  per  annum  for  houses  whose  annual 
value  is  under  £10,  to  £()0  per  annum  for  houses  whose 
anniuil  value  exceeds  £;'00  Thus  the  highest  annual  sa- 
loon license  rate  in  Great  Britain  is  about  the  same  as  the 
average  rate  in  the  United  States.  The  total  Government 
reveiuie  from  publicans'  and  grocers'  licenses  for  the  year 
ending  March  31,  188;t,  was  £1,487,096.  (These  particulars 
are  tul<en  from  "  Whitaker's  Almanac  "  for  1890.) 
-  Whitaker's  Almanac  for  1890,  p.  ITi. 


eminent  writer  on  the  statistical  aspects 
of  drink,  William  Iloyle,  it  appears  that 
in  1820  the  population  of  the  United 
Kingdom  was  20,807,000,  the  total  esti- 
mated cost  of  intoxicating  liquors  con- 
sumed was  $245,469,448,  and  the  average 
cost  of  liquors  per  capita  was  $11.80;  in 
1850,  according  to  Mr.  Hoyle,  these  items 
were,  respectively,  27,320,000,  1392,814,- 
551  and  $14.31;  in  1860,  28,778,000, 
8414,999,888  and  $13.26;  in  1870,31,- 
205,000,  $577,830,082  and  $18.51;  in 
1880,  34,468,000,  $618,407,860  and  117.58. 
Since  1880  the  estimated  cost  of  liquors 
to  the  public  has  been  in  the  neighbor- 
hood of  $600,000,000,  a  slightly  decreas- 
ing tendency  having  been  observed.  Mr. 
Hoyle's  figures  show  that  the  heaviest 
expenditure  for  drink  was  in  the  year 
1876,  when  the  total  cost  reached  $716,- 
780,746. 

The  total  number  of  convictions  in  the 
United  Kingdom  for  crime  from  all 
causes  is  now  about  000,000  annually. 
The  annual  apprehensions  for  drunken- 
ness vary  from  175,000  to  more  than  200,- 
000.  In  the  metropolitan  district  (Lon- 
don and  vicinity),  there  were  23,638 
arrests  for  drunkenness  and  disorderly 
conduct  in  1888,  the  total  population  be- 
ing nearly  5,600,000. 

Although  the  only  systems  recognized 
by  Parliamentary  law  are  those  of  license 
and  revenue,  the  right  of  Local  Option 
not  having  yet  been  conferred,  local  Pro- 
hibition has  been  established  in  many 
places  by  various  means,  chiefly  by  the 
exercise  of  legal  rights  by  landowners. 
On  the  authority  of  Dr.  Dawson  Burns, 
there  are  at  least  2,000  places  in  the 
United  Kingdom  where  the  sale  of  liquors 
is  prohibited.  In  Liverpool  one  district, 
containing  40,000  inhabitants,  is  under 
Prohibition;  and  in  London  there  is  one 
dwellings  company  possessing  three  es- 
tates on  which  there  are  4,000  houses  oc- 
cupied by  20,000  people,  that  also  pro- 
hibits the  sale  absolutely.  But  the  entire 
removal  of  dramshops  from  the  com- 
munity has  been  accomplished  in  but  few 
instances,  and  in  such  instances  only  by 
resorting  to  extraordinary  methods,  since 
the  political  power  to  effect  removal  is 
not  vested  in  the  people.  On  the  other 
hand  the  people,  when  given  opportuni- 
ties to  express  themselves  on  the  question 
of  local  Prohibition,  have  manifested  a 
strong  preference  for  taking  the  whole 


Great  Britain.] 


19G 


[Great  Britain. 


"subject  into  their  own  hands.  Eeeent 
plebescites  in  Scotland,  conducted  under 
the  auspices  of  individuals  desirous  of 
testing  public  sentiment,  have  resulted 
in  emphatic  majorities  in  favor  of  decid- 
ing the  licensing  issue  at  the  ballot-box 
and  in  behalf  of  limiting  the  number  of 
licenses ;  while  a  manifest  disposition  to 
altogether  prohibit  the  liquor  traffic  in 
localities  has  been  exhibited. 

Nor  has  the  demand  for  popular  con- 
trol been  without  effect  upon  Parliament. 
"  The  United  Kingdom  Alliance  for  the 
Total  and  Immediate  Suppression  of  the 
Liquor  Traffic,"  founded  June  1,  1853, 
has  for  many  years  made  the  principle  of 
popular  control  the  cardinal  point  of  its 
platform.  In  Great  Britain  the  term 
"  Local  Option "  has  not  the  definite 
signification  that  is  attached  to  it  in  the 
United  States:  it  does  not  necessarily 
mean  a  system  of  legislation  whereby  the 
people  of  separate  communities  may 
wholly  suppress  the  license  system,  but 
an  elastic  system,  involving  limitation  of 
the  number  of  licenses,  more  or  less 
severe  restrictions,  etc.,  the  degree  of  re- 
striction or  Prohibition  to  be  determined 
by  local  preference.  Therefore  the 
United  Kingdom  Alliance  does  not  de- 
mand the  iu'definite  privilege  of  "  Local 
Option "  but  the  specific  jDrivilege  of 
"  Direct  Veto  "—that  is,  it  asks  Parlia- 
ment to  pass  an  act  enabling  the  electors 
in  each  community,  by  periodical  major- 
ity votes,  to  pass  a  "  direct  veto  "  upon 
the  issuance  of  liquor  licenses  for  their 
respective  communities.  The  "  Direct 
Veto  "  idea  in  Great  Britain  is  precisely 
equivalent  to  the  Local  Option  idea  in 
the  United  States.  This  idea,  under  the 
steady  championshi])  of  the  United 
Kingdom  Alliance,  has  commanded  able 
support  in  Parliament  by  individual 
members  of  the  House  of  Commons,  es- 
pecially by  Sir  Wilfrid  Lawson,  the 
President  of  the  Alliance.  The  Ministry 
has  uniformly  failed  to  pass  Direct  Veto 
bills,  but  the  Liberal  party,  when  in 
power,  found  it  expedient  to  make  con- 
cessions to  the  temperance  sentiment, 
June  18,  1880,  the  House  of  Commons, 
by  a  majority  of  26,  passed  a  resolution 
declaring  that  in  the  opinion  of  the 
House  a  law  should  be  enacted  conferring 
on  electors  the  right  to  decide  for  or 
against  tlie  license  system;  and  similar 
resolutions  were  passed  in  1881  by  a  ma- 


jority of  42,  and  in  1883  by  a  majority 
of  87. 

Political  vicissitudes  and  the  absorbing 
Irish  question  have  prevented  the  fulfill- 
ment of  the  pledge  implied  by  the  adop- 
tion of  these  resolutions.  But  the  Liberal 
party  is  now  thoroughly  committed  to 
the  Direct  Veto  programme.  At  the 
National  Liljeral  meeting  at  Manchester 
in  December,  1889,  the  declaration  of 
principles  that  was  adopted  pronounced 
for  "the  Direct  Popular  Veto  of  the 
liquor  traffic." 

Generally  speaking,  the  Liberal  and 
Conservative  parties  of  Great  Britain 
stand  respectively,  in  reference  to  liquor 
legislation,  much  as  the  Republican  and 
Democratic  parties  stand  in  the  United 
States.  The  Liberals  profess  a  progressive 
spirit  and  purpose ;  the  Conservatives  are 
avowedly  hostile.  The  Liberals,  however, 
are  cautious  and  given  to  compromises 
and  delays,  and  their  shrewd  political 
managers  have  no  desire  to  alienate  the 
very  considei*able  liquor  vote  now  under 
their  control  by  seriously  attacking  the 
traffic.  For  the  sake  of  temporary  ad- 
vantage, however,  the  Liberals  are  very 
willing  to  use  the  strong  temperance 
sentiment  of  the  country  in  party  war- 
fare ;  and  a  highly  interesting  illustration 
has  been  afforded  in  the  present  Parlia- 
ment (1890)  by  the  solid  Liberal  opposi- 
tion, under  Mr.  Gladstone's  immediate 
leadership,  to  the  compensation  clauses 
of  the  Tory  Ministry's  Licensing  bill. 
(See  Compensation.)  The  Conservatives 
owe  much  of  their  strength  to  the  sup- 
port that  they  receive  from  the  great 
brewers  and  wealthy  publicans;  and  al- 
though twice  signally  defeated  in  trying 
to  force  compensation  upon  the  country, 
it  seems  certain  that  they  will  faithfully 
represent  the  wishes  of  the  liquor  inter- 
ests in  future  struggles. 

There  is  an  element  of  advanced  Pro- 
hibitionists in  Great  Britain  that  urges 
the  political  doctrine  upon  which  the 
Prohibition  party  of  the  United  States  is 
based.  Believing  that  the  existing  parties 
will  never  satisfactorily  champion  their 
cause  and  that  the  speediest  means  of 
forcing  it  to  the  front  is  by  independent 
partisan  action,  they  favor  the  adoption 
of  that  means.  But  no  very  important 
results  of  the  movement  are  yet  appar- 
ent. 

Notwithstanding   all   the   unfavorable 


Great  Britain.] 


19'; 


[Great  Britain. 


aspects  and  results,  the  political  phases 
of  the  drink  question  are  incessantly 
agitated  in  Great  Britain.  With  so  many 
able  writers  and  speakers  constantly  pre- 
senting testimony  and  arguments  in  sup- 
port of  radical  views,  political  leaders 
cannot  avoid  touching  the  issue  at  many 
of  its  vital  points.  Despite  their  evasive 
records  and  unfriendly  performances  in 
dealing  with  practical  measures,  nearly 
all  of  the  foremost  statesmen  have  made 
memorable  and  impressive  declarations 
against  drink  and  the  drink  traffic. 

Among  the  temperance  organizations 
the  United  Kingdom  Alliance,  as  already 
indicated,  is  the  most  important  one 
working  on  political  and  legislative  lines. 
It  publishes  the  Alliance  Ne'wti,  the  leading 
temperance  paper  of  England.  In  1889 
the  subscriptions  received  by  the  Alliance 
amounted  to  almost  $56,000.  The  Na- 
tional Temperance  League  labors  for  the 
cause  "  by  means  of  public  meetings,  lec- 
tures, sermons,  tract  distribution,  domi- 
ciliary visitation,  conferences  with  the 
clergy  of  all  denominations,  medical 
practitioners,  schoolmasters,  magistrates, 
poor-law  officers  and  other  persons  of  in- 
fluence, deputations  to  teachers  and  stu- 
dents in  universities  and  colleges,  train- 
ing institutions  and  schools,  missionary 
efforts  among  sailors,  soldiers  and  the 
militia,  the  police  and  other  classes;"  it 
publishes  the  Temperance  Record,  the 
Medical  Temperance  Journal  and  the  Na- 
tional Temperance  Union,  and  in  1889 
sold  temperance  literature  of  the  value  of 
$38,750.  The  Scottish  and  Irish  Tem- 
perance Leagues  perform  similar  work, 
the  former  publishing  the  League  Jour- 
ncd  (Glasgow)  and  the  latter  the  -Irish 
Temperance  League  Journal  (Belfast). 
The  British  Woman's  Temperance  Asso- 
ciation is  made  up  of  women  exclu- 
sively. The  Good  Templars,  Rechabites 
and  similar  benevolent  temperance  orders 
are  very  strong  throughout  the  British 
Isles. 

Of  the  great  denominational  societies, 
the  Church  of  England  Temperance  So- 
ciety and  the  Wesleyan  Society  have  the 
so-called  dual  basis — i.e.,  they  permit 
their  members  to  choose  between  total 
abstinence  and  "moderation."'  The 
strongest  (numerically)  of  the  distinct- 
ively religious  temperance  organizations 
is  probably  the  Salvation  Army,  every 
one  of  whose  members  is  a  pledged  ab- 


stainer from  alcohol  and  tobacco.  All 
the  leading  denominations  support  influ- 
ential temperance  societies.  The  Blue 
Ivibbon  Gospel  Temperance  movement 
and  the  Bands  of  Hope  also  co-operate 
most  usefully  in  the  agitation. 

Taking  the  clergymen  altogether,  there 
seems  to  be  no  doubt  that  a  large  major- 
ity of  them  are  total  abstainers.     A  much 
larger  proportion  of  students  in  the  the- 
ological colleges  are  pledged  abstainers. 
Thus,   of  404    Congregational    students 
340  are  pledged  to  total  abstinence,  and 
21G  of  235  Baptist  students;  while  in  Mr. 
Spurgeon's   "  Pastors'  College "  and  the 
Wesleyan  College  at  Headingly  and  Rich- 
mond there  are  no  excejDtions.i    Never- 
theless the   churches  as  organized  bodies 
(with  some  striking  exceptions,  of  course) 
are  still  fairly  to  be  charged  with  timid- 
ity.    The   Lambeth  Conference  of  1888 
appointed  a  committee  of  Bishops  to  con- 
sider   the  "duty    of    the    church    with 
regard  to  intemperance,"  and  this  Epis- 
copal body  was   not  prepared  to  recom- 
mend so  mild  a  reform  as  the  use  of  un- 
f  ermented  wine  at  the  sacrament.     In  the 
great    compensation    struggle   of    1890, 
when  the  anti-compensationists  had  the 
advantage    of    the    argument   and    the 
enthusiastic  support  of  the  country,  the 
attitude  of  the  Church   of  England  was 
represented  to  be  in  favor  of  a  compro- 
mise whereby  the  liquor-traffickers  would 
have  been  granted  the  right  of  compen- 
sation  for  a  period  of  ten  years.     It  is 
true    that    individual    members    of  the 
Church  of  England  Temperance  Society 
protested  against  this  concession ;  but  the 
proposals  in  behalf  of  the  Society  were 
made  with  so  much  appearance  of  author- 
ity that  Mr.  Henry  Labouchere  took  occa- 
sion in  the  House  of  Commons  to  allude 
to   them  as  evidence  of  "an  incestuous 
union  between   the  parson  and  the  pot- 
house-keeper in  favor  of  the  party  which 
it  was  thought  would  jjrotect  their  several 
interests."     Upon  the  conversion  of  the 
great  brewing  concerns  into  limited  lia- 
bility companies,  persons  inspecting  the 
lists   of     stock     subscribers     found    the 
names   of   many  clergymen  among    the 
shareholders.     On  the  lists  of  six  of  these 
companies    the  names   of  50  clergymen 
appeared — none  of  them  being  of  non- 
conformist denominations,  however.* 

'  stated  on  the  authority  of  J.  P.  B.  Tlnling,  London. 


Greece.] 


198 


[Greeley,  Horace. 


Yet  the  various  manifestations  of  con- 
servative feeling  by  the  aristocratic  cler- 
gymen are  offset  by  many  noble  excep- 
tions in  their  own  ranks.  Such  examples 
as  those  given  by  Archdeacon  Farrar, 
Canon  Wilberforce,  the  Bishop  of  London 
and  scores  of  other  divines  of  the  greatest 
eminence  and  talent,  make  it  impossible 
to  justly  reckon  even  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land as  an  undivided  opponent  of  rad- 
ical action.  Few  English  writers  and 
speakers  have  done  so  much  as  these  men 
to  promote  total  abstinence  and  justify 
the  growing  antagonism  to  the  drink 
traffic  as  a  factor  of  national  life.  And 
many  leaders  of  the  Eoman  Catholic 
Church  deserve  equal  praise,  especially 
the  recognized  head  of  that  church  in 
the  United  Kingdom,  the  venerable  Car- 
dinal Manning,  whose  advocacy  of  the 
temperance  cause  is  one  of  the  distin- 
guishing features  of  his  life-work. 

The  restrictive  laws  for  liquor-sellers, 
notably  the  partial  Sunday-closing  laws 
and  the  acts  forbidding  sales  to  children 
and  drunkards,  are  violated  with  impu- 
nity throughout  the  United  Kingdom. 

Greece. — The  writings  of  the  ancient 
Greeks  abound  in  allusions  to  drink  and 
drunkenness.  Wine  was  their  alcoholic 
beverage :  the  art  of  distillation  was  then 
unknown,  and  the  evils  of  intoxication 
in  the  most  highly  cultivated  country  of 
ancient  times  were  wholly  due  to  the  drink 
that  is  now  recommended  by  certain  tem- 
perance advocates.  History  records  no 
more  significant  pra.ctice  than  that  pre- 
vailing in  Sparta,  where  the  helots  or 
slaves  were  on  certain  occasions  compelled 
to  drink  to  excess,  that  the  Spartan  youth 
might  be  provided  with  object  lessons  of 
the  dire  consequences  of  intemperance 
and  thus  be  warned  against  indulgence. 
Drunkards  were  severely  punished  in  the 
various  Grecian  communities.  The  Dra- 
conian laws  of  Athens  pronounced  sen- 
tence of  death  upon  any  individual  con- 
victed of  drunkenness,  and  even  the 
milder  code  of  Solon  "condemned  an 
Archont  (the  highest  public  functionary 
in  Athens  after  the  abolition  of  royalty, 
B.  C.  1068)  to  a  heavy  fine  for  the  first 
time  he  was  intoxicated,  and  in  case  of 
relapse  to  death."  ^ 

'  Foundation  of  Duath,  p.  20. 


.  In  contemporary  Greece  all  the  branches 
of  the  liquor  traffic  flourish.  In  188(j 
250,000  acres  of  the  Greek  Kingdom  were 
devoted  to  wine-grapes.  Wine  is  a  princi- 
pal article  of  export,  the  value  of  wines 
exported  in  1888  having  been  4.415,000 
drachmas  (about  $750,000).  The  Gov- 
ernment lays  a  comparatively  heavy  tax 
on  spirituous  liquors,  but  for  revenue 
objects  exclusively.  No  efforts  are  made 
to  restrict  the  use  of  liquors.  Enter- 
prising Greek  tradesmen  derive  large 
profits  from  the  liquor  business  in  many 
ports  of  the  Mediterranean. 

Greeley,  Horace. — Born  in  Am- 
herst, N.  H.,  Feb.  3,  1811,  and  died  in 
Pleasantville,  N.  Y.,  Nov.  29,  1872. 

His  devotion  to  total  abstinence  and 
Prohibition  principles  Avas  lifelong  and 
uncompromising.  On  his  twelfth  birth- 
day his  mother  counseled  him  to  abstain 
from  intoxicating  beverages.  He  replied 
that  he  had  already  thought  of  that  sub- 
ject and  had  resolved  never  to  taste  liquor. 
In  the  numerous  addresses  that  he  made, 
he  frequently  advocated  total  abstinence. 
It  is  related  that  in  one  of  his  Tribune  edi-  i 
torials  he  earnestly  urged  young  men  to 
avoid  the  tempter  in  whatever  form  he 
might  appear,  "  whether  as  punch  or  ^ 
bitters,  as  sherry  or  Madeira,  as  hock  or 
claret,  as  Heidsieck  or  champagne." 
Other  members  of  the  editorial  corps  who 
were  not  total  abstainers  greeted  Mr. 
Greeley  on  his  entrance  to  the  office  that 
morning  with  uproarious  laughter,  telling 
him  that  heidsieck  was  not  a  different 
wine  from  champagne,  but  only  a  par- 
ticular brand.  As  the  laugh  went  around 
the  room  Mr.  Greeley  said :  "  Well,  boys, 
I  guess  I'm  the  only  man  in  this  office 
that  could  have  made  that  mistake.  It 
don't  matter  what  you  call  him — cham- 
pagne, or  heidsieck,  or  absinthe — he  is 
the  same  old  devil." 

The  New  York  Tribune  was  founded 
by  Mr.  Greeley  in  1841.  During  the 
early  agitation  in  New  York  State  upon 
the  question  of  liquor  legislation,  the 
Tribune  was  a  radical  advocate  of  Pro- 
hibition. As  early  as  Feb.  13,  1852  (see 
the  Tribune  for  that  date),  Mr.  Greeley 
defined  the  issue  in  the  following  power- 
ful language: 

•'What  the  temperance  men  demand  is  not 
the  regulation  of  the  liquor  traffic,  but  its  de- 
struction; not  that  its  evils  bo  ciicumscribed 


Greeley,  Horace.] 


199 


[Greeley,  Horace. 


(idle  fancy!)  or  veiled,  but  that  they  be,  to  the 
exteat  of  the  State's  abilitv,  utterly  eradicated. 
Such  a  law  we  are  all  willing  to'  stand  under 
and  (if  such  be  its  fate)  fall  with;  but  no  shilly- 
shally legislation  can  endure,  and  it  would  be 
good  for  nothing-  if  it  would.  Stave  in  the  heads 
of  the  barrels,  put  out  the  tires  of  the  distillery; 
contiscite  the  demijohns,  bottles  and  glasses 
wh'ch  have  been  polluted  with  the  infernal 
tratfic;  but  no  act  screening  great  mischief- 
makers  and  bearing  down  on  little  ones  can 
possibly  be  fastened  on  the  advocates  of  tem- 
perance.    They  disown  and  loathe  it. 

•'  For  our  own  part,  we  are  opposed  to  legal- 
izing the  manufacture  or  sale  of  intoxicating 
liquors  for   medical,   mechanical  or  any  other 
l)urpose.     There   is  no  need  of  it,  and  great 
harm  in  it.     That  alcohol   may  be  useful  in 
various  contingencies  we  do  not  dispute;  for 
arsenic,  opium  and  other  poLsons  are  so,  and  it 
is  not  probable  that  this  single  member  of  the 
familj-  should    have    no   good  end  whatever. 
Let  alcohol —pure,  undiluted  alcohol — be  manu- 
factured and  sold  without  license,  le    doctors 
and  others  use  it  as  they  shall  see  tit;  but  this 
undisguised  poison  no  one  would  drink;  and 
we  protest  against  all  tampering  with,  coddling 
up  and  disguising  it  so  that  the  ignorant,  the 
.simple,  the  victims  of  depraved  appetite,  shall 
be  tempted  to  imbibe  it  where  they  would  re- 
ject the  naked  poison.     All   such  weaving  of 
snares  for  the  feet  of  the  unwary  is  indefensible, 
is  demoniac  and  ought  to  be  prohibited  by  law. 
•'  '  But  the  people  are  not   ready  for  such 
stringent  legislation.'     Well,  sir,  if  you   think 
lh„'y  are  not,  take  hold  and  help  us  make  them 
Toxly  !     We  maintain  that  they  are,  and  that 
th'j  Maine  law,  in  all  its  primitive  rigor,  would 
be  suslamed  by  50,003  majority  of  the  legal 
voters  of  our  State,  and  carried  into  full  execu- 
tion within  a  year  after  its  passage.  Legislators! 
will  you   oblige   us   by   submitting  it    to   the 
people ! 

"We  have  just  tried  five  years  of  'moral 
suasion,'  and  find  that  rum  has  gained  on  us 
every  day.  We  shall  now  try  five  years' legal 
suasion,  if  necessary,  and  see  how  that  will 
operate.  Gentlemen,  politicians!  choose  whether 
to  stand  with  us  or  against  us,  but  do  not 
imagine  any  fence  will  last  long  enough  to  hold 
you  in  an  equivocal  position." 

lu  an  editorial  upon  "  Temperance  and 
Law  "  in  the  Tribune  for  April  2G,  1853, 
Mr.  Greeley  wrote : 

"  We  are  quite  willing — yea,  more  than  willing 
— to  see  the  upholders  of  license  laws  devote  their 
energies  to  the  enforcement  of  those  laws  in 
their  1l*ss  exceptionable  aspects  by  a  rigorous  and 
unitel  crusade  against  their  violators  by  Sun- 
day dramselling  and  their  defiers  by  poisoning 
without  lictnse.  It  is  a  work  manifestly  de- 
volving on  them,  and  to  which  they  are,  or 
should  be,  especially  adapted.  To  them  and 
their  kind  this  query  addresses  itself  with  irre- 
sistible force:  'Since  you  uphold  the  license 
8y.stem,  why  do  you  not  take  care  to  make  it 
something  else  than  a  fraud  and  a  sham?  '  But 
to   us,  who  stand  for  total  abstinence  and  the 


Maine  1  iw,  the  hunting  and  hounding  of  poor 
wretches  into   the  payment  of  a  beggarly  $10 
per  annum  each  [the  license  fee  in  New  York 
at  that   time],  for   the   privdege   of   poisoning 
their  neighbors,  is  a  business  possessing  few  at- 
tractions   For  laws  which  as.surae  to  forbid  and 
to  punish  human  acts  ought  to  rest  on  a  baus 
of  morality.      For  us,   who   attirm   that  alco- 
hol is  a  poison  and  its  use  as  a  beverage  always 
hurtful,  always  perilous,  always  demoralizing, 
there  is  obviously  but  one  consistent,  defeasi- 
ble position— that  of  unqualified  and  uncom- 
promising hostility   to  the  licjuor  traffic.      If 
men  will  poison  their  neighbors  for  gain,  we 
greatly  prefer  that  they  should  do  it  on  their 
own    responsibility,  rather  than  the  State's — 
at  all  events,  we  cannot  permit  them  to  do  it 
on  ours     To  sell  rum  for  a  livelihood  seems 
bad  enough  ;   but  for  a  whole  community   to 
share  the  respousibility  and  the  guilt  of  such 
a  traffic  for  a  beggarly  $10,  seems  a  worse  bar- 
gain than  that  of  Eve  or  Judas Al- 
cohol is  a  poison;  the  traffic  in  alcoholic  bever- 
ages is  an  offense  against  the  well-being  of  soci- 
ety, and  ought  to  be  a  crime  against  the  laws. 
The  essential  wrong  is  not  the  lack  of  a  license, 
but  inheres  in  the  business  for  which  a  license 
is  demanded:  if  it  were  a  good  business  no  li- 
cense for  its  prosecution  should  be  required;  be- 
ing a  bad  one  no  such  license  should  be  granted. 
.     .     .     No    practicable    enforcement  of  the 
license  system  will  ever  sensibly  mitigate  the 
evils  of  intemperance.     So  long  as  there  shall 
be  even  2.000   authorized,   legalized,    licensed 
liquor  shops  in  our  city,  all  who  choose  to  drink 
will  find  abundant  opportunity,  and  our  youth 
will  mainly  be  initiated,  as  fast  as  they  become 
old  enough  to  elude   their  parents'  vigilance, 
into  the  primary  degrees  of  tippling,  whence  the 
road  is  direct  and  the  grade  descending  to  top- 
ing and  drunkenness.     But  let  the  laws  intiexi- 
blj'  forbid  the  sale  of  alcoholic  beverages,  and 
every  youth  is  warned   from    the   cradle  that 
those  beverages  are  hurtful  and  dangerous,  and 
that  in  drinking  them  he  encourages  a  violation 
of  the  laws  of  the  land      Such  legislation  may 
not  at  once  abolish  rumselling,  as  our  present 
laws  against  theft  and  burglary  do  not  utterly 
extirpate  those  crimes;  but  being  based  on  a 
principle  and  dealing  out  equal  justice  to  rich 
and  poor,  it  must  command  the  respect  even  of 
its  antagonists  and  gradually  win  its  way  to 
universal  respect  and  obedience." 

An  editorial  in  the  Tribune  for  April 
29,  1853,  on  "Temj^erance  and  License 
Laws,"  contains  the  following : 

"  Rumselling  is  either  right  or  wrong:  alco- 
hol is  either  a  poison  or  no  poison — there  is  no 
half-way  position.  If  liquor  is  a  good  thing  es- 
sentially— that  is  good  to  drink,— then  there 
ought  to  be  no  license  required  of  its  sellers. 
Men  hurt  themsc'lves  by  eating  too  much,  or  at 
unseasonable  hours;  yet  we  do  not  require  a 
license  to  authorize  a  man  to  sell  meat  or  bread, 
or  keep  a  restaurant.  Men  kill  others  by  the 
careless  use  of  fire-arms,  yet  we  do  not  exact 
security  of  every  man  who  keeps  or  handles  a 
gun.     We  make  it  unlawful  for  nine  tenths  of 


Greeley,  Horace.] 


100 


[Guthrie,  Thomas. 


our  people  to  sell  liquor — as  we  would  have  no 
right  to  do  if  liquor  were  not  a  bad  tiling — and 
then  we  license  the  other  portion  to  sell  it  as  if 
it  were  a  good  thing.  The  first  step  toward  the 
enforcement  of  anti-liquor  laws  is  to  make 
them  consistent  and  logical.  We  can  never  stop 
the  unlicensed  sale  of  liquor  while  we  license 
its  sale  by  some  ;  for  there  is  no  moral  principle 
behind  such  restriction.  Who  can  tell  what 
grog  shops  are  unlicensed  '?  And  who  veiy 
much  cares  ?  But  let  the  law  make  all  liquor- 
selling  illegal,  and  then  we  know  just  who  the 
ofEenders  are." 

The  Civil  War  caused  a  suspension  of 
temperance  activity,  but  upon  the  revival 
of  the  Prohibition  issue  Mr.  Greeley 
showed  that  his  oj^iuions  had  undergone 
no  change.  In  an  editorial  entitled 
"  Mixed  Liquors "  in  the  Tribune  for 
Nov.  9, 1867,  he  said : 

"  The  people  of  Massachusetts  decided,  at 
their  late  election,  that  they  would  discard  their 
present  system   of  liquor  Prohibition  and  try  a 

system  of  license  instead We  note 

suggestions  that  the  Prohibitionists  may,  by 
uniting  with  a  part  of  the  advocates  of  license, 
secure  the  passage  of  a  stringent  Excise  act. 
We  presume  they  might;  but  we  trust  they 
will  do  nothing  of  the  kind.  The  fort  of  mud- 
dle termed  compromise  has  a  singular  fascina- 
tion for  the  American  mind,  and  its  effects  are 
almost  alwaj-s  pernicious.  We  trust  the  P.  L. 
L.'s  will  be  allowed  to  frame  and  pass  just  such 
a  liquor  law  as  they  ajiprove  and  are  willing  to 
live  by.  Then,  if  it  have  the  predicted  effect  of 
diminishing  dissipation,  drunkenness,  pauper- 
ism and  crime,  let  them  have  the  full  credit  of 
it,  as  they  deserve.  If  the  opposite  results  be 
realized,  let  that  fact  clearly  appear,  and  let  judg- 
ment be  entered  accordingly.  But  let  us  have  no 
part  nor  lot  in  the  fabrication  of  a  license  law, 
but  give  our  adversaries  unlimited  rope." 

•  In  an  article  headed  "A  question  for 
'H.  G./"in  the  Tribune  for  Nov.  12, 
1867,  Mr.  Greeley  quoted  as  follows  from 
the  Boston  TranHcnjJt :  "  What  would 
be  the  verdict  of  history  upon  a  political 
party  that  carried  the  Republic  safely 
through  a  civil  war,  and  then  lost  its  in- 
fluence in  the  nation  by  attempts  to 
regulate  the  sale  of  cider  and  lager 
beer  ?  "  To  this  Mr.  Greeley  replied,  in 
part :  "  Attempts  to  reyuJate  the  sale  of 
alcoholic  beverages  are  exactly  what  the 
Transcript  and  its  P.  L.  L.  confederates 
have  all  along  professed  to  uphold.  But 
mind  that  attempts  to  '  regulate '  the 
liquor  traffic  are  in  your  line,  not  in  ours. 
IFe  believe  in  cutting  that  liquor  dog's 
tail  off  right  behiiid  the  ears." 

Mr.  Greeley  foresaw  the  results  that 
would  follow  the  adoption  of  the  system 
of  liquor   taxation   inaugurated   by  the 


Federal  Government  dl^ring  the  war. 
Dr.  T.  S.  Lambert,  in  reminiscences  of 
conversations  with  Greeley  held  after  the 
war,i  quotes  him  as  condemning  that 
system  with  extreme  vigor.  According 
to  Dr.  Lambert,  he  charged  that  the  or- 
ganized liquor  power  was  the  direct  out- 
growth of  the  revenue  laws.  In  his  talks 
with  Dr.  Lambert  Mr.  Greeley  also  said 
that  at  the  time  when  the  Internal  Rev- 
enue bill  was  pending  in  Congress  an  at- 
tempt was  made  by  its  promoters  to  Avin 
his  support  by  bribery.  *'  For  some  (to 
me)  unaccountable  reason,"  he  said,  "  I 
was  considered  a  proper  custodian  of  a 
Ijromise  that  I  had  the  right  to  call,  any 
time  within  90  days,  for  half  the  profit 
on  40,000  gallons  of  whiskey  supposed 
equal  to  $20,000,  all  without  the  least 
trouble  or  expense  or  risk  to  me;  but  as 
I  could  not  stand  it  to  be  in  the  necessity 
of  sleeping  every  remaining  night  of  my 
life  with  a  man  that  I  did  not  respect,  I 
declined  in  my  plainest  Saxon,  so  definite 
that  neither  the  young  man  nor  my  old 
acquaintance,  who  introduced  him,  stop- 
ped one  moment  to  argue,  or  ever  spoke 
to  me  again,  though  we  often  met." 

Guthrie,  Thomas. — Born  in  Brech- 
in, Scotland,  July  12,  1803,  and  died  in 
St.  Leonard's,  Scotland,  Feb.  24,  1873. 
He  was  educated  at  Edinburgh  Univer- 
sity, and  in  1825  was  licensed  to  preach. 
He  studied  medicine  in  Paris  a  little 
later,  and  upon  his  return  Avas  emj^loyed 
for  some  time  in  his  father's  banking- 
house.  In  1830  he  was  ordained  as  pastor 
at  Arbirlot,  where  he  remained  seven 
years.  In  1837  he  was  called  to  the  pas- 
torate of  old  Greyfriars'  Church  in  Edin- 
burgh. He  Avas  a  popular  preacher  and 
it  was  his  ambition  to  reach  the  poorer 
classes.  For  this  purpose  he  opened  the 
old  Magdalen  Chapel,  and  gave  the  poor 
the  preference  of  the  seats.  In  the  dis- 
ruption of  the  Church  of  Scotland  in 
1843  he  united  with  Dr.  Chalmers  and 
others  of  the  Free  Church.  For  some 
time  after  the  rupture  he  preached  to  his 
congregation  in  a  Methodist  chapel.  He 
undertook  to  open  a  "  ragged  school "  in 
the  basement  of  the  new  church  built  by 
his  congregation,  but  the  elders  opposed 
the  project.  He  then  (1847)  published 
his   "Plea    for    Ragged    Schools,"   and 

1  Published  in  the  Voice  for  Dec.  5, 1889. 


Haddock,  George  C] 


201 


[Haddock,  George  C. 


opened  a  large  institution  apart  from  any 
connection  with  a  denomination  or  clnirch 
organization.  Other  ragged  schools  were 
established  elsewhere,  patterned  upon  this. 
Forced  to  give  up  public  speaking  in 
1864,  he  became  editor  of  the  Sunday 
Magazine,  published  at  Edinburgh.  Dr. 
Guthrie's  active  interest  in  the  temper- 
ance reform  dates  from  1840,  when,  trav- 
eling in  Ireland,  he  saw  his  car-driver  re- 
fuse to  taste  whiskey  at  an  inn  because 
he  was  a  teetotaller.  "  That  circum- 
stance," said  Dr.  Guthrie,  "  along  with 
the  scenes  in  which  I  was  called  to  labor 
daily  for  years,  made  me  a  teetotaller." 
He  lectured  often  in  support  of  the  total 
abstinence  movement,  and  in  1850  pub- 
lished "A  Plea  on  behalf  of  Drunkards 
against  Drunkenness."  He  also  advo- 
cated the  utter  suppression  of  the  drink 
traffic  by  law.     He  said  : 

"  We  liave  cause  to  thank  God  for  that  act  of 
Parliament  by  which,  in  answer  to  the  voice  of 
an  all  but  unanimous  people,  the  drinking- 
shops  of  Scotland  were  closed  and  all  traffic  in 
intoxicating  liquors  pronounced  illegal  from 
Saturday  night  till  Monday  morning  We  are 
not  afraid  to  express  our  wish  that  the  law  of 
the  Sabbath  were  extended  to  every  day  of  the 
weak,  and  all  shops  opened  for  the  mere  pur- 
poses of  drinking  shut — shut  up,  as  a  curse  to 
the  community,  as  carrying  on  a  trade,  not 
less  than  the  opium  shops  of  China,  incurably 
pernicious." 

Dr.  Guthrie  published  about  20  vol- 
umes, composed  chiefly  of  sermons  and 
republished  extracts  from  the  Sunday 
Magazine  and  Good  Words.  Some  of  the 
best-known  of  his  works  are :  "  The  Gos- 
pel in  Ezekiel,"  "The  Saint's  Inherit- 
ance," "The  Way  to  Life,"  "On  the 
Parables,"  "Oat  of  Harness,"  "Speaking 
to  the  Heart,"  "  Studies  of  Character," 
"  Man  and  the  Gospel,"  and  "  Our 
Father's  Business."  His  books,  includ- 
ing his  "  Autibiography  and  Memoir  "  by 
his  sons  (1874),  have  been  republished  in 
America. 

Haddock,  George  C. — Born  at 
Watertown,  N.  Y.,  Jan.  23,  1832,  and 
was  murdered  at  Sioux  City,  la.,  Aug.  3, 
188G.  He  was  descended,  on  his  mother's 
side,  from  Lorenzo  Dow,  the  famous 
preacher.  His  father  was  locally  known 
as  "  the  learned  blacksmith,"  having  ac- 
quired a  knowledge  of  Latin  and  Greek 
while  working  at  the  forge.  George  was 
reared  under  the  best  of  influences,  and 
he  gave  his  support  to  the  Anti-Slavery 


and  temperance  reforms  as  a  matter  of 
course.  He  was  educated  at  Black  River 
Institute  under  Prof.  Boyd,  author  of  a 
once  popular  text-book  on  Rhetoric.  In 
1852  he  was  married  and  in  1860  began 
his  career  as  a  Methodist  Episcopal 
minister  in  the  Wisconsin  Conference. 
He  was  outspoken  in  his  pulpit  utterances 
against  the  drink  traffic.  In  1873  he 
was  made  Presiding  Elder  of  the  Eon  du 
Lac  district.  In  1874,  after  delivering  a 
temperance  lecture  at  Sheboygan,  Wis., 
he  was  brutally  assaulted  by  three  armed 
men.  He  received  some  heavy  blows,  but 
making  a  vigorous  defense  drove  his  as- 
sailants into  a  saloon.  He  immediately 
arranged  to  give  another  lecttire  in  the 
same  place  despite  the  entreaties  of  his 
friends. 

He  was  long  dissatisfied  with  the  hos- 
tile or  indifferent  treatment  of  the  tem- 
perance question  by  the  old  political 
parties,  and  as  early  as  1871  he  declared: 
"  For  the  last  ten  years  I  have  acted 
mainly  with  the  Republican  party,  simply 
because  that  party  has  been  right  upon 
questions  which  then  assumed  great  pro- 
portions and  demanded  immediate  settle- 
ment. These  questions  have  been  settled. 
I  have  long  since  ceased  to  hope  for  any- 
thing from  any  party  as  such  until  tem- 
perance men  take  such  a  decided  stand 
as  will  command  respect  from  tlie  Re- 
publican politicians."  In  1 884  he  allied 
himself  with  the  Prohibition  party. 

In  1885  he  was  stationed  at  Sioux  City, 
la.,  a  town  with  20,000  inhabitants,  15 
churches,  and  about  100  saloons  running 
in  defiance  of  the  State  Prohibitory  law. 
The  saloon-keepers  had  threatened  to 
burn  the  churches  if  their  traffic  was  in- 
terfered with,  and  no  one  had  the  courage 
to  fight  them  until  Mr.  Haddock  began 
to  arraign  them  from  his  pulpit.  He 
signed  petitions  for  prosecutions,  lectured 
in  surrounding  towns  and  raised  funds 
for  the  work  in  the  face  of  the  combined 
opposition  of  the  city  press,  the  Courts 
and  the  rumsellers.  He  issued  a  circular 
entitled  "  A  City  in  Rebellion,"  addressed 
to  the  pastors  of  the  churches  in  Sioux 
City  and  other  towns,  in  which  he  de- 
scribed the  situation  with  remarkable 
force  and  clearness  and  asked  for  finan- 
cial and  moral  support.  The  success  of 
his  efforts  aroused  the  liquor  men.  About 
9  o'clock  on  the  evening  of  Aug.  3,  1886, 
he  procured  a  horse  and  buggy  from  a  pub- 


Haddock,  George  C] 


202 


[Hasheesh. 


lie  stable  in  Sioux  City,  and  in  company 
with  Rev.C.  C.  Turner  drove  to  Greenville, 
a  neighboring  town,  to  secure  evidence  in 
the  liquor  cases  then  pending.  About  an 
hour  later  he  returned  to  the  stable 
alone,  having  left  his  companion  at  the 
latter's  home.  As  he  was  crossing  the 
street  from  the  stable  a  crowd  of  brewers, 
saloon-keejiers  and  roughs  gathered  about 
him,  and  one  of  them,  John  Arensdorf 
(as  the  evidence  subsequently  adduced 
indicated,  in  the  judgment  of  most  intel- 
ligent people),  thrust  a  pistol  into  the 
preacher's  face  and  fired  a  shot.  Haddock 
fell,  and  he  expired  almost  instantly. 

This  cold-blooded  murder  made  a  pro- 
found stir  throughout  the  countrv.  Re- 
ligious  and  temperance  organizations  m 
every  part  of  the  nation  held  meetings 
and  adopted  resolutions.  The  local 
authorities  in  Sioux  City,  however,  were 
inactive.  The  municipal  government 
was  in  the  hands  of  the  liquor  element, 
and  a  considerable  time  elapsed  before 
Arensdorf  and  his  associates  were  appre- 
hended. Then  the  fact  was  made  clear 
that  the  murder  was  the  result  of  a  de- 
liberate conspiracy.  At  a  meeting  of  the 
Saloon-Keepers' Association  of  Sioux  City, 
on  Aug.  2,  plans  for  "  doing  up  "  Had- 
dock and  D.  W.  Wood  (a  lawyer  con- 
nected with  him  in  the  liquor  prosecu- 
tions) had  been  discussed,  and  Arensdorf 
had  reminded  the  Association  that  there 
was  $700  in  the  treasury,  which  could  be 
used  for  rewarding  the  person  doing  "  the 
job."  The  first  trial  of  Arensdorf  ex- 
tended from  March  23  to  April  17,  1887. 
The  strongest  evidence  was  presented 
and  the  Judge  before  whom  the  trial  was 
had — C.  H.  Lewis — was  above  criticism  ; 
but  everybody  looked  with  suspicion 
upon  the  jury.  A  verdict  of  acquittal 
was  prevented  only  by  the  conscientious 
firmness  of  one  of  the  jurors,  J.  D.  O'Con- 
nell,  who  intimated  tliat  the  other  jurors 
had  been  bribed  by  the  defense  and  that 
he  had  been  approached  by  Arensdorf's 
representatives  and  requested  to  name  his 
price.  Another  trial,  held  in  November  and 
December  of  1887,  resulted  in  acquittal. 
The  jury  brought  in  its  verdict  after  a 
(lonsultation  lasting  for  only  10  minutes  ; 
and  then  the  jurors  proceeded  in  a  body 
with  the  accused  murderer  to  a  photo- 
grapher's and  were  photographed  with 
Arensdorf  in  the  center.  The  prosecu- 
tion's  case   was    even    stronger   at   this 


second  trial  than  at  the  first,  and  in  the 

interval  Munchrath,  one  of  tbe  conspira- 
tors, had  been  convicted  and  lodged  m 
jail.  Arensdorf's  escape  was  due  to  his 
prominence,  to  the  weight  of  the  influ- 
ences exercised  in  his  behalf  and  to  the 
contribution  of  large  sums  of  money  by 
liquor  men  who  took  an  interest  in  secur- 
ing his  acquittal.  The  other  conspirators 
were  ordinary  ruffiaus — den-keepers  and 
desperadoes  for  whom  few  cared  to  inter- 
fere. But  Arensdorf  was  identified  with 
the  brewing  interests  ;  and  the  brewers 
of  the  country,  Avho  backed  their  law- 
defying  brethren  in  the  Prohibition 
States,  recognized  that  he  had  a  legiti- 
mate claim  upon  them.  Tbe  United 
States  Brewers'  Association,  at  its  annual 
convention  in  St.  Paul,  May  30  and  31, 
1888,  formally  declared,  through  its  Board 
of  Trustees  : 

"  With  great  pride  and  gratification  we  record 
the  fact  that  th  >  fauaticism  of  Iowa  Prohibi- 
tionists was  frustrated  in  at  least  one  instance, 
namely,  in  the  aitempt  to  fasten  the  crime  of 
murder  upon  Arensdorf,  a  member  of  our  trade, 
twice  acquitted  of  complicity  in  the  murder  of 
Dr.  Haddock,  of  which  our  charitable  and 
highly  moral  opponents  endeavored  to  convict 
him  at  any  cost." 

The  events  following  the  murder  of 
Haddock  brought  about  a  reaction  against 
the  saloons  in  Sioux  City,  and  it  was  not 
long  before  the  Prohibitory  law  was  com- 
pletely enforced  there.  (See  Prohibi- 
Tioisr,  Benefits  of.) 

[For  further  particulars  about  Haddock,  the 
assassination  and  the  first  trial  of  Arensdorf, 
see  the  volume  written  by  his  .'Jon,  Frank  C. 
Haddock,  "  Hero  and  Martyr,"  New  York. 
1887. J 

Hasheesh  — A  narcotic  preparation 
made  in  India,  Turkey  and  other  countries 
of  the  East  from  the  leaves,  flowers,  resin 
and  small  stalks  of  the  hemp  plant. 
When  used  an  intoxicating  effect  is  pro- 
duced. Exhilaracion,  languor,  sleep, 
visions,  delirium,  hallucinations  and 
catalepsy  are  among  the  characteristic 
results.  Enormous  quantities  of  the  drug 
are  consumed  by  the  Oriental  peoples, 
and  it  is  estimated  that  it  is  in  general 
use  among  not  less  than  300.000,000  of 
the  human  race.  Different  varieties  of 
the  intoxicating  products  of  hemp  are 
bhang,  prepared  from  the  stalks  and 
leaves;  ganja,  made  from  the  flowers  of 
the  plant,  and  cluiras,  the  resinous  exud- 


Hawkins,  John  Henry  Willis]    203 


[Hayes,  Lucy  Webb. 


ation  of  the  plant.  (See  Ixdia.)  It 
was  the  custom  of  Eastern  despots,  when 
assigning  to  servants  the  duty  of  assassi- 
nating an  enemy,  to  intoxicate  them  with 
hasheesh.  "  When  in  this  state  they 
■■  were  introduced  into  tlie  splendid  gardens 
of  the  sheikh  and  surrounded  with  every 
sensual  pleasure  Such  a  foretaste  of 
Paradise,  only  to  be  granted  by  their 
supreme  ruler,  made  them  eager  to  obey 
his  slightest  command;  their  lives  they 
counted  as  nothing,  and  would  resign 
them  at  a  word  from  him."  '  Hence, 
from  "  hasheesh,"  the  word  "  assassin." 

Hawizins,    John    Henry    Willis. 

—Born  in  Baltimore,  Md.,  Oct.  23,  1799, 
and  died  in  Parkersbarg,  Aug.  26,  1858. 
A  confirmed  drunkard,  he  was  reformed 
in  18-10  through  the  efforts  of  his  little 
daughter,  and  became  the  chief  apostle 
of  the  AVashingtonian  movement.  The 
•*  Washingtonians  "  originated  in  the  con- 
version into  a  temperance  society  in 
April,  18-40,  of  a  Baltimore  drinking- 
club,  consisting  of  six  men,  who  took  a 
pledge  not  to  drink  "  any  spirits  or  malt 
liquors,  wine,  or  cider,"  and  called  their 
organization  "  The  Washington  Temper- 
ance Society."  Mr.  Hawkins  was  re- 
formed two  months  later.  He  joined  the 
Washingtonians  and  soon  became  their 
most  powerful  advocate.  By  the  end  <5f 
the  year  1810  the  society  contained  about 
700  members,  all  reformed  drinkers.  An 
account  of  the  work,  published  in  the 
journal  of  the  American  Temperance 
Lrnion  by  Rev.  John  Marsh,  led  to  a  re- 
el uest  from  New  York  temperance  men 
to  Mr.  Hawkins  and  some  of  his  co- 
reformers  to  visit  their  city.  They  did 
so,  addressing  a  meeting  in  New  York  on 
March  23.  Twenty-one  meetings  followed 
and  2,000  drinkers  signed  the  pledge, 
334  doing  so  at  a  single  meeting.  On 
April  10  a  similar  campaign  was  begun 
in  Boston,  resulting  in  a  Washingtonian 
Society  which  organized  branch  societies 
and  carried  the  movement  into  160  towns. 
Mr.  Hawkins  and  his  Baltimore  associates 
travelled  through  various  parts  of  the 
( country  founding  societies  and  securing 
pledge-signers.  By  the  end  of  1841  at 
least  100,000  pledges  had  been  taken, 
and  more  than  one-third  of  them  by  con- 
tirmed  drinkers.      A   weekly  newspaper 

'  Encyclopjsclia  Brittanica,  article  on  "  Assassins." 


was  established  as  the  organ  of  the  move- 
ment, and  Martha  Washington  Societies, 
composed  of  women,  were  inaugurated. 
The  order  of  Sons  of  Temperance,  insti- 
tuted by  16  persons  in  New  York  City, 
Sept.  29,  1842,  was  also  an  offspring  of 
the  Washingtonian  crusade.  Interest 
in  the  reform  began  to  decline  after  1842, 
althoucrh  Mr.  Hawkins  until  his  death 
continued  to  lecture  on  temperance,  visit- 
ing every  State  in  the  Union  except 
California.  A  quarter  of  a  million  would 
be  a  low  estimate  of  the  number  of  habit- 
ual drinkers  of  intoxicants  reclaimed, 
temporarily  at  least,  through  the  instru- 
mentality of  the  Washingtonian  agitation. 
Besides  lecturing  diligently,  Mr.  Hawkins 
contributed  freely  to  the  press.  A  "  Life 
of  J.  H.  W.  Hawkins  "  has  been  published 
by  his  son,  William  G.  Hawkins  (Boston, 
1859). 

Hayes,  Lucy  W^bb,  wife  of  Presi- 
dent Hayes ;  born  in  Chillicothe,  0.,  Aug, 
28, 1831,  and  died  in  Fremont,  0.,  June  25, 
1889.  Her  father,  a  practising  physician 
who  served  in  the  War  of  1812,  died  dur- 
ing her  infancy.  In  1844  her  mother 
removed  with  her  children  to  Delaware, 
0.,  to  give  them  the  educational  advan- 
tages offered  by  the  Ohio  Wesley  an  Uni- 
versity. Girls  were  not  at  that  time 
admitted  to  the  regular  course  of  study, 
but  Lucy  received  instruction  from  the 
professors.  In  ]i^47  she  entered  the 
Wesleyan  Female  College  at  Cincinnati, 
graduating  in  1852.  In  December,  1852, 
she  was  married  to  Rutherford  B.  Hayes. 
She  was  with  her  husband  in  the  Union 
Army  during  the  Civil  War,  and  devoted 
much  of  her  time  to  the  wounded,  sick 
and  furloughed  soldiers.  After  the  war, 
until  her  deatli,  she  was  an  active 
member  of  various  organized  charities. 
Throughout  Mr.  Hayes's  official  life,  as 
Governor  of  Ohio  for  three  terms.  Mem- 
ber of  Congress  and  President  of  the 
United  States,  she,  as  hostess,  dispensed 
with  wines  and  all  alcoholic  beverages, 
not  even  offering  them  to  guests  at  jDublic 
receptions.  She  was  the  first  lady  of  the 
White  House  to  banish  intoxicants  from 
the  Executive  Mansion,  although  Mrs. 
Grant  had  taken  some  commendable 
steps,  especially  in  the  direction  of  dis- 
couraging the  serving  of  wines  at  New 
Year  receptions.  The  rule  established 
by  Mrs.   Hayes   would   have   occasioned 


Heredity.] 


20-i 


[Heredity. 


less  comment  if  it  had  applied  exclusively 
to  the  private  or  semi-private  life  of  the 
President's  family  ;  but  when  extended 
to  ceremonial  dinners  to  foreign  ambas- 
sadors and  other  dignitaries  it  excited 
wonder,  opposition  and  malignant  ridi- 
cule. The  Secretary  of  State  was  partic- 
ularly strenuous  in  seeking  to  persuade 
Mrs.  Hayes  that  it  was  an  insult  to  the 
representatives  of  foreign  nations  not  to 
offer  them  the  wines  they  were  accus- 
tomed to  drink.  But  she  was  not  swerved 
from  her  resolution.  "I  have  young 
sons  who  have  never  tasted  liquor,"  said 
she,  explaining  her  course;  "they  shall 
not  receive  from  my  hand  or  with  the 
sanction  that  its  use  in  our  family  would 
give,  their  first  taste  of  what  might  prove 
their  ruin.  What  I  wish  for  my  own  sons 
I  must  do  for  the  sons  of  other  mothers." 
In  recognition  of  Mrs.  Hayes's  attitude 
the  National  Woman's  Christian  Tem- 
perance Union  placed  in  the  White 
House  (March  7,  1881)  a  portrait  of  her, 
for  which  she  had  sat  at  the  Union's 
request. 

Heredity. — The  heredity  of  form  and 
features  and  the  heredity  of  mental  traits 
and  character  are  unquestioned.  The 
heredity  of  disease  and  diseased  tenden- 
cies may  also  be  observed  in  every  com- 
munity. Kecently  it  has  been  shown 
that  criminality,  pauperism,  insanity, 
epilepsy  and  other  allied  characteristics 
or  tendencies  are  transmitted,  and  can 
be  cultivated  and  grown  with  as  much 
certainty  as  plants  or  animals  are  bred 
and  changed.  Inebriety  belongs  to  the 
same  class,  and  has  been  recognized  as 
hereditary  for  ages.  On  one  of  the  monu- 
ments of  Egypt  there  is  a  drawing  of  a 
drunken  father  and  several  drunken  chil- 
dren, and  the  grouping  conveys  the  idea 
that  the  inebriety  of  the  parent  was  the 
direct  cause  of  the  children's  disgrace. 
The  references  to  inebriety  and  its  he- 
redity in  both  ancient  and  modern  times, 
by  philosophers,  physicians  and  states- 
men, would  fill  a  volume ;  and  the  briefest 
presentation  of  them  would  furnish  a 
curious  and  most  suggestive  chapter  of 
the  growth  of  a  great  truth.  The  limits 
of  this  article  will  permit  only  a  general 
outliue  of  some  of  the  leading  facts  that 
are  regarded  as  established  by  authorities 
in  this  field  of  research. 

If  the  histories  of  100  inebriates  are 


studied  and  compared,  the  following  gen- 
eral truths  will  be  deduced : 

Forty  per  cent,  of  the  100  will  be 
fouTid  to  be  children  of  parents  who  were 
either  excessive  or  moderate  drinkers: 
many  of  these  pai-ents  used  wine  and 
beer  only  at  meals,  and  probably  their 
children  shared  the  beverage  with  them, 
while  others  drank  to  excess  at  long  in- 
tervals. 

In  30  per  cent,  of  the  cases  the  in- 
ebriety may  be  traced  to  the  grand- 
parents, more  frequently  on  the  mother's 
than  on  the  father's  side,  the  heredity 
passing  over  one  generation  and  appear- 
ing in  the  next.  Often  with  this  heredi- 
ty is  found  associated  the  form  or  features 
or  some  of  the  mental  characteristics  of 
the  grandparent.  The  time  of  the  de- 
velopment of  the  drink  impulse  may  cor- 
respond to  the  age  at  which  the  grand- 
parent became  a  victim.  The  desire 
may  remain  dormant  and  give  no  evi- 
dence of  its  presence,  then  break  out 
suddenly  without  any  apparent  exciting 
cause. 

In  one  case  the  son  of  an  excellent 
clergyman  whose  training  and  life  had 
been  above  reproach  suddenly  began  to  j 
use  spirits  at  the  age  of  28,  and  he  died  1 
ten  years  later  an  inebriate.  This  was 
the  exact  history  of  his  grandfather, 
whom  he  resembled  closely.  In  another 
case  a  divinity  student  who  had  about 
finished  his  studies  and  had  been  a  tem- 
perate, model  man,  coming  from  an  ex- 
cellent family,  all  at  once  became  intem- 
perate, ran  away  to  sea  as  a  common 
sailor,  and  died  a  low  drunkard  some 
years  after.  His  grandfather,  a  merclumt, 
had  done  the  same,  only  at  a  later  period 
of  life.  This  persistence  of  hereditary 
intemperance  and  its  seeming  cessation 
only  to  appear  in  the  next  generation,  is 
apparent  in  many  very  curious  cases. 

The  inebriety  of  another  20  per  cent, 
will  be  clearly  traceable  to  consumptive, 
insane,  epileptic  and  feeble-minded  an- 
cestors—nerve and  brain-exhausted  per- 
sons. It  will  be  discovered  that  a  certain 
number  of  the  inebriates  of  this  class  had 
ancestors  in  whose  ages  there  was  con- 
siderable disparity.  Thus  the  alcoholic 
tendency  will  be  stimulated  and  intensi- 
fied to  a  marked  degree  in  the  offspring 
of  a  young  mother  whose  father  was  an 
elderly  man  and  in  whose  family  there 
was  some  hereditary  disease.     Some  au- 


Heredity.] 


205 


[Heredity. 


thorities  assert  that  the  union  of  persons 
whose  ages  vary  over  20  years  will,  if 
one  happens  to  be  an  inebriate  or  alco- 
holic of  any  kind,  always  produce  insane 
and  inebriate  children  -children  who,  as 
a  rule,  will  become  easy  victims  to  delir- 
ium and  be  classed  among  the  criminal 
inebriates. 

The  intemperance  of  the  persons  mak- 
ing up  the  remaining  20  per  cent,  of  the 
100  inebriates  may  be  attributed  to  in- 
juries, diseases,  shocks,  bad  nutrition, 
bad  surroundings,  physical  and  mental 
contagions,  etc. 

All  students  agree  that  fully  80  per 
cent,  of  the  cases  of  inebriety  are  due 
and  traceable,  directly  or  indirectly,  to 
inebriate  or  diseased  ancestors.  As  al- 
ready indicated,  these  cases  are  divisible 
into  distinct  groups. 

The  so-called  direct  heredities  are  the 
commonest.  We  have  seen  that  fully  40 
per  cent,  of  all  inebriates  inherit  their 
inebriety  directly  from  their  parents.  In 
these  cases  there  seems  to  be  transmitted 
from  parent  to  child  some  special  ten- 
dency to  use  alcohol  for  relief,  or  some 
special  taste  for  alcohol  or  craving  for  its 
effects.  The  brain  and  the  nervous  sys- 
tem appear  to  be  most  agreeably  in- 
fluenced by  alcohol,  and  to  demand  repe- 
titions of  the  pleasurable  excitement. 
An  organic  condition  is  thus  established, 
and  the  consequences  are  the  creation  of 
an  organic  memory  and  a  lowering  of  cell 
and  nerve  vigor.  The  seeming  relief  that 
is  obtained  from  alcohol  is  an  organic 
revelation  that  is  so  impressive  as  to  con- 
trol all  future  activity.  In  some  instances 
a  single  glass  of  spirits  may  rouse  up 
diseased  impulses  and  tendencies,  setting 
the  brain  aflame  as  a  match  kindles  a  pile 
of  combustibles.  In  other  cases  each 
glass  may  promote  a  gradual  degenera- 
tion of  cell  and  nerve  tissue,  a  degenera- 
tion that  does  not  reach  its  consummation 
until  a  comparatively  long  period  of  time 
has  elapsed.  In  such  cases  a  special 
form  of  degenerative  tendency  has  been 
transmitted,  and  alcohol  is  its  peculiar 
exciting  cause.  The  children  of  all  in- 
ebriates, and  frequently  the  children  of 
moderate  drinkers,  transmit  to  their  off- 
spring certain  specific  defects  of  cell  and 
nerve  growth,  which  generally  betray 
themselves  in  the  next  generation  in  the 
same  forms ;  yet  the  inherited  taint  may 
not  be  manifested  in  the  first  generation 


of  descendants  but  may  reappear  in  the 
second  one  in  consequence  of  some  pecul- 
iar cause.  The  person  in  whom  the 
hereditary  tendency  is  dormant  may  have 
an  intimation  of  its  presence.  Many  de- 
scendants of  inebriate  ancestors  feel  in- 
tuitively that  they  cannot  or  ought  not 
to  use  liquor,  and  hence  are  abstainers; 
others,  similarly  descended,  exhibit  an 
intense  disgust  for  alcohol,  and  others 
are  profoundly  indifferent  to  it.  Such 
individuals  abstain  without  effort,  yet 
their  children  frequently  become  passion- 
ate lovers  of  drink.  The  direction  of 
the  alcoholic  tendency  is  most  frequently 
from  mother  to  son  and  from  father  to 
daughter.  The  father's  weakness  finds 
reproduction  in  the  feeble  impulses  and 
hysterical  character  of  the  daughter,  who 
may  not  use  alcohol,  but  will  be  an  in- 
valid and  drug-taker,  and  commonly  be- 
comes at  the  end  aa  opium  inebriate; 
while  her  children  (unless  she  marries  a 
man  remarkably  free  from  all  hereditary 
taints)  will  be  inebriates.  Her  sons  will 
receive  legacies  of  alcoholic  tendency  and 
probably  die  early,  and  her  daughters 
will  be  sickly  and  "  defective."  A  drink- 
ing mother,  or  one  who  uses  wine  at 
meals  or  spirits  in  any  form  for  the  sup- 
posed tonic  effects  at  different  periods  of 
life,  persistently  sows  seeds  of  heredity 
from  which  inebriety  and  its  allied  dis- 
eases will  probably  grow.  A  drinking 
father  equally  takes  the  risk  of  begetting 
descendants,  near  or  remote,  who  will  be 
inebriates,  criminals  and  paupers.' 

If  both  parents  use  intoxicants  freely, 

1  The  familiar  case  of  the  .Jukes  family  may  be  again  ad- 
verted to  here.  (See  p.  142.)  The  ancestry  of  this  family 
is  traced  to  Max,  a  man  who  was  a  very  hard  drinlier,  and 
who  became  blind.  Many  of  his  descendants  for  two 
generations  were  also  blind,  and  a  multitude  of  them  in- 
herited his  intemperance.  One  of  the  most  notorious  of 
his  offspring  was  a  woman  named  Margaret,  of  whose 
progeny  Richard  L.  Dugdale  writes:  "In  fracingthe  gene- 
alogies of  540  persons  who  descended  in  seven  generations 
from  this  degraded  woman,  and  169  who  were  related  by 
marriage  or  cohabitation,  280  were  adult  paupers,  and  140 
were  criminals  and  offenders  of  the  worst  sort,  guilty  of 
seven  murders,  theft,  highway  robbery  and  nearly  every 
other  offense  linovvn  in  tne  calendar  of  crime."  He  esti- 
mates that  the  cost  to  the  public  of  supporting  this  family 
of  drunkards,  criminals  and  paupers  was  $1,308,000. 

Ribot,  in  his  work  on  heredity,  gives  the  genealogy  of 
the  Chretien  family.  John  Chretien,  its  progenitor  (with 
the  taint  of  robbery  in  his  blood),  had  three  sons,  Peter, 
Thomas  and  John.  Peter  had  a  son  named  John  Francis, 
who  was  condemned,  for  robbery  and  murder,  to  hard 
labor  for  life.  Thomas  had  two  sons,  Francis  and  Martin, 
who  were  also  condemned  for  murder,  while  the  son  of 
Martin  was  transported  for  highway  robbery.  John,  the 
third  brother,  had  a  son  named  John  Francis,  whose  wife 
belonged  to  a  family  of  incendiaries.  To  this  couple 
seven'children  were  "born,  of  whom  the  first  was  found 
guilty  of  seven  robberies  and  died  in  prison,  while  the 
other  six  (including  two  daughters)  all  died  in  prison,  ex- 
cepting the  seventh,  who  was  condemned  to  death  for 
murder. 


Heredity.] 


20G 


[Heredity. 


the  descendants  will  inevitably  be  alco- 
holic consumptives  or  insane  persons,  or 
will  have  some  form  of  brain  and  nerve 
disease.  In  some  cases  where  alcohol  has 
been  prescribed  medicinally  for  a  long 
time  as  a  tonic,  especially  after  exhausting 
fevers  or  constitutional  diseases,  the 
children  begotten  will  have  a  very  marked 
alcoholic  heredity.  There  are  on  record 
many  instances  of  inebriety  in  children 
conceived  soon  after  marriage  (when  the 
parents  drank  wine),  although  children 
born  to  the  same  parents  later  in  life 
(when  the  parents  abstained)  were  tem- 
perate. If  the  parent  is  intoxicated  at 
the  time  of  conception,  the  child  is  likely 
to  be  a  victim  to  insanity,  inebriety  and 
idiocy.  Mothers  who  indulge  in  intoxi- 
cants freely  before  the  birth  and  during 
the  lactation  of  their  children  impart  to 
them  impulses  toward  inebriety  that  in 
after  years  will  obtain  mastery  if  en- 
couraged by  circumstances.  During  the 
critical  periods  of  life— for  example,  the 
period  of  puberty,  the  period  from  30  to 
35  and  the  period  from  40  to  45, — the 
tendency  of  persons  descended  from  in- 
temperate ancestors  to  seek  relief  in 
drink  is  very  strong.  On  the  other  hand, 
a  subsidence  of  the  drink  mania  in 
parents  and  children  at  certain  periods  of 
life  is  noted  in  many  cases.  Very  young 
infants,  the  children  of  hard  drinkers, 
frequently  manifest  a  marked  craving 
for  spirits,  and  cease  their  cries  when  a 
few  drops  of  liquor  are  administered.  It 
has  even  been  observed  that  little  children 
have  exhibited  intense  desire  at  the  sight 
of  bottles  similar  to  the  ones  in  which 
liquors  are  placed,  and  would  not  ho  satis- 
fied until  given  alcoholic  stimulants.  The 
great  variety  of  very  curious  developments 
of  the  heredity  of  inebriety  is  almost  be- 
wildering to  the  student,  and  establishes 
not  only  the  general  fact  that  inebriety 
is  a  hereditary  condition  but  that  it 
may  be  reproduced  in  the  descendant 
under  circumstances  minutely  resem- 
bling those  witnessed  in  the  case  of  the 
progenitor. 

A  second  group  of  heredities  may  be 
called  the  indirect,  including  cases  of 
families  in  which,  during  one  or  two  gen- 
erations, the  inebriety  of  the  ancestor 
bequeaths  minor  forms  of  insanity  and 
various  brain  and  nerve  defects,  but  en- 
tails inebriety  upon  the  second  or  third 
generation  with  or   without  any  special 


exciting  cause.  In  these  families,  though 
a  particular  generation  may  not  be  notice- 
ably cursed  by  the  drink  crave,  all  kinds 
of  eccentricities  will  be  betrayed:  the 
individual  members  will  have  abnormal 
mental  and  physical  characteristics,  from 
which  brain  and  nerve  diseases  will  spring 
and  grow  rapidly;  they  will  frequently 
be  drug-takers,  gourmands,  "neurotics," 
etc. — always  on  the  verge  of  serious  and 
fatal  disorders.  In  a  case  that  I  studied, 
that  of  a  Hessian  soldier,  it  was  necessary 
to  go  back  for  five  generations  in  order 
to  fix  the  ancestral  responsibility  for  the 
patient's  inebriety.  From  our  present 
knowledge  it  is  hard  to  understand  why 
it  is  that  inebriety  so  often  begets  only 
milder  allied  diseases,  which  in  turn  be-  J 
get  virulent  types  of  inebriety,  which  " 
again  spend  their  force  in  a  single  genera- 
tion and  give  way  in  later  generations  to 
minor  ailments;  but  the  facts  are  too 
abundant  to  admit  of  dispute. 

A  third  group  of  heredities  is  made  up 
of  complicated  or  "borderland  "  cases — 
cases  of  persons  to  whose  ancestors  in- 
ebriety cannot  be  with  certainty  attribut- 
ed, but  who  are  found  to  have  been  in- 
sane, epileptic  or  consumptive, — criminals 
or  paupers,  or  in  other  respects  degenerate 
individuals.  A  large  number  of  all  in- 
ebriates belong  to  this  group,  and  their 
inebriety  is  but  one  outgrowth  of  the 
profound  degeneration  tliat  overtakes 
and  dooms  innumerable  families.  This 
degeneration  may  be  apparently  arrested 
at  times;  certain  members  of  the  family 
may  betray  marked  individuality,  genius, 
a  high  order  of  emotional  sensibility, 
zeal  for  an  idea,  etc.  But  in  succeeding 
generations  insanity,  feeble-mindedness, 
inebriety,  consumption,  criminality,  pau- 
perism, etc.,  will  wreck  the  heirs  of  this 
tainted  blood.  It  is  undoubtedly  true 
that  even  in  the  most  degraded  families 
there  is  an  element  of  vitality  that  offers 
combat  to  the  degenerative  principle  and 
achieves  temporary  triumphs,  which  are 
strengthened  by  intermarriage  with  fam- 
ilies of  purer  blood;  but  at  best  the  force 
of  corruption  is  merely  neutralized  for  a 
time,  and  the  advantages  gained  by  the 
degenerate  family  are  more  than  offset  by 
the  injury  done  to  the  better  one. 

With  the  truth  established  that  a  con- 
stitutional tendency  to  inebriety  and 
kindred  diseases  may  be  handed  down 
from  parent  to  children  and  children's 


He"wit,  Nathaniel.] 


307 


[High  License. 


children,  it  is  needless  to  enlarge  upon 
the  terrible  consequences  to  posterity 
that  each  drinker  is  engaged  in  sowing. 
Observe  the  direful  results  to  individuals 
in  typical  cases  of  intemperance  — the 
loss  of  health,  character,  position,  wealth, 
integrity,  morals,  means  of  support  and 
happiness;  understand  that  these  results 
are,  in  eight  cases  in  ten,  visited  upon  the 
wretched  sufferers  bocause  of  the  con- 
scious or  unconscious  sins  of  ancestors, 
and  all  will  be  ready  to  grant  that  the 
evils  entailed  by  drink  through  the  laws 
of  heredity  may  not  be  described  in 
words  too  jirofuse  or  too  vivid. 

T.  D.  Ceothees. 

Hewit,  Nathaniel. — Born  in  New 

London,  Conn.,  Aug.  38,  1788,  and  died 
in  Bridgeport,  Conn.,  Feb.  3,  1867.     He 
graduated  from  Yale  College  in  1808  and 
began   the   study  of  law,  but  afterward 
decided  to  enter  the  ministry  and  attended 
Andover  Theological  Seminary.  Licensed 
to   preach   in    1815,  he   first  served  the 
Presbyterian    Church   at  Plattsburg,  N. 
Y.     In    1818   he  became   pastor   of  the 
Congregational     Church     at     Fairfield, 
Conn.,  resigning  in  1838  to  become  a^ent 
for  the   American  Temperance  Society, 
organized  at  Boston  in  1836.     Dr.  Hewit 
had   already,  in  1837,  prepared   a  "  Re- 
port" of  this  Society  containing  68  pages 
and   giving   the    resolutions    passed    by 
various  medical   societies   regarding  the 
nature  and  effects  of  intoxicating  drinks 
and  the  resolutions  of  different  ecclesias- 
tical bodies.     As  agent  of  the  American 
Temperance  Society  he  visited  the  New 
England  States  and  some  of  the  Middle 
States,  resigning  the  position  in  Septem- 
ber,   1830.     He     has     been    called     the 
'•  Luther  of  the  early  temperance  reform." 
In  1831  he  visited  England  as  the  repre- 
sentative of   the  American  Temperance 
Society,  to  attend  the  first  public  meeting 
of  the  London  Temperance  Society,  held 
in  Exeter  Hall,  June  39,  1831.     He  ad- 
dressed the  meetiig,  and  it  was  largely 
through  his  exhortations  that  the  London 
Society   chans^ed   its   name   to    that    of 
"The  British  and  Foreign  Temperance 
Society,"  with   a  view   to   enlarging   its 
work.     After   visiting   various   cities   in 
England  and  France  Dr.  Hewit  returned  ■ 
to  America  and   became  pastor   of  the 
3d  Congregational  Cliurch  at  Bridgejoort, 
Conn.,  and  afterwards  of  a  Presbyterian 


church  organized  in  the  same  place  by 
his  old  parishoners,  which  he  continued 
to  serve  until  compelled  by  old  age  and 
feebleness  to  resign  in  1863. 

High  License. — The  name  given  to 
that  policy  of  American  liquor  legislation 
whose  distinctive  feature  is  the  require- 
ment that  individual  liquor-sellers  shall 
pay  relatively  large  annual  fees  into  the 
State,  municipal    or   county   treasuries. 
Many  of  the  disinterested   advocates  of 
the  High  License  programme  insist  that 
the  term  High  License  has  a  wider  meaning 
and  also  covers  accessory  restrictions  of 
all  kinds — that  it  is  merely  a  convenient 
generic  name  for  all  "  improved  "  license 
acts.     As  a  matter  of  fact,  Hia^h  License 
provisions  are  invariably  accompanied  by 
certain  restrictions  or   231'ohibitions  gov- 
erning  the   manner   of   sales;  but  such 
restrictions    and    prohibitions   are   inci- 
dental to  all  license  laws,  and  the  High 
License  idea  derives  its  special  significance 
not  from  the  restrictive  principle  proper 
(i.  c,  the  principle  of  absolutely  prohibit- 
ing sales  to  certain  persons,  during  cer- 
tain hours  and   in  certain   places),  but 
from  the  tax  or  revenue  principle  {i.  e., 
the  principle  of  taxing  the  traffic  as  a 
"  necessary  evil  "—taxing   it   up   to  the 
maximum  attainable  point,  and  drawing 
from  it  for  the  public  funds  the  maxi- 
mum amount  of  revenue).    The  practical 
distinction   between   High   License   and 
restriction  proper  will  be  better  under- 
stood from  this  statement:  There  is  no 
organized  opposition  among  temperance 
people  to  efforts  for  restrictions  proper — 
for   Sunday-closing  legislation,   for    the 
prohibition  of  sales  to  minors  and  drunk- 
ards, and  at  certain  hours  of  the  night, 
for  limiting  the  number  of  saloons  to  one 
for  500  or  1,000  of  the  population,  etc. 
— because    such    restrictions   viewed   by 
themselves    are    unconditional    prohibi- 
tions,  which    operate    (theoretically    at 
least)  against  all  sellers  equally  and  which 
cannot   be   lawfully   suspended,  at    any 
price,  for  the  benefit  of  particular  dealers ; 
on   the   other   hand   the   High    License 
principle  is  bitterly  antagonized  by  nearly 
all  the  advanced  temperance  people,  be- 
cause, however  disguised,  it  is  nothing 
else   than   a  recognition   of   tlie   liquor- 
dealer's  claim  that  his  traffic  is  entitled 
to  rank  with  all  other  species  of  legitimate 
traffic  provided  he  pays  an  imposing  fee 


High  License.] 


208 


[High  License. 


to  the  State.  In  the  case  of  a  restriction 
proper  the  prohibitory  doctrine  is  sug- 
gested, but  in  the  case  of  a  High  License 
provision  the  idea  of  sanction  for  the 
traffic  is  dominant.  The  disposition  to 
look  with  some  favor  upon  restrictive 
acts  while  unsparingly  condemning  High 
License  is  therefore  based  upon  principle 
first  of  all. 

CLAIMS  FOR  HIGH  LICE]SrSE. 

But  High  License  is  said  to  be  a  re- 
striction in  practice — a  more  effective  re- 
striction even  (it  is  claimed)  than  is  the 
prohibition  of  sales  to  minors  or  any 
similar  provision.  For  the  absolute  pro- 
hibition of  sales  to  certain  persons,  at 
particular  hours,  etc.,  when  merely  in- 
cidental to  a  license  policy  is  very  difficult 
of  enforcement,  since  the  public  sentiment 
which  consents  to  indiscriminate  license 
is  not  likely  to  insist  upon  diligent 
police  supervision  of  the  details  of  the 
traffic ;  while,  on  the  other  hand,  a  large  in- 
crease in  the  license  rate  will  inevitably  re- 
duce the  number  of  saloons  and  thereby 
bring  the  business  within  narrower  limits. 
That  is,  incidental  prohibitions  do  not  ne- 
cessarily accomplish  their  purpose  in  prac- 
tice, but  a  High  License  provision  works 
automatically,  necessarily  driving  out  of 
the  traffic  large  numbers  of  dealers  who 
cannot  afford  to  pay  the  larger  fee. 

Again,  it  is  urged  that  High  License  is 
the  most  valuable  of  restrictions  because 
by  diminishing  the  number  of  drinking- 
places  it  simplifies  the  problem  of  police 
supervision  and  promotes  the  ability  of 
the  officials  to  enforce  the  various  prohi- 
bitions of  the  statutes.  Therefore  it  is 
maintained  that  High  License  is  the 
most  important  instrument  for  compell- 
ing liquor-sellers  to  respect  the  conces- 
sions made  by  law  to  temperance  senti- 
ment. Other  claims  made  for  this  policy 
are  that  it  will  operate  to  exterminate  the 
most  objectionable  saloons;  that  it  Avill 
confine  the  traffic  to  men  of  responsibility 
and  therefore,  presumably,  to  men  of 
better  character ;  that  by  diminishing  the 
aggregate  number  of  liquor-dealers  it  will 
diminish  the  temptations  to  the  drinker 
and  consequently  reduce  the  consumption 
of  drink ;  that  it  will  remove  from  polit- 
ical warfare  the  organized  power  of  the 
more  dangerous,  demonstrative,  ignorant 
and  offensive  rum  element  that  is  seen  in 
active  and  constant  operation  so  long  as 


the  laws  bestow  upon  it  the  right  to  exist ; 
that  by  entrusting  a  comparatively  few 
responsible  men,  under  rigid  conditions, 
with  the  privilege  of  selling  liquor — that 
privilege  to  be  purchased  at  a  high  money 
price  and  to  be  cancelled  in  case  of  viola- 
tions of  the  law, — the  co-operation  of  these 
privileged  licensees  will  be  commanded 
by  the  authorities  in  their  efforts  to  en- 
force wholesome  restrictions  and  to  sup- 
press unlicensed  establishments ;  that  the 
first  restriction  of  the  liquor  traffic  by 
High  License  will  make  it  comparatively 
easy  to  bring  about  a  second  and  greater 
restriction,  to  be  followed  in  time  by  more 
radical  restrictions  until  the  whole  traffic 
is  "  taxed  to  death  "  and  thus  extinguished 
by  progressive  action  instead  of  by  a 
sudden  (and  not  necessarily  permanent) 
sentimental  decree ;  that,  meanwhile,  the 
liquor  traffic  will  be  under  the  severest 
stigma  attaching  to  any  trade,  and  be 
pronounced  by  law  to  be  so  dangerous  to 
the  community  as  to  require  restriction 
at  all  points  and  the  payment  of  enor- 
mous sums  to  the  Government;  and  that 
the  larger  revenue  will  in  a  more  satis- 
factory degree  compensate  the  public  for 
the  evils  resulting  from  the  traffic. 

HISTORICAL    REVIEW. 

The  High  License  plan  was  not  urged 
with  any  activity  in  the  early  years  of 
the  temperance  agitation.  This  fact 
seems  remarkable  when  it  is  remembered 
that  the  Prohibitory  movement  was  suc- 
cessful (nominally  at  least)  in  more 
States  during  the  decade  1850-60  than  it 
has  been  in  the  three  decades  since  1860. 
But  the  ingenuity  of  conservative  people 
was  not  then  fully  developed.  The  prop- 
osition that  the  traffic  was  either  right  or 
wrong,  and  should  be  suppressed  wholly 
or  permitted  to  continue  under  compara- 
tively normal  conditions,  was  then  more 
willingly  accepted.  The  Prohibitory  sys- 
tem, where  adopted,  was  not  regarded  as 
necessarily  permanent,  but  as  distinctively 
experimental,  to  be  abandoned  uncondi- 
tionally if  not  strong  enough  to  hold  its 
own.  The  willingness  of  liquor-dealers 
to  pay  heavy  license  charges  rather  than 
cease  selling  was  not  then  apj^arent.  At 
the  time  of  the  Prohibition  agitation  in 
New  York,  the  annual  saloon  license  fee 
in  the  chief  city  of  that  State  was  only 
110.  A  law  fixing  a  yearly  rate  of  $500 
or  11,000  would  probably  have  been  con- 


High  License.] 


209 


[High  License. 


sidered  a  greater  innovation  than  entire 
Prohibition.  The  Federal  Government 
liad  not  then  set  an  example  to  the  States. 
There  was  no  large  tax  upon  the  produc- 
tion of  liquors;  a  man  could  engage  in 
the  traffic  in  any  of  its  branches  with  but 
little  capital;  the  organized  liquor  power 
as  it  is  known  to-day  had  not  been  created. 

The  Hi2:h  License  movement,  as  a 
feature  of  the  temperance  agitation,  came 
into  existence  at  about  the  same  time  that 
the  Constitutional  Prohibition  idea  at- 
tained prominence.  Preparation  for  it 
had  been  made  by  a  gradual  raising  of 
the  license  rates  in  many  States.  Up  to 
1880,  however,  a  rate  of  $200  per  year 
was  considered  high.  The  High  License 
crusade  dates  from  the  enactment  of  the 
Nebraska  ''  Slocumb  "  law  in  February, 
188  L  It  fixed  minimum  annual  fees  of 
$500  for  saloons  in  all  towns  having  less 
than  10,000  population,  and  $1,000  in 
those  containing  more  than  10,000  in- 
habitants, and  established  numerous  re- 
strictions of  a  very  rigid  nature.  The 
enactment  of  the  Downing  law  of  Mis- 
souri followed  in  March,  1883,  fixing  the 
yearly  license  charges  at  $50  to  $200  for 
State  purposes,  and  $500  to  $800  for 
county  purposes— a  minimum  of  $550 
and  a  maximum  of  $1,000.  In  the  same 
year  (in  June)  the  Illinois  Legislature 
passed  the  Harper  law,  under  which 
minimum  rates  of  $500  for  the  sale  of  all 
kinds  of  liquors  and  $150  for  the  sale  of 
malt  liquors  only  were  fixed.  Since  then 
many  of  the  other  license  States  have  re- 
quired the  saloon-keepers  to  pay  relatively 
large  sums — notably  Massachusetts,where 
the  minimum  license  rate  for  the  ordinary 
saloon  selling  all  kinds  of  liquors  for  con- 
sumption on  and  off  the  premises  is  now 
$1,300  per  year;  Minnesota,  where  the 
minimum  rates  are  $500  for  towns  and 
$1,000  for  cities;  Pennsylvania,  where 
the  uniform  rate  for  each  city  is  $500; 
the  new  State  of  Montana,  wliere  $500  is 
charged  in  towns  having  3,500  inhabitants 
or  more;  the  Territory  of  Utah,  where 
the  minimum  charge  is  $600  and  the 
maximum  $1,200,  and  several  Southern 
States  like  Arkansas,  Texas  and  West 
Virginia,  where  the  aggregate  fees  ex- 
acted range  from  $500  upward.  (For  the 
license  provisions  prevailing  in  the  va- 
rious States,  see  Legislation.) 

The  first  High  License  legislation  un- 
deniably originated  with  thoroughly  rad- 


ical temperance  men,  believers  in  the 
principle  of  Prohibition,  who  honestly 
thought  they  were  making  a  serious  at- 
tack upon  the  traffic.  The  framers  of 
the  Nebraska  act  were  John  B.  Finch, 
H.  W.  Hardy  and  other  temperance 
leaders  equally  earnest.  The  Missouri 
law  was  passed  as  a  compromise  measure, 
to  defeat  the  Prohibitory  bill  pressed  by 
John  A.  Brooks  and  his  aggressive 
followers,  but  it  was  looked  upon  by 
many  as  an  important  step  in  the  direc- 
tion of  Prohibition.  In  Illinois  the 
Harper  law  was  also  welcomed  by  ad- 
vanced men.  "  When  our  Illinois  Legis- 
lature adopted  the  High  License  law," 
writes  Samuel  W.  Packard  of  Chicago, 
"I  was  greatly  rejoiced.  I  thought  it 
was  a  long  step  towards  Prohibition,  I 
tried  to  get  up  a  celebration  over  the 
great  victory  for  temperance,  and  offered 
to  contribute  $10  towards  fireworks  for 
the  occasion."!  Similar  gratification  and 
confidence  have  been  expressed  by  tem- 
perance leaders  upon  the  enactment  of 
High  License  in  other  States.  Very 
moderate  measures  have  called  forth  en- 
comiums from  some  of  the  foremost 
friends  of  Prohibition :  for  instance,  the 
Scott  law  of  Ohio,  fixing  the  maximum 
saloon  tax  at  $200  per  year  for  places  sell- 
ing all  sorts  of  liquors,  and  $100  per  year 
for  those  selling  beer  and  wine  exclusively,, 
was  commended  in  the  warmest  terms  by 
Dr.  Theodore  L.  Cuyler.  (See""p.l07.)  It 
was  several  years  before  the  High  License 
programme  was  regarded  with  decided 
suspicion  by  the  Prohibitionists,  but  by 
1886  a  general  distrust  was  felt,  and  ever 
since  then  active  hostility  has  been  mani- 
fested. Opposition  to  High  License  is-^ 
now  as  much  a  part  of  the  ProhibitioiL 
creed  as  opposition  to  the  saloon  itself. 

PROHIBITION     OPPOSITION — TEST     QUES- 
TIONS. 

In  justification  of  this  antagonism  the 
Prohibitionists,  besides  declaring  that 
High  License  in  principle  is  simply  a 
variation  of  the  license  idea  with  which 
they  are  at  war,  present  an  indictment 
against  the  policy  on  practical  grounds 
that  seems  to  be  conclusive.  This  indict- 
ment contradicts  every  claim  made  by 
High  License  advocates,  save  only  the 
claims  that  a  reduction  in  the  number  of 
saloons  will  be  effected  by  an  honest  trial 

1  The  Voice,  Jan.  19,  1888. 


High.  License.] 


210 


[Higli  License. 


of  their  programme,  and  that  an  increase 
in  the  revenue  from  the  traffic  will  be 
gained.  High  License  legislation  is 
shown  to  have  no  genuine  temperance 
value  and  to  be  incapable,  even  under  the 
most  favorable  circumstances,  of  produc- 
ing encouraging  temperance  results. 
And  it  is  not  a  failure  merely  in  the 
sense  that  restrictions  proper  are  failures; 
it  is  condemned  as  an  obstructiii'e  de- 
vice, more  dangerous  than  any  other 
■compromise  yet  tried,  and  the  most  ef- 
fective policy  that  can  possibly  be  resorted 
to  by  the  forces  that  seek  to  defeat  or 
defer  Prohibition. 

Any  statistical  inquiry  concerning  the 
fruits  of  High  License  experiments  from 
.the  temperance  point  of  view  must  be 
ibased  on  certain  test  questions  like  these : 
Has  the  number  of  arrests  for  drunken- 
■ness  and  disorderly  conduct  been  re- 
duced, or  is  that  number  comparatively 
■smaller  in  High  License  communities 
than  in  communities  where  low  rates  of 
license  prevail  ?  How  do  the  total  num- 
bers of  arrests  for  all  causes  compare  in 


High  License  and  low  license  communi- 
ties ?  Is  there  any  evidence  that  the 
quantity  of  liquor  consumed  has  been 
diminished  under  High  License  ?  No 
satisfactory  inquiry  has  been  conducted 
under  official  auspices,  but  private  in- 
vestigators have  amassed  a  great  deal  of 
testimony  that  stands  unchallenged.  The 
most  important  evidence  is  that  printed 
by  the  Voice,  of  which  we  present  some 
of  the  main  features. 

In  1889  the  Voice  sent  letters  to  the 
police  and  other  officials  of  every  import- 
ant city  of  the  United  States  in  which 
the  annual  saloon  license  fee  during  1888 
was  (1)  in  excess  of  $500  or  (2)  under 
1200.  Statistics  sufficiently  complete  to 
Justify  classification  were  received  from 
41  of  the  High  License  cities  and  38  of 
the  low  license  cities.  Every  re2^ort  was 
treated  with  perfect  impartiality.  In  the 
following  table  the  Voice's  figures  of  ar- 
rests and  license  fees  for  1888  are  copied, 
but  the  population  returns  are  for  the 
year  1890,  specially  obtained  from  the 
Census  Bureau  in  February,  1891. 


CiTT. 

Population,    1890. 
Official  and  Semi-Offi- 
cial. 

Annual  License  Fee 
of  Ordinary  Saloon, 

1888. 

§ 

■a 

t»  . 

**-  00 

.Q 
3 

Population  to  One 
Saloon. 

Total  Number  of 

Arrests. 

Arrests  for  Drunk- 
enness and  Disorderly 
Conduct. 

Number  of  Popula- 
tion to  One  Arrest  foi 
Drunkenness  and  Dis- 
orderly Conduct. 

Per  Cent,  of  Arresti- 
for  Drunkennes.^  and 
Disorderly  Conduct  to 
Total  Arrests. 

Hi(/h  License  Cities. 

Little  Rock',  Ark 

■Joliet,  111 

(«)     25,133 
la)     27,407 
(a)     23,584 
(a)    I(i4.7:i8 
in)    133,1.56 
(a)     13,793 

(a)  55,491 
(fl)    139,.526 

(b)  40,733 
(b)    132,716 

(a)  52,811 
(6)      16,074 

(b)  30,801 
(6)      84,655 
(a)     38,681 
(«)      19,634 

(a)  38,140 
(ft)      .50,395 

(b)  77,096 

(a)  22,242 

(b)  451,770 
(a)     11,159 
(a)      18,650 
(6)1,099,850 
(a)     15,156 
(a)     31,478 
(a)     13,596 
(ffi)     24,852 
(fl)       6,.524 
(a)       5.321 
(a)     27,826 
(a)    205,069 

(c)  30,000 
(«)      61,147 
(a)     20,779 
(a)     22,668 
(a)     13,519 
(6)     44,179 

SI, 000 

1,000 

1,000 

1,000 

1,000 

1,000 

1,000 

1,000 

1,000 

900 

850 

800 

750 

750 

650 

625 

600 

600 

600 

600 

550 

500 

500 

500 

500 

500 

500 

500 

500 

.500 

500 

,500 

500 

510 

500 

500 

500 

500 

45 

54 

26 

248 

360 

13 

32 

250 

96 

500 

130 

20 

34 

81 

1.50 

38 

100 

210 

217 

52 

1,800 

72 

41 

4,200 

100 

116 

57 

115 

14 

11 

141 

1,000 

171 

143 

60 

62 

48 

36 

559 
.508 
907 
664 
370 

1,061 

1,7:W 
5.58 
424 
265 
406 
804 
906 

1,045 
258 
517 
3'1 
238 
3.58 
428 
251 
1.55 
455 
262 
152 
270 
2.39 
216 
466 
484 
197 
20() 
175 
449 
346 
306 
282 

1,227 

2,932 
1,760 

401  > 
6,039 
6,862 

353  2 
1,876 
12,,543  3 
1,345 
6,767 
3,909 

642 
1,540 
4,241 
2,725  1 

307 
3,721  1 
5,579 
4,150 
1,110 
17,987 
2,058 
2,062 
50,4.32 
1„573 

808 

417 

3,233 

78 

62 

972 
9,142 
1,671 
1,737 

876 

466 

957 
2,084 

1,099 
1,158 

305  1 
3,408 
3,493 
150 
752 
2,955  ' 
1,006 
2,308 
1,540 
419 
1,180 
3,284 
1,227  1 

190 

1,634  1 

1,853 

3,065 

008 

8,467 

1,547 

1,375 

51,164 

648 

510 

207 

1,351 

89 

26 

523 

5,396 

779 

1,046 

478 

362 

308 

1,478 

23 
24 

77 
48 
38 
92 
74 
47 
40 
58 
34 
38 
26 
26 
32 
103 
23 
27 
25 
37 
53 
7 
14 
35 
23 
61 
66 
18 
167 
205 
53 
38 
39 
61 
43 
63 
44 
30 

37 
66 
76 
56 
51 
43 
40 
23 
75 
34 
39 
65 
7'7 
77 
45 
62 
44 
33 
74 
54 
47 
75 
67 
62 
41 
63 
50 
42 
50 
42 
54 
59 
47 
60 
55 
7-8 
32 
71 

Rockford,  111 

Minneapolis,  Minn 

St.  Paul,  Minn 

Hastines.  Neb 

Lincoln.  Neb 

Omaha,  Neb 

New  Bedford,  Mass 

Kansas  City,  Mo 

St.  Joseph,  Mo 

North  Adams,  Mass 

Salem,  Mass        

Worcester,  Mass 

San  Antonio,  Tex 

Aurora,  III   

Dallas,  Tex 

Los  Angeles,  Cal 

Lowell,  Mass 

Bloomington,  111 

8t.  Louis,  Mo 

Leadville,  Col .. 

Columbus,  Ga  

Chicago,  111 

East  St.  Louis,  111 

Quincey,  III   

Rock  Island,  111 

Springfield,  111  

Faribault,  Minn 

Rochester,  Minn 

Rav  Citv.  Mich 

Detroit,  Mich 

East  Saginaw,  Mich .... 
Grand  Rapids,  Mich — 

Jackson,  Mich 

Muskegon,  Mich 

Port  Huron,  Mich 

Springfield,  Mass 

High  liicense.] 


211 


[High  License. 


'  CiTT. 


Hidh  License.  Cities. 

Allegheny,  Pa 

Philadelphia,  Pa 

Parkersburg,  W.  Va 

Low  License  Cities. 

Savannah,  Ga  

Indianapolis,  Ind 

Charleston,  S.  C 

Fon  Du  Lac,  Wis 

La  Crosse,  Wis     

Madison,  Wis 

Milwaukee,  Wis 

Oshkosh,  Wis 

Kacine,  Wis 

Lynchburg,  Va 

New  York  City 

Virginia,  Nev .. 

Richmond,  Va 

Ogdensburg,  N.  Y 

Oswego,  N.  y         

Watertown,  N.  Y 

Norristown,  Pa 

Auburn,  N.  Y  

Buffalo,  N.  Y 

Poughkeepsie,  N.  Y 

Wilmington,  Del 

Lexington,  Ky 

Brooklyn,  N.  Y 

San  Francisco.  Cal 

Binghamton,  N.  Y 

Schenectady,  N.  Y 

Baltimore,  Md 

Cumberland,  Md 

Long  Island  City,  N.  Y. 

Rochester,  N.  Y 

Rome,  N.  Y 

Utica,  N.  Y 

Yonkers,  N.  Y" 

Martinsburg,  W.  Va 

Elmira,  N.  Y 

Cohoes,  N.  Y 

Troy,  N.  Y       

Covington,  Ky 


"  3 

o 

ATI 

.2 -3 

2.  3 

S"i3   . 


Summary. 
41  High  License  Cities. 
38  Low  License  Cities. 


[h)  105,287 
(Wl,04(i,9fj4 
(a)   8,389 


(a) 
(a) 
(a) 
(W 
<b) 
ib) 
(b) 
(b) 
(b) 
(a) 


41,762 
107,445 
.54.592 
12.024 
25,090 
13,426 
204, 168 
22,836 
21,014 
J  9,779 


(6)l,.ol5,301 


(«) 

(a) 

(«) 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

(b) 

(b) 

(a) 

(a) 

(b) 

(a 

(a) 

(a) 

<a) 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

(«) 

(a) 

(«) 

(a) 


6,337 
80,838 
11,667 
21,826 
14,7.33 
19,7.50 
25,887 

254,457 
22,836 
61,437 
22,355 

806,343 

298,097 
35,093 
19,857 

434,439 
10,030 
30,.396 

138,327 
14,980 
44,001 
.31,945 
7.207 
28,070 
22,432 
60,605 
37,375 


4,4.55,189 
4,599.957 


s  = 

, 

"  o 

a 

o 

^  3 

o 

■3 

►J§ 

o88 

CJ 

S'^ 

.c 

cO  . 

a 

<^^ 

« 

$500 

78 

50<1 

1,340 

500 

34 

800 

265 

200 

360 

200 

271 

200 

54 

200 

144 

200 

70 

200 

1,198 

200 

85 

200 

85 

200 

66 

200 

7,809 

184 

50 

s  180 

314 

1.50 

39 

1.50 

1.50 

1.50 

38 

1.50 

.34 

135 

111 

125 

1,850 

125 

im 

100 

2t)0 

100 

85 

100 

3,164 

84 

3,(X)0 

5  90 

99 

75 

120 

50 

2,860 

50 

58 

50 

216 

.50 

926 

50 

100 

50 

aso 

50 

101 

50 

19 

45 

218 

40 

200 

30 

720 

25 

194 

Ave  rage 

License. 

$665. 

12,295 

122. 

25,783 

o 

o 


§§ 


p. 
o 


1,.3.50 
781 
247 

158 
298 
201 
223 
174 
192 
171 
269 
247 
300 
194 
127 
257 
299 
146 
388 
.581 
233 
i:i8 
176 
307 
263 
255 
100 
354 
165 
1.52 
173 
141 
149 
150 
116 
316 
379 
129 
112 
84 
193 


362 
179 


o 


3,042 

46,899 
768 

2,157 
3,972 
3,210 

149  < 
2,375 

293 
4,:M6 
1,376 

129 

2.575 

85,049 

262 
6,290 

116 

736 

352 

409 

1,142 

14,149 

462 

2,019  « 

2,322 

31,124 

19,466 

725 

708 
29,789 

770 
1,256 
4,204 

165 
1,.520 

509 

97 

1,830 

626 
2,531 
1,667 


216,132 

230,877 


a;  C  . 
a  "  o 

«  OD  3 


2,026 

31.837 

616 


1,198 

1,296 

91 

623 

142 

3.02;j 

286 

82 

560 

46,174 

180 

2,225 

43 

512 

222 

2.52 

702 

7,584 

226 

1,105  « 

764 

16,112 

10,508 

621 

366 

18,949 

655 

380 

1,356 

110 

540 

389 

39 

1,087 

312 

1,356 

1,1.30 


121,877 
122,179 


ci  O  °^ 
t.  C  c  o 

SOcO 


s 


52 
33 
14 

43 
90 
42 

132 
40 
95 
68 
80 

256 
35 
33 
.35 
36 

271 
43 
66 
78 
37 
34 

100 
.56 
29 
50 
28 
57 
54 
23 
15 
80 

103 

136 
81 
82 

185 
26 
72 
45 
33 


36.6 
37.6 


t.  m  3 
.  O^  CO 


68 

m 

80 

45 

30 
40 
61 
28 
48 
69 
21 
64 
23 
M 
69 
35 
87 
69 
63 
61 
61 
53 
49 
55 
33 
51 
&4 
8(J 
51 
64 
85 
30 
33 
66 
36 
76 
40 
59 
50 
54 
67 


56 
53 


'Figures  for  1887.  ^  including  105  so-called  "arrests"  of  prostitutes.  3  Including  2,701  so-called  "arrests"  of 
prostitutes.  <  Does  not  include  678  vagrants  and  tramps.  *  Approximate.  *  Nine  months'  record.  '  The  fig- 
ures of  arrests  for  disorderly  conduct  in  Omaha  do  not  include  1,113  for  '•  disturbing  the  peace  by  fighting,"  484  "  susm- 
cious  characters,"  62  "using  obscene  language,"  2.608  "  vaCTants"  or  other  similar  arrests  usually  classified  with  "dis- 
orderly." In  order  to  be  strictly  fair  to  High  License  Omaaa,  we  have  not  counted  these  offenses,  althougb  they  should 
undoubtedly  be  counted. 

(rt)  First  counts,  and  therefore  semi-official.    (6)  Official,    (c)  Estimated. 


The  following  deductions  are  drawn 
from  the  table  : 

1.  The  license  fee  is  five  times  as  great  in  the 
41  High  License  cities  as  in  the  38  low  license 
cities,  and  the  number  of  saloons  is  only  about 
one-third  as  great. 

2.  Yet  there  is  but  very  little  difference 
in  the  number  of  arrests  in  ratio  to  popula- 
tion in  the  High  License  and  the  low  license 
cities. 

3.  The  ratio  of  arrests  for  drunkenness  and 
disorder  to  the  total  arrests  is  noticeably  greater 
in  the  High  License  than  in  the  low  license 
cities. 


The  conclusions  thus  reached  are  con- 
firmatory of  those  derived  from  similar 
investigations,  on  a  narrower  scale,  foy- 
merlv  made  by  the  Voice.  (See  "The 
Political  Prohibitionist  for  1887,"  p.  59, 
and  for  1889,  p.  60.) 

Separate  comparisons  of  particular  High 
License  cities  with  particular  low  license 
cities  might  be  made,  showing  very  un- 
favorably for  High  License.  But  the  table 
given  above  meets  all  the  purposes  of 
such  individual  comparisons  and  it  is  far 
more   satisfactory  to  the  student  than 


High.  License.] 


212 


[High  liiceuse. 


any  number  of  single  instances  would  be, 
since  it  has  a  wide  range  and  justifies 
general  statements. 

But  there  is  another  very  important 
branch  of  investigation.  It  is  desirable 
not  merely  to  compare  conditions  in  one 
city  with  those  in  another,  but  to  ascer- 
tain the  comparative  conditions  resulting 
from  the  High  License  and  low  license 
policies  respectively,  ojoerating  in  differ- 
ent years  in  the  same  city.  What  have 
been  the  practical  consequences  of  changes 
from  low  license  to  High  License  in  typi- 
cal American  communities  ?  Do  not  the 
statistics  of  arrests  for  drunkenness  and 
critae  show  that  such  changes  have  been 
for  the  better  ?  These  questions  must  be 
candidly  answered  by  patiently  searching 
the  records  of  a  large  number  of  cities, 
before  the  final  verdict  on  the  High 
License  system  can  fairly  be  made  up. 

A   GENERAL   SURVEY. 

From  Nebraska,  the  oldest  of  the  High 
License  States,  the  testimony  is  practi- 
cally unanimous  that  there  is  more 
drunkenness  and  crime  in  proportion  to 
the  population  now,  after  nine  years'  trial 
of  the  $1,000  law,  than  there  ever  was 
under  low  license.  Unfortunately  it  is  all 
but  impossible  to  secure  reliable  police  re- 
cords of  arrests  for  drunkenness,  etc.,  for 
any  year  of  the  low  license  period.  But 
conditions  must  have  been  frightful 
indeed  if  the  evils  of  the  liquor  traffic  in 
the  Nebraska  towns  were  greater  tlen 
than  they  are  now.  For  example,  in 
Omaha  (see  the  above  table)  there  was 
one  arrest  in  1888  for  every  11  of  the 
population ;  and  even  omitting  the  2,701 
so-called  "  arrests "  of  prostitutes  in 
Omaha  in  that  year,  there  was  one  arrest 
for  every  14  of  the  poj)ulation— a  ratio 
more  appalling  than  that  found  in  any 
other  great  American  city.  The  com- 
plete failure  of  High  License  in  Nebraska 
will  be  alluded  to  more  j^articularly  in 
another  part  of  this  article. 

Missouri,  which  adopted  High  License 
in  1883,  has  had  a  similar  experience. 
In  the  city  of  St.  Louis  during  the  last 
year  of  low  license  (1:85)  there  were  1,800 
saloons,  3,500  arrests  for  drunkenness 
and  14,000  arrests  for  all  causes;  while 
in  1887  the  licpnse  fee  was  $559,  there 
were  about  1,700  saloons,  and  the  number 
of  arrests  for  drunkenness  was  4,112,  and 
for  all  causes  15,217.     In  St.  Joseph  dur- 


ing the  last  full  year  of  low  license  the 
license  fee  was  $150  and  there  were  1,935 
arrests,  of  which  465  were  for  drunken- 
ness ;  while  during  the  first  full  year  of 
High  License  (April,  1884,  to  April,  1885) 
the  license  fee  was  $750  and  there  were 
2,141  arrests,  of  which  612  were  for 
drunkenness. 

The  cities  of  the  State  of  Illinois  pre- 
sent records  that  are  uniformly  discour- 
aging to  the  High  License  advocates. 
The  following  are  the  figures  for  Chicago : 


Year. 

Saloon 
License 

Fee. 

Total 
Arrests. 

Arrests 
FOR  Drunk- 
enness 
AND  Disor- 
derly 
Conduct. 

Arrests 

OF 

Minors. 

1880 
1881 
1882 
1883 
1884 
1885 
1886 
1887 
1888 

S52 

53 

52 

10.3 

1.50-5001 

150-.500" 

500 

.500 

500 

28,480 

3i.ri3 

32,S00 
37,187 
30.434 
40.'.l'.lS 
44,2til 
4(1.505 
50,432 

18,045 
21,410 
23,0S0 
25.407 
26,007 
31,164 

6,144 
6,753 
7,109 
6,675 
6,718 
6,.5.50 
6,841 
7,.539 
8,923 

1  $150  for  beer  and  $.500  for  strong  liquors. 

The  last  year  befq^-e  the  $500  license 
fee  went  into  effect  was  1883 ;  comparing 
the  figures  for  1888  with  the  figures  for 
1883,  it  is  seen  that  the  license  fee  in- 
creased 400  per  cent.,  the  total  arrests 
increased  35.6  per  cent.,  the  arrests  for 
drunkenness  and  disorderly  conduct  in- 
creased 72.7  per  cent,  and  the  arrests  of 
minors  increased  33.7  per  cent,  (although 
special  efforts  were  made  by  the  Citizens' 
League  to  keep  the  boys  out  of  the 
saloons).  The  other  cities  of  Illinois 
show  results  quite  as  striking.  In  Joliet 
and  Rockford,  where  the  annual  license 
rate  has  been  $1,000,  crime  and  intem- 
perance have  steadily  increased.  ^ 

Passing  by  many  other  examples,  we 
dismiss  this  branch  of  the  statistical  in- 
quiry with  a  glance  at  the  High  License 
cities  of  Massachusetts  and  Pennsylvania. 
In  the  former  State  at  the  beginning  of 
the  license  year  in  1889  (May  1)  two 
extraordinary  statutes  went  into  effect  : 
one  limited  the  number  of  saloons  to  one 
for  each  500  of  the  population  in  Boston 
and  each  1,000  of  the  population  In  every 
other  community;  and  the  other  fixed  a 
minimum  annual  license  rate  of  $1,000 
for  saloons  selling  all  kinds  of  liquors  for 
consumption   on    the    premises   and   an 

'  See  "  The  Political  Prohibitionist  for  1889,"  pp.  58,  62. 


High  liicense.] 


213 


[High  License. 


additional  $300  for  those  selling  also  for 
consumption  off  tlie  premises— so  that 
the  minimum  annual  license  rate  for  the 
ordinary  saloon  in  Massachusetts  became 
$1,300  on  the  1st  of  May,  1889.  The 
average  rate  prevailing  previously  to  that 
date  was  not  in  excess  of  $350,  although 
in  some  cities  $400  and  larger  sums  were 
charged.  But  in  practically  all  the  cities 
granting  licenses  in  May,  1889,  there  was  a 
noticeable  increase  in  arrests.  In  Boston, 
although  there  were  only  780  licenses 
granted  in  1889  as  against  1,545  in  1888, 
the  arrests  for  drunkenness  numbered 
5,999  during  May,  June  and  July  of  1889, 
as  against  only  5,261  during  the  same 
months  of  1888.  In  Lynn  the  number 
of  saloons  decreased  from  120  in  1888  to 
46  in  1889,  yet  the  arrests  for  drunken- 
ness increased  from  444  during  May, 
June  and  July  of  1888  to  517  during  the 
same  months  of  1889.  In  Lowell  the 
license  fee  for  the  ordinary  saloon  was 
$500  in  1888  and  $1,400  in  1889,  while 
only  62  licenses  were  issued  in  1889  as 
against  240  in  1888;  yet  the  arrests  for 
drunkenness  were  1,348  in  the  four 
months  of  May,  June,  July  and  August, 
1889.  as  against  only  1,204  in  the  same 
months  of  1888.  ^ 

THE   CASE   OF   PHILADELPHIA. 

All  this  convincing  testimony  against 
High  License  as  a  temperance  measure 
has  been  ignored  by  the  advocates  of  the 
policy.  When  asked  to  present  facts  in 
demonstration   of   its   practical  benefits. 


1  For  statistics  for  other  license  cities  of  Massachusetts, 
telling  with  equal  force  against  High  License,  see  tlie 
Voice  for  Sept.  13  and  Oct.  31,  1889. 

The  Voice  made  a  still  more  thorough  presentation  of 
Massachusetts  police  statistics  in  its  issue  for  April  3, 
1890.  But  chis  presentation  is  not  so  valuable  as  the  others, 
since  the  tigures  for  1889  are  figures  for  the  police  year 
which  terminated  (in  most  cities)  on  Jan.  31, 1889,  and  not 
for  the  license  year  which  terminated  (in  all  cities)  on 
April  30,  1890;  therefore  the  figures  for  the  year  1889  given 
by  the  Voice  represent,  at  the  most,  only  eight  months  of 
the  first  year  of  High  License  in  Massachusetts.  Besides, 
the  figurea-under  the  heads  "  License  Fee  "  and  "  Number 
of  Saloons  "  are  not  properly  computed  in  all  cases. in  this 
table.  But-'^fio  statistics  (official  in  every. case)  of  arrests 
for  all  offenses  and  arrests  for  drunkenness,  are  of  great 
interest;  they  show  that  during  the  police  year  1889  (in- 
cluding eight  months  under  the  new  High  License  law), 
the  arrests  for  drunkenness  and  crime  were  in  nearly  all 
cases  more  numerous  than  during  the  low  license  years 
1880,  1887  and  1888.  For  instance,  the  totals  for  Boston 
were:  An-fxts  for  «Wo^'<?;we.?— 1886  (low  license),  28,510; 
1887  (low  license),  30,681;  1888  (low  license),  36,009;  1889 
(eight  months  High  License),  40,066;  Arrests  for  dri/nk- 
ewi«;.v<— 1886, 16,179;  1887,19,141;  1888,23,044;  ISS'.l.  ^'l.i)91. 
The  totals  for  Lowell  were:  Arrests  for  all  ojfe/ises— 1880, 
3,393;  1887,  3,484;  1888,  4,150;  1889,  4,.557;  Airests  for 
drunkenness— 18SQ,  2,220;  1887,  2,501;  1888,  2,930;  1889, 
3,307.  And  the  figures  for  Fall  River,  Lynn,  Lawrence, 
Springfield  and  other  cities  were  of  the  same  general 
character. 


they  have  merely  cited  figures  showing  a 
decrease  in  the  number  of  saloons  and  an 
increase   in   the   revenue.      No    attempt 
has  been  made  to  prove  that  High  License 
has  checked  intemperance  and  crime,  save 
only  for  the  city  of  Philadelphia.     The 
Brooks  law  went  into  operation  in  that 
city  June  1, 1888.     The  number  of  liquor 
licenses  was   immediately  reduced   from 
5,773  in  1888  to  1,347;  and  during  the 
five  months  of  June,  July,  August,  Sep- 
tember and  October,  1888,  the  number  of 
commitments  to  tbe  County  Prison  was 
only  8,455,  as  against  13,554  in  the  same 
months  of  1887;   while  the  number  of 
commitments  to  the  House  of  Correction 
in  the  same  months  showed  a  decrease 
from  2,663  in  1887  to  1,823  in  1888.     It 
was  claimed  that  this  very  large  reduc- 
tion was  due  to  the  High  .License  feature 
of  the  Brooks  law.     But  the  license  rate 
fixed  by  this  law  was  only  $500;  and  ex- 
perience in  other  cities  had  provided  no 
justification  for  attributing  Philadelphia's 
temperance   results  to   the  increased  li- 
cense fee.      In  fact,  these  results  came 
wholly    from  other  causes:    the  Brooks 
law  established  a  new   licensing  system 
for   Philadelphia,   taking    the    licensing 
power  out  of  the  control  of  the  corruj^t 
jjolitical  board  that  had   formerly  exer- 
cised it  and  placing  it  in  the  hands  of  the 
Court  of  Quarter  Sessions.     This  Court 
manifested  great  severity ;  and  although 
more  than  3,000  applicants  stood  ready 
to  pay  the  $500  license  fee,  only  1,347 
licenses  were   granted.     The  Judges   of 
the  Court  were  exceptionally  aggressive 
and    honorable    men,   and    it   was   well 
known   to   the  liquor-dealers  that  their 
licenses  would  not  be   continued  if  the 
restrictions    of    the    law    were    not    re- 
spected.    These    peculiar   circumstances 
explain  the  brief  imjirovement  in  Phila- 
delphia  from   the  temperance   point  of 
view.      The    record    of   decreased    com- 
mitments was   not   maintained,  the   fig- 
ures  for   the    year    1889    showing    tbat 
crime  was  again  on  the  increase.     The 
brewers  of  Philadelphia  are  more  pros- 
perous  than   they  were   under   the   low 
license  law;  for  the  year  ending  June  30, 
1890,  the  sales  of  beer  in  that  city  aggre- 
gated 1,458,846  barrels,  as  against  1,409,- 
478  barrels  for  the  year  ending  June  30, 
1888,  the  last  year  of  low  license. ^     The 

*  The  Brewers''  Journal  for  July,  1890. 


Higli  License.] 


214 


[High  License. 


most  prominent  temperance  leaders,  men 
who  had  originated  the  restrictions  of  the 
Brooks  law,  united  in  declaring  that  the 
High  License  provision  had  nothing 
to  do  with  the  decrease  in  the  arrests.  ^ 
And  there  was  no  such  decrease  in 
any  other  city  of  Pennsylvania.  The 
traffic  in  the  cities  of  Pittsburgh  and 
Allegheny  was  revolutionized  in  pre- 
cisely the  same  way  as  the  traffic  in 
Philadelphia  had  been  ;  the  licensing 
power  was  taken  from  a  political  board 
and  given  to  the  Courts,  and  Judge 
White,  who  presided  at  the  licensing 
session,  was  even  more  stringent  tnan 
the  Philadelphia  Judges.  Under  his  ad- 
ministration the  number  of  licenses  in 
Allegheny  County  (embracing  Pittsburgh 
and  Allegheny)  was  reduced  from  2,185 
in  1887  to  525  in  1888:  yet  arrests  for 
drunkenness  and  crime  in  the  two  cities 
in  1888  showed  a  decided  increase.  As 
for  the  other  cities  of  Pennsylvania,  the 
Brooks  law  was  attended  with  no  benefi- 
cial results  in  any  of  them.^ 

In  making  statistical  comparisons  we 
have  purposely  contrasted  High  License 
systems  with  low  license  systems  exclu- 
sively,' in  order  to  discover  whether 
High  License  has  any  advantages  over 
low  license  on  temperance  grounds.  Low 
license  is  confessedly  an  inefficient  tem- 
perance policy ;  nobody  claims  that  in  a 
community  Avhcre  licenses  are  granted 
without  discrimination  the  evils  of  the 
liquor  traffic  will  be  comparatively  slight ; 
everybody  admits  that  in  such  a  com- 
munity these  evils  will  be  appalling. 
High  License  is  championed  solely  upon 
the  theory  that  it  will  be  a  somewhat  bet- 
ter temperance  policy  than  low  license. 
We  have  seen  that  this  theory  is  falla- 
cious if  official  statistics  are  to  be  re- 
garded as  conclusive.  High  License  laws, 
even  the  most  rigid,  have  not  checked 
arrests  for  intemperance,  disorder  and 
crime :  that  proposition  admits  of  no  dis- 
pute. 

But  if  it  is  urged  that  the  different 
claims  for  High  License  noticed  at  the 
beginning  of  this  article  should  be  sub- 
jected to  other  tests,  no  difficulty  will  be 


•  See  the  letter  of  Joshua  L.  Baily  in  the  Voice  for  Jan. 
31,  1889,  and  the  interview  with  Lewis  D.  Vail  in  the  Voice 
for  Oct.  31,  1889. 

9 See  "The  Political  Prohibitionist  for  1889,"  p.  64. 

*  For  an  examination  of  the  comparative  results  of  High 
License  and  Prohibitory  laws,  see  Pkohibition,  Bene- 
riTS  OF. 


experienced  in  reviewing  them  from  any 
standpoint  that  may  be  suggested  to  the 
practical  mind.  Testimony  of  unques- 
tioned authority  is  abundant. 

TESTIMONY    PKOM   THE    CLERGYMEN   AND 
OTHERS. 

The  testimony  of  the  persons  most 
profoundly  and  most  conscientiously  in- 
terested in  the  advancement  of  temper- 
ance reform  should  first  be  consulted — 
the  testimony  of  the  religious  element 
and  of  the  temperance  leaders  and  organ- 
izations. Exhaustive  inquiries  as  to  the 
effects  of  the  Nebraska  law  have  recently 
been  made  among  the  Nebraska  clergy. 
In  1890  the  Voice  sent  a  series  of  ques- 
tions to  the  ministers  of  that  State,  in- 
cluding the  following : 

"  After  an  experience  of  nine  years  of  High 
License  in  Nebraska,  how.  in  your  opinion,  can 
the  power  of  the  saloon  be  most  readily  broken 
and  its  influence  for  evil  destroyed  — by  con- 
tinuing the  license  system  and  making  it  man- 
datory in  all  parts  of  the  State,  or  by  prohibit- 
ing the  saloon  by  law  ? " 

Replies  were  received  from  285  clergy- 
men, among  whom  there  were  142 
Methodist  Episcopalians,  17  Baptists,  15 
Presbyterians,  19  Congregationalists,  3 
United  Brethren  pastors,  4  Protestant 
Episcopalians,  12  Lutherans,  2  Eoman 
Catholics  and  4  Christians;  while  67  were 
affiliated  with  other  denominations.  Of 
these  285  clergymen,  276  answered  that 
observation  and  experience  induced  them 
to  believe  that  High  License  had  failed 
in  Nebraska  and  Prohibition  would  be  a 
better  policy.*  Similar  investigations 
have  produced  similar  results.  In  1888 
Kev.  (t.  H.  Prentice  of  Gilbertsville,  N. 
Y.,  addressed  a  number  of  inquiries, 
covering  the  whole  ground  of  the  claims 
made  by  the  advocates  of  High  License, 
to  many  Nebraska  pastors.  The  replies, 
with  scarcely  an  exception,  "denounced 
the  law  with  extraordinary  vehemence, 
declaring  it  to  be  worse  than  worthless 
as  a  temperance  measure  and  the  strong- 
est possible  barrier  to  the  advancement 
of  Prohibition.''^  Representative  reli- 
gious denominations  of  Nebraska,  at  their 
State  meetings,  frequently  condemn  the 
High  License  law  explicitly,  or,  by  de- 
claring for  Prohibition  as  the  only  ac- 


*  See  the  Voice  for  March  13,  Juno  12  and  June  19,  1890. 
6  Political  Prohibitionist  for  1S90,  p.  60. 


High.  Liicense.] 


515 


[High  License. 


ceptable  policy,  intimate  their  condemna- 
tiou  of  it.  The  Nebraska  Baptist  Con- 
vention declared,  Nov.  2,  1888 : 

"  We  condema  the  High  Licenss  system  of 
Nebraska  as  morally  wrong  and  a  compromise 
with  the  powers  of  darkness,  under  which  the 
liquor  traffic  lias  been  fostered  and  developed 
until  it  has  become  a  united  and  mighty  power 
of  evil  and  a  controlling  influence  in  the  poli- 
tics and  legislation  of  our  State." 

The  Nebraska  Presbyterian  Synod  in 
1888  declared : 

"  We  have  no  faith  in  compromise,  no  faith 
in  license,  high  or  low.  In  the  name  of  God 
and  humanity,  we  demand  that  the  saloon  be 
made  an  outlaw  in  the  State  and  m  the  nation. 
We  want  no  fellowship  with  the  'unfruitful 
works  of  darkness.'  We  want  no  blood  money 
to  pay  our  taxes  and  to  educate  our  children. 
We  want  no  legal  enactment  to  protect  this  na- 
tional nuisance  from  the  vengeance  of  an  out- 
raged people." 

The  Methodist  Episcopal  Conference 
of  Nebraska  in  1888  declared : 

"That  we  will  adhere  to  and  support  only 
that  ]iarty  which  is  entirely  committed  to  the 
principle  that  the  '  complete  legal  Prohibition  of 
the  traffic  iu  alcoholic  drinks  is  the  duty  of  civil 
government.'  We  cannot  be  induced  to  deviate 
from  this  position." 

The  temperance  leaders  of  Nebraska 
who  took  so  active  a  part  in  framing  the 
High  License  act  unite  in  pronouncing  it 
an  absolute  failure  in  practice.  John  B. 
Finch  said  in  1885 : 

"  I  now  know  I  was  terribly  mistaken  in  my 
theories.  Many  of  the  delusions  urged  in  de- 
fense of  High  License  have  been  exploded  by 
the  trial  of  the  law."  ' 

H.  W.  Hardy,  known  as  the  '•  father  of 
High  License,"  has  said : 

"High  License  does  increass  the  number  of 
unlicensed  drinking- places.  The  last  time  we 
had  access  to  the  Internal  Revenue  Collector's 
books  (he  won't  let  us  see  them  lately),  there 
were  91  iJirsons  in  Omaha  and  17  in  Lincoln 
w^ho  held  a  Government  permit  without  the  sign 
of  a  city  or  State  license.  Of  coursa  they  were 
selling  liquor,  or  why  did  they  pay  for  a  Gov- 
ernment permit  ?  They  are  not  afraid  of  local 
authorities,  but  do  not  dare  to  monkey  with  the 
Government.  We  never  knew  one  liquor  dealer 
to  complain  of  another.  They  all  live  in  glass 
houses  of  violated  law.  and  throwing  stones 
would  be  dangerous.  Some  parts  of  the  State 
are  even  worse  than  the  cities  I  have  mentioned. 
It  does  not  lessen  the  number  of  open  saloons. 
If  ten  are  making  clear  $1,000  each  and  you  tax 
each  of  them  $1,000.  it  would  leave  them  no 
profits  at  all ;  but  if  four  dropped  out,  or  went 
into  partnership  with   four  others,  then  they 

»  The  Voice,  Nov.  12,  1885. 


could  pay  |6,000  and  make  money  again  ;  for 
they  save  the  expense  of  running  four  saloons 
and  have  all  the  trade  the  ten  did.  It  does  not 
lessen  the  drinks  or  the  curse,  but  heavily  in- 
creases them.  After  a  man  pays  .•i;l,000  he 
pushes  things  the  best  he  knows  how.  It  pro- 
crastinates Prohibition  ten  years.  It  is  a  whiskey 
devil  in  temperance  garb.  We  were  deceived 
by  it,  or  Nebraska  would  have  Prohibiiion  to- 
day. The  money  serves  as  a  bribe  In  Omaha 
it  is  $33  for  every  voter.  Praying  church  mem- 
bers vote  lor  it  just  for  tlie  money.  They  are 
willing  to  let  their  boys  slide  rather  than  miss 
the  money.  At  first  the  liquor  men  fought 
against  it,  now  they  all  fight  for  it.  Put  on  re- 
strictions but  don't  take  their  money.  A  virtu- 
ous woman  may  be  deceived  and  betrayed,  but 
when  she  deliberately  sells  her  virtue  for  money, 
what  is  she  ?  It  is  selling  boys  for  arunkards, 
and  girls  for  drunkards'  wives. 

"  "There  is  now  no  longer  any  excuse  for  being 
deceived  as  we  were.  The  fraud  has  been  test- 
ed and  found  wanting.  I  was  first  elected 
Mayor  [of  Lincoln]  in  1877,  and  again  re- 
elected at  the  close  of  my  first  term.  I  thought 
at  the  time  I  had  done  a  good  thing  to  reduce 
the  number  of  saloons  from  22  to  five,  but  when 
I  found  it  did  not  lessen  the  curse  I  saw  my 
mistake.  There  are  just  as  many  stabbings, 
shootings  and  pound(  d  noses  as  ever  there 
were,  just  as  many  broken  homes,  crying  wives 
and  ragged  children.  It  is  no  great  consolation 
to  a  houseless,  hungry,  crying  wife  to  tell  her 
that  her  husband  got.  drunk  on  High  License 
whiskey.  High  License  is  one  of  the  devil's 
best  devices  to  deceive  good  temperance  people. 
Then  to  think  I  was  his  first  agent  on  earth  to 
start  it  !  Don't  you  think  I  ouuht  to  do  some- 
thing to  atone  for  such  conduct?"^ 

SEDUCTIVE    INFLUENCES    OF    THE    HIGH 
LICENSE   IDEA. 

Li  the  other  States  that  have  tried 
High  License,  all  the  advanced  temper- 
ance workers  and  most  of  the  clergymen 
denounce  it  with  equal  bitternes.s.  They 
have  looked  in  vain  for  beneficial  effects, 
and  they  have  found  High  License  to  be 
the  most  objectionable  form  of  compro- 
mise legislation,  since  the  plausil)le  argu- 
ments in  its  behalf  deceive  multitudes  of 
men  who  would  otherwise  favor  more  radi- 
cal measures,  while  the  large  revenue  that 
it  brings  to  the  public  funds  seduces  other 
multitudes.  Care  is  taken,  by  the  artful 
framers  of  High  License  acts,  to  appeal 
irresistibly  to  local  selfishness  by  providing 
that  the  largest  part  of  the  resulting  reve- 
nue shall  be  retained  in  the  municipality  or 
county  where  raised.  Of  all  the  struggles 
made  for  Constitutional  Prohibition,  the 
most  unsuccessful  ones  have  been  those 
conducted  in  High   License  States,  be- 

2  Political  Prohibitionist  for  1889,  p.  GO. 


High  License] 


J16 


[High  License. 


cause  the  masses  of  the  people  are  loth 
to  surrender  au  immense  revenue,  and, 
not  paying  careful  attention  to  all  the 
arguments  and  evidence,  are  unable  to 
attach  due  weight  to  the  considerations 
against  High  License. 

The  seductive  influence  that  this  doc- 
trine has  with  the  masses  will  be  better 
appreciated  when  its  influence  with  im- 
portant elements  of  the  clergy  and  even 
with  some  persons  identifled  with  the 
temperance  movement  is  considered.  The 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church  is  practical- 
ly committed  to  it,  and  the  Temperance 
Society  of  this  church  is  one  of  the  most 
active  promoters  of  it.  The  most  emi- 
nent leaders  of  the  Eoman  Catholic 
Church  prefer  High  License  as  a  legislative 
policy,  and  the  most  distinguished  total  ab- 
stinence advocate  among  the  Catholics, 
Archbishop  Ireland,  while  favoring  Pro- 
hibition under  certain  circumstances,  and 
always  speaking  against  the  saloon  with 
great  boldness,  is  an  avowed  High  License 
man.  In  the  other  denominations  there 
are  highly  influential  divines  who  have 
stood  by  High  License  through  all  the 
controversy  ;  the  well-known  Presbyter- 
ian, Dr.  Howard  Crosby,  is  foremost 
among  these  champions  ;  and  many  other 
clergymen,  either  by  outspoken  action  or 
by  significant  silence,  lend  respectability  to 
the  High  License  policy.  Some  of  the  most 
important  religious  weeklies  treat  the  poli- 
cy with  manifest  tolerance.  And  outside 
the  church,  even  among  those  who  are  re- 
garded as  temperance  specialists,  occasion- 
al supporters  of  High  License  are  found. 
Francis  Murphy,  the  prominent  gospel 
temperance  orator,  and  ex-Judge  Noah 
Davis,  wliose  devotion  to  the  anti-saloon 
cause  is  undoubted,  are  leading  repre- 
sentatives of  this  class  of  sympathizers.  The 
examples  of  such  men  naturally  confuse  the 
minds  of  the  public  and  are  responsible 
for  much  of  the  strength  of  the  High  Li- 
cense movement.  Yet  the  testimony  of 
the  clergy  and  temperance  leaders  to 
which  we  have  alluded  is  in  no  wise 
weakened  by  the  circumstance  of  excep- 
tions. This  testimony  relates  facts  that 
have  never  been  disputed.  The  men  who 
cling  to  the  High  License  idea  justify 
themselves  by  ingenious  arguments  and 
various  excuses.  They  maintain  that 
under  certain  present  circumstances  Pro- 
hibition cannot  be  or  will  not  be  enforced, 
and  therefore  they  propose  the  aJterna- 


tive  scheme  of  High  License.  But  they 
have  no  evidence  to  offer  in  proof  of  the 
practical  value  of  their  plan. 

TESTIMONY    OF   THE    PKESS. 

The  testimony  against  High  License 
so  aggressively  presented  by  nearly  all  the 
active  supporters  of  the  temperance  agita- 
tion is  discredited  by  some  on  the  score 
that  it  comes  from  prejudiced  sources, 
from  Prohibition  partisans.  No  such 
criticism  can  be  urged  against  the  delib- 
erate comments  of  representative  daily 
newspapers.  No  fact  is  better  understood 
than  that  the  great  dailies  of  the  United 
States  are  very  loth  to  offer  encourage- 
ment to  the  Prohibitionists  or  to  assault 
compromise  liquor  legislation.  When  a 
formal  attack  on  High  License,  upon 
temperance  grounds,  is  made  by  an  im- 
portant daily  journal,  it  may  almost  be  said 
to  have  the  weight  of  a  judicial  opinion. 

The  Chicago  Daihj  J\'eivs  (Ind.)  print- 
ed this  remarkable  declaration  in  its  issue 
for  April  9,  1888: 

"We  have  had  High  License  [$500]  in  Illi- 
nois for  five  years,  and  while  it  is  a  success  as  a 
revenue  measure,  it  is  an  undisguised  failure 
as  a  temperance  measure.  It  in  no  way  checks 
the  consumption  of  intoxicating  lic^uors  as  a 
beverage  nor  does  it  in  the  least  degree  lessen 

the  evils  or  crime  from  such  use 

The  dives  and  dens,  the  barrel-houses  and 
thieves'  resorts,  are  as  bad  and  as  fn  quent  in 
this  city  to-day,  after  five  years  of  Ilich  Li- 
cense, as  they  ever  were.  Call  High  License 
what  it  is.  an  easy  way  to  raise  a  revenue  from 
vice,  but  let  there  be  an  end  of  endoising  it  as  a 
temperance  or  reform  measure." 

The  Chicago  Daily  Times  (Dem.),  a 
newspaper  that  had  uniformly  opposed 
Prohibition  and  sustained  High  License 
and  has  done  so  since,  published  in  its 
editorial  columns,  July  10,  1889,  an 
exceedingly  candid  article,  so  important 
that  we  reproduce  it  entire: 

"  The  recent  elections  in  Pennsylvania  and 
Rhode  Island  have  not  in  the  slightest  degree 
affected  the  principle  that  lies  behind  Prohibi- 
tion. They  have  served  only  to  estnblish  the 
fact  more  thoroughly  in  the  minds  of  those  who 
are  fighting  the  liquor  traflic  that  their  enemy 
is  a  giant  in  strength. 

'•  The  difference  between  those  who  believe  in 
Prohibition  and  those  who  believe  in  license  is 
precisely  the  difference  between  right  and 
wrong.  The  wrong  ma_v  triumph,  but  it  is  none 
the  less  vrrong.  The  right  may  fail,  but  it  is 
none  the  less  right. 

"If  the  liquor  traffic  is  legitimate  it  should 
not  be  burdened  with  any  more  taxation  than  is 
borne  by  any  other  legitimate  business.     If  it  is 


High  License.] 


217 


[High  License. 


illegitimate  or  wrongful  it  should  be  wiped  out 
altogether. 

•'  Whatever  the  great  bulk  of  those  who  are 
friendly  to  High  License  may  think  or  believe, 
or  however  conscientious  they  may  be,  it  is 
plain  that  the  leaders  in  the  movement  are  but 
instruments  in  the  hands  of  the  brewers  and  dis- 
tillers. They  know  as  well  as  they  know  any- 
thing that  High  License  will  not  lead  to  the 
checking  of  intemperance  in  this  country.  They 
know  as  well  as  tliey  know  anything  that  the 
licensing  of  saloons  legitimizes  the  traffic  that 
fills  the  poor-houses,  the  jails,  the  penitentiaries 
and  the  lunatic  asylums,  and  that  furnishes 
victims  for  the  gallows.  They  know  that  license, 
in  effect,  authorizes  the  whiskey  seller  to  make 
men  drunk  and  authorizes  the  whiskey-boozer 
lo  get  ilrunk.  If  the  traffic  is  to  be  legitimized 
at  all  then  the  man  who  falls  a  victim  to  it 
should  not  be  held  lesponsible  for  his  offenses 
or  his  crimes.  He  is  simply  a  victim  of  the  sys- 
tem which  permits  a  fellow-man  to  sell  him 
liquid  damnation  for  so  much  per  drink,  provid- 
ing a  license  fee  is  paid  into  the  public  treasury. 

"  Tlie  open  advocacy  of  the  sale  of  whiskey 
is  not  so  eontemi)tible  as  the  advocacy  of  license 
by  those  who  profess  friendship  for  the  cause  of 
temperance  and  morality.  Those  who  are  so  ready 
to  furnish  proof  going  to  show  that  Prohibition 
is  a  failure  in  Iowa  and  Kansas  are  paid  for 
furnishing  it.  If  Prohibition  is  a  failure  in 
either  of  the  States  named,  intelligent  people, 
whether  friendly  or  unfriendly  to  temperance, 
understand  wh}^  it  is  so.  The  brewers  and  dis- 
tillers of  the  country  have  spared  neither  labor 
nor  money  to  bring  Prohibition  into  ridicule  in 
Iowa  and  Kansas.  They  have  .shipped  beer  and 
whiskey  into  these  States  free  of  charge  to  those 
who  would  handle  it,  and  they  have  had  agents 
employed,  and  they  have  them  now,  who  will 
give  whiskey  or  beer  free  of  charge  to  those 
who  will  drink  it.  The  end  they  are  aiming  at 
is  to  make  Prohibition  appear  ridiculous  in  the 
sight  of  the  public.  It  is  almost  impossible  in 
either  of  these  States  to  bring  about  a  conviction 
for  violation  of  the  Prohibition  law.  because  the 
money  of  the  brewers  and  distillers  is  used 
freely  to  corrupt  witnesses  and  jurors  and  in 
suborning  testimony. 

'•  The  High  License  newspaper  might  just  as 
well  show  its  hand  plainly.  If  it  isn't  paid  for 
the  work  it  is  doing  it  is  doing  very  dirty  work 
for  nothing." 

The  St.  Louis  Dailij  Republic  (Dem.), 
after  an  election  at  which  the  political 
power  of  the  High  License  saloons  of 
that  city  (each  paying  an  annual  license 
fee  of  S559)  had  been  strikingly  and  of- 
fensively shown,  attacked  the  existing 
license  policy  in  scathing  language.  It 
said: 

"  These  dives  [the  lowest]  are  so  numerous  in 
the  city,  their  organization  is  so  compact,  their 
clientele  so  extensive,  that  as  long  as  present 
conditions  remain  they  will  control  the  city 
completely.  .  .  .  Our  present  license  law  was 
intended  to  break  their  power,  but  as  far  as  it  ap- 
plies to  St.  Louis  it  has  rather  served  to  increase 


it.  It  is  just  high  enough  to  discriminate 
against  the  respectable  saloon  in  favor  of  the 
low-class  resorts  which  make  an  enormous 
profit  on  cheap  beer  and  vile  whiskey."  (Nov. 
9,  1888.) 

"  The  groggery,  the  gambling-house  and  the 
brothel  control  the  city's  affairs  and  openly 
boast  their  power,  and  woe  to  the  man  who  by 
fair  deeds  and  respect  for  the  laws  and  his  oath 
of  office  Invites  their  enmity.  He  is  crushed 
without  mercy,  and  a  more  pliant  figure-head 
set  up  in  his  place."    (Nov.  11,  1888.) 

The  Omaha  Daily  Bee  (Rep.),  one  of 
the  most  persevering  defenders  of  the 
High  License  law  of  Nebraska  and  in- 
tolerant opponents  of  Prohibition,  was 
frank  enough  to  say,  Dec.  10,  1888, 
speaking  of  the  saloons  of  that  city,  each 
of  which  paid  annually  $1,000  for  the 
privilege  of  license : 

'■  No  one  can  deny  that  the  license  system,  as 
now  existing  in  our  city,  has  been  a  source  of 
corruption  and  irregularity.  It  has  had  a  de- 
moralizing effect  upon  members  of  the  City 
Council  and  the  City  Clerk.  It  has  exacted 
political  support  from  the  low  dives  and  bum- 
mers; it  has  compelled  the  orderly  liquor- 
dealers  to  support  with  money  and  influence  the 
very  worst  element  of  the  city,  and  has  u.sed 
the  liquor  men  to  do  the  dirty  work  at  the 
primaries  and  elections." 

According  to  the  undivided  testimony 
of  the  anti-Prohibition  press  of  Phila- 
delphia aud  Pittsburgh,  even  the  extra- 
ordinary restrictive  conditions  prevailing 
in  those  cities  were  wholly  neutralized 
before  the  Brooks  law  had  been  in  opera- 
tion for  two  years.  The  Pittsburgh  Com- 
rneirial  Gazette  (Rep.)  said,  Jan.  27, 1890: 

"  As  the  time  for  the  municipal  election  ap- 
proaches the  speakeasies  1  become  bolder  in 
conducting  their  illegal  business.  Yesterday 
[Sunday]  not  a  few  of  the  select  700  [unlicensed 
places]  -  were  running  wide  open.  They  were 
not  '  speak-easies,'  but '  yell-louds,'  as  they  dis- 
turbed their  neighborhoods  with  their  boisterous 
conduct.  What  inducments  have  regularly 
licensed  saloons  to  observe  the  law  and  renew 
their  licenses  in  the  spring  if  saloons  that  pay 
no  license  are  permitted  tosell  not  only  throuijh 
the  week  but  on  Sundays,  when  of  all  the  days 
they  should  be  kept  shut  ?  The  disregard  of 
the  Prohibition  law  in  Maine,  Iowa  and  Kan- 
sas, that  is  a  very  weighty  argument  against 
Prohibition,  is  no  more  flagrant  than  the  dis- 
regard of  the  High  License  law  in  this  city.  If 
Prohibition  is  a  failure  there,  then  is  High 
License  a  failure  here— at  least  about  election 
times.  The  speak-easies  have,  or  imagine  they 
have,  a  'pull,'  on  the  political  parties  that  they 

'  A  Pennsylvania  name  for  unlicensed  liquor  saloons. 

2  Thus  on  the  authority  of  one  of  the  most  prominent 
advocates  of  High  License  and  restriction,  there  were  700 
lawless  saloons  running  in  Pittsburgh  in  .lannary,  1890. 
Yet  at  the  last  previous  session  of  the  License  Coiirt  only 
93  licenses  had  been  granted! 


High  License.] 


218 


[High  License. 


thus  dare  to  impudently  disregard  the  law,  and 
the  party  that  would  commaud  the  respectable 
vote.which  is  much  stronger  tlian  the  speak-easy 
following,  would  do  well  to  prove  its  independ- 
ence of  speak-easy  influence  before  election 
time. " 

The  Philadelphia  Press,  chief  Eepub- 
lican  organ  of  Penns3dvania,  after  in- 
forming itself  thoroughly  about  the  situ- 
ation in  Pittsburgh,  said  editorially,  Jan. 
6,1890: 

"  All  accounts  agree  that  High  License  is  a 
failure  in  Pittsburgh.  '  Speakeasies,'  or  un- 
licensed groceries  liave  multipled  in  every  sec- 
tion of  the  city,  until  now  it  is  believed  that  the 
number  of  places  where  liquor  is  sold  is  con- 
siderably greater  than  it  was  two  years  ago 
under  low  license.  These  '  speakeasies '  are 
thinly  disguised  as  '  soft-drink  '  places,  cigar- 
shops  and  restaurants.  They  get  their  supplies 
of  liquor  in  the  dead  of  night  and  sell  without 
hindrance  or  regulation,  when  they  please  and 
to  whom  they  please." 

The  Philadelphia  Times  (Ind.),  speak- 
ing of  conditions  in  Philadelphia,  said, 
Jan.  32,  1890: 

"  There  is  a  general  complaint  of  the  large 
number  of  places  where  liquor  is  sold  without 
a  license.  These  "urreptitious  barrooms  do 
their  principal  bu.s  jss  on  Sundays,  when  the 
licensed  saloons  are  closed,  though  many  of 
them  are  in  operation  during  the  week.  They 
are  conducted  under  various  disguises  or  with 
no  disguise  at  all,  and  for  the  most  part  they 
are  known  to  the  policeman  on  the  beat." 

THE  RUM  POWER  AND  HIGH  LICENSE. 

No  testimony  is  of  greater  interest  or 
value  than  that  furnished  by  the  liquor- 
sellers  themselves.  The  great  object  of 
temperance  legislation  is  to  reduce  the 
sales  of  liquor.  This  cannot  be  done 
without  crippling  the  traffic.  No  per- 
sons are  so  well  qualified  as  the  drink- 
dealers  to  testify  concerning  the  efficacy 
of  any  particular  system.  Do  the  drink- 
dealers  regard  High  License  as  a  temper- 
ance measure,  which  interferes  with  or 
menaces  their  traffic  ? 

It  is  true  that  many  liquor  men  doing 
business  under  low  license  laws  antagonize 
High  License  bills  when  proposed  for  en- 
actment. Such  bills  imply  an  increased 
expense  to  each  man  in  the  traffic.  To 
numerous  retailers  they  imply  the  neces- 
sity of  quitting  the  business.  The  small 
retailers  outnumber  by  a  very  large  ma- 
jority the  more  prosperous  dealers.  The 
wealthy  men  in  "  the  trade "  cannot  af- 
ford to  incur  the  enmity  of  their  fellows 
by  encouraging  a  revolutionary  policy. 
Therefore  in  nearly  every  State  the  liquor 


element  has  shown  more  or  less  antago- 
nism to  High  License  legislation  when 
first  suggested.  But  the  attitude  of  the 
traffic  previously  to  the  actual  trial  of 
High  License  does  not  merit  serious  con- 
sideration. It  is  certain,  however,  that 
even  in  the  low  license  States  High 
License  is  secretly  desired  by  the  more 
intelligent  rumsellers.  This  point  was 
made  clear  by  the  New  York  Tribune, 
which  said,  during  the  High  License 
campaign  of  1888  in  New  York  (Sept. 

"One  of  the  developments  of  this  campaign 
which  is  going  to  startle  everybody  will  be  tlie 
number  of  saloon-keepers  who  are  now  talking 
and  will  be  found  working  and  voting  for 
Warner  Miller  and  High  License.  Ask  the 
owner  of  a  first-class  saloon  in  this  city  if  he 
favors  High  Licen.se,  and  he  will  give  you  good 
business  reasons  why  he  should  do  so." 

In  seeking  the  opinions  of  the  repre- 
sentative liquor-sellers,  however,  inquiry 
need  not  extend  beyond  those  who  are  en- 
titled to  speak  with  authority  for  "the 
trade  "  in  general  and  those  who  have  had 
practical  experience  under  High  License 
laws. 

J.  M.  Atherton,  President  of  the  Na- 
tional Protective  Association,  the  fore- 
most organization  of  distillers  and  whole- 
sale liquor-dealers  in  the  LTnited  States, 
wrote  as  follows  in  a  letter  to  E.  0.  Fox 
of  Eaton  Eapids,  Mich.,  dated  at  Louis- 
ville, Ky.,  March  2, 1889 : 

'■  The  two  most  effective  weapons  with  which 
to  fight  Prohibition  are  High  License  and  Local 
Option.  .  .  .  The  true  policy  for  the  trade 
to  pursue  is  to  advocate  as  high  a  license  as 
they  can  in  justice  to  themeelvts  affird  to  pay. 
because  the  money  thus  raised  tends  to  r  lieve 
all  owners  of  property  from  taxation  and  keeps 
th(.'  treasuries  of  the  towns  and  cities  pretty 
well  filled.  This  catches  the  ordinary  tax- 
payer, who  cares  less  for  the  sentimental  op- 
position to  our  business  than  he  does  for  taxes 
on  his  own  property.  .  .  .  Until  Prohibi- 
tion is  destroyed,  or  its  political  efforts  broken, 
I  repeat  that  our  best  weapons  to  fight  it  with 
are  High  License  and  Local  Option  by  town- 
ships. If  Local  Option  can  be  defeated  without 
encouraging  Prohibition,  it  should  be  done. 
These  are  my  views  in  a  general  way.  Of 
course  eacii  locality  and  State  has  its  peculinri- 
ties,  and  must  modify  its  views  to  such  existing 
conditions,  but  I  think  the  suggestions  1  have 
herein  given  you  are  sound." 

In  1888,  while  High  License  bills  were 
pending  in  the  Legislatures  of  New  York 
and  New  Jersey,  confidential  letters,  in- 
tended for  the  guidance  of  the  traffic  in 
those  States,  were  written  by  a  number 


High  License.] 


219 


[High  License. 


of  distillers  and  brewers  doing  bnsiness 
under  High  License  in  the  West,  Peter 
E.  Her,  the  most  prominent  distiller  of 
Nebraska,  wrote  from  Omaha  (Jan.  7) : 

"  1.  High  License  has  not  hurt  our  business, 
but,  on  the  contrary,  has  been  a  great  benefit  to 
it  as  well  as  to  the  people  generally. 

"2.  I  believe  somewhat  as  you  say  the  Cin- 
cinnati Volksblatt  says,  that  High  License  acts  as 
a  bar  against  Prohibition  It  is  especially  so  in 
this  State,  as  the  tax  from  the  license  goes  to- 
wards supporting  the  schools,  thereby  relieving 
the  citizens  and  farmers  of  just  so  much  tax 
that  they  would  otherwise  have  to  pay,  and  is 
therefore  especially  beneficial  to  the  poor  and 
laboring  classes.  It  also  gives  the  business  more 
of  a  tone  and  legal  standing,  and  places  it  in 
hands  of  a  better  class  of  people. 

'■  3.  I  do  not  think  that  High  License  lessens 
the  quantity  of  liquor  used,  but  places  it  in 
fewer  and  better  hands  with  better  regularity. 

"4.  As  to  the  trade  repealing  the  High  Li- 
cense law,  if  the  question  was  left  to  it,  I  do  not 
think,  so  far  as  my  acquaintance  is  concerned, 
that  it  would  do  so.  I  have  an  extensive  ac- 
quaintance throuiih  this  State,  and  I  believe  if 
it  were  put  to  a  vote  of  the  liquor-dealers  and 
saloon  men  whether  it  should  be  High  License, 
no  license  or  low  license,  that  they  would  al- 
most unanimously  be  for  High  License.  Those 
objecting  would  be  a  class  without  responsibilily 
or  character,  who  never  pay  for  anything  if  they 
can  help  it,  and  simply  start  in  business  for  a 
few  months  with  a  view  of  beating  every  one 
they  can ;  and  of  course,  naturally  such  a  class 
would  not  want  this  law.  I  cannot  see  how 
any  one  who  has  anything  at  stake  can  help  but 
favor  High  License  and  enforcing  the  law 
strictly. 

"  5.  I  would  be  in  favor  of  High  License 
rather  than  trust  to  the  non-enforcement  of  the 
law  under  Prohibition.  If  you  undertake  to  do 
your  business  without  protection  you  are  black 
mailed  by  one-horse  attorneys,  which  in  the 
end  amounts  to  many  times  the  cost  of  a  licen.se 
every  year,  even  if  the  license  be  very  high.  We 
have  had  a  great  deal  of  business  in  the  State  of 
Iowa,  both  before  it  was  Prohibition  and  since, 
and  we  can  say  positively  that  there  is  very  little 
satisfaction  in  doing  bu.siness  in  that  State  now. 
Ever  so  often  the  goods  are  seized,  and  it  causes 
a  great  deal  of  delay  and  trouble  to  get  them 
released  ;  and  then  there  is  a  fear  of  not  getting 
money  for  the  goods,  and  all  the  forms  we  have 
to  go  through  make  it  very  annoying  busi- 
ness. It  is  like  running  a  railroad  underground. 
You  don't  know  where  you  are  going  or  what  is 
ahead.  In  all  my  experience  of  ten  years  in 
Ohio  before  the  temperance  movement  and 
twenty  years'  experience  here  previous  to  High 
License  and  since,  I  believe  that  High  License 
is  one  of  the  grandest  laws  for  the  liquor  traffic, 
and  for  men  interested  as  well  as  people  at 
large,  there  is.  The  only  objection  that  we  have 
here  is  that  the  regulations  are  not  more  strictly 
enforced  than  they  are.  I  do  not  believe  we 
would  have  any  Prohibition  people  in  the  State 
if  our  High  License  law  was  more  rigidly  en 
forced." 


Metz  &  Bro.,  the  leading  brewers  of 
Nebraska,  wrote  from  Omaha  (Jan.  20) : 

"  High  License  has  been  of  no  injury  to  our 
business.  In  our  State  \fe  think  it  bars  out 
Prohibition.  We  are  positively  certain  that 
were  it  not  for  our  present  High  License  law 
Nebraska,  to-day,  would  have  Prohibition. 
Please  understand  that  our  High  License  law  is 
also  a  Local  Option  law.  In  our  opinion  High 
License  does  not  lessen  the  consumption  of 
liquor.  If  left  to  us.  we  (the  liquor-dealers) 
would  never  repeal  this  law.  There  are  a  great 
many  diflBculties  at  first  for  the  brewers  and 
liquor-dealers  to  get  a  High  License  law  in 
working  order,  but  after  a  year  or  two  you  will 
certainly  find  it  to  your  advantage  over  Pro- 
hibition. We  at  first  made  a  bitter  tight  against 
its  enforcement,  but  since  it  is  well  enforced  we 
would  not  do  without  it." 

Henry  H.  Shufeldt  &  Co.,  the  well- 
known  distillery  firm  of  Chicago,  wrote 
(Jan.  G): 

"  'Has  High  License  been  any  hurt  to  your 
business?'  We  think  not.  It  weeds  out  the 
irr 'Sponsible  retailers,  injuring  at  first  those 
wholesale  dealers  who  have  been  selling  them, 
bu.  eventually  placing  the  retailing  in  more 
responsible  hands,  thus  making  collections  bet- 
ter among  the  wholesalers  and  thus  benefiting 
the  distiller.  It  may  caT.'y  down  some  of  the 
weaker  wholesalers  who  t'l'ed  but  little  adversity 
to  destroy  them,  but  it  eventually  places  the 
whole  line  from  the  retailer  to  the  distiller  on  a 
safe  footing.  We  believe  thiit  High  License  is 
the  only  remedy  for  Prohibition,  but  coupled 
with  High  License  should  be  discretionary 
power  in  issuing  licenses  and  just  regulations 
regarding  the  selling  to  drunkards,  minors,  etc. 
Remove  the  disreputable  elements  of  the  busi- 
ness and  the  majority  of  the  people  will  be 
satisfied.  .  .  .  We  think  the  trade  in  any 
State  should  favor  High  License  and  just  re- 
strictions, and  that  it  is  the  only  solvent  of  the 
question." ' 

Similar  confidential  letters  of  advice 
were  Avritten  in  1890  by  influential  mem- 
bers of  the  liquor  trade  for  the  benefit  of 
the  persons  conducting  the  anti -Prohibi- 
tion campaign  in  Nebraska.  Devereaux 
&  Meserve,  wholesale  liquor-dealers  of 
Boston,  wrote  (March  7) :  "  Advocate 
High  License  and  reach  all  the  politicians 
and  others  of  influence.  Do  not  think 
you  can  silence  the  pulpit,  but  you  can 
induce  some  of  them  to  advocate  High 
License  on  moral  grounds "  Bowler 
Bros.,  brewers,  of  Worcester,  Mass.,  wrote 
(March  7) :  "  Your  great  battle  cry  must 
be  'High  License  vs.  Prohibition.'" 
Emanuel  Furth,  attorney  for  the  Penn- 
sylvania State  Liquor  League,  wrote 
(March  7) :   "  My  experience  has  taught 

'  other  letters  will  be  found  in  "  The  Political  Prohibi- 
tionist for  1888,"      22. 


Historical,  etc.] 


220 


[Historical,  etc. 


me  that  the  public  advocacy  of  High  Li- 
cense together  with  legishation  regulat- 
ing and  restricting  the  traffic  produces 
the  best  results."  '■ 

In  the  article,  Constitutional  Peo- 
HiBiTiON,  especially  under  the  heads 
"Massachusetts,"  "Pennsylvania"  and 
"  Rhode  Island,"  we  have  shown  that  the 
High  License  argument  has  been  one  of 
the  most  potent  influences  operating  to 
defeat  Prohibition  in  representative  and 
critical  contests. 

For  several  years  the  tendency  has  been 
steadily  towards  monopolizing  the  liquor 
traffic  in  a  few  hands.  The  distilling 
business  is  now  praiaic;illy  controlled  bj 
trade  combinations  which  wield  despotic 
power.  The  brewing  interests  are  being 
rapidly  consolidated,  particularly  under 
the  auspices  of  an  English  syndicate  of 
capitalists;  and  in  all  the  manufacturing 
branches  of  the  traffic  the  policy  of  cen- 
tralization has  been  practically  accepted. 
The  retail  traffic  in  nearly  all  the  large 
cities  is  to  a  great  extent  conducted  by 
mere  hired  agents  of  the  brewers;  a  very 
large  majority  of  the  saloons  in  the  repre- 
sentative centers  are  mere  "  tied  houses  " 
of  great  brewing  concerns.  [See  Liquor 
Traffic]  The  effect  of  High  License 
is  to  precipitate  the  monopolization  of 
the  liquor  interests  for  which  the  shrewd- 
est men  in  the  traffic  are  laboring  as  a 
consummation  eminently  desirable  for 
commercial  reasons.  High  License  legis- 
lation therefore  promotes  the  two  most 
important  objects  now  sought  by  the 
organized  liquor  power  in  the  United 
States:  to  defeat  the  Prohibition  move- 
ment by  a  compromise  policy  and  to 
effect  a  thorough  consolidation  of  trade 
interests. 

Historical  and  Philosophical 
Notes  on  Intemperance. — The 

survey  proposed  by  the  title  of  this 
article  derives  its  interest  from  the 
two  well-worn  sayings,  that  "  history  is 
philosophy  teaching  by  example,"  and 
that  "  whatever  has  a  history  has  a  law." 
It  is  the  law  as  to  intemperance,  as  it 
exists  in  nature  and  has  found  expression 
in  civil  statutes,  which  lies  at  the  founda- 
tion of  the  present  inquiry.  Yet  more, 
as  statute  laws  are  enacted  either  by  the 


1  These  letters  were  all  addressed  to  William  E.  Johnson 
of  Lincoln,  Neb.,  and  were  published  in  the  Voice  for 
April  3  and  17,  and  May  8,  1890. 


voice  of  the  people  or  by  classes  who 
recognize  the  people's  demand,  the  his- 
tory of  intemperance  reveals  what  classes 
of  society,  male  or  female,  young  or  old, 
private  citizens  or  public  officers,  cul- 
tured or  professional,  have  been  most  ex- 
posed, most  prominent,  and  therefore 
especially  to  be  mentioned  in  the  history 
of  intemperance. 

The  meaning  of  terms  is  learned  by 
their  use  in  common  conversation  and  by 
writers  who  analyze  language.  The 
fullest  and  clearest  statement  of  the 
nature  of  intemperance  is  found  in  the 
Greek  writers,  who  fully  studied  the  his- 
tory of  the  effects  of  intoxicating  drinks 
and  who  had  widely  observed  as  well  as 
carefully  analyzed  the  demands  of  the 
public  interest  and  duty  as  to  their  use. 
Never,  probably,  was  this  discussion  so 
thorough  as  it  was  made  by  the  greatest 
of  Grecian  teachers,  and  in  the  writings 
of  Xenophon,  Plato  and  Aristotle,  who 
discussed  all  moral  questions  and  compre- 
hended the  wisdom  of  all  ages. 

The  first  two  of  the  12  books  of  Plato's 
Laws  are  almost  wholly  devoted  to  the 
discussion  of  the  moral  demands  upon 
the  civil  authorities  of  any  community 
which  justify  and  compel  legislation  re- 
straining from  the  use  of  intoxicating 
wines.  A  Spartan  insists  that  military 
hardihood  requires  entire  abstinence; 
while  on  the  other  hand  an  Athenian  ar- 
gues that  though  women,  children  and  ser- 
vants should  be  prohibited  their  use,  men 
of  mature  age  may  seek  their  stimulus, 
except  pilots,  magistrates  and  men  having 
like  responsible  trusts,  who  must  never 
allow  their  clearness  of  mind  to  be  in  the 
least  endangered  by  any  stimulant. 
Meanwhile  a  Cretan  (representing  Minos, 
who  was  the  generally-recognized  Moses 
of  the  early  Grecian  legislation)  main- 
tains this  balanced  judgment,  that  there 
is  a  distinction  between  mere  beverages 
and  nourishing  food.  As  to  food,  there 
should  be  no  restrictive  law,  since  tem- 
perance, or  the  moderate  use,  should  be 
learned  and  followed  by  each  individual 
without  civil  statutes  to  control;  while 
parents  and  guardians,  however  (as  stew- 
ards in  the  army  and  on  shipboard),  must 
apportion  food  supplies.  On  the  other 
hand,  intoxicating  liquors  are  entirely 
different  from  food.  Their  use  should 
be  restricted  and  prohibited.  The  Athe- 
nian had  argued  that  positive  "temper- 


Historical,  etc.] 


991 


[Historical,  etc. 


ance  "  can  only  be  learned  by  having  once 
tasted   the    intoxicating    cup,   and   asks 

y  (Plato,  Laws,  i,  14, 15) :  "  How  will  any- 
one be  perfectly  temperate  who  has  not 
fought  with  and  overcome  by  reason  and 
effort  and  art,  in  sport  and  in  earnest, 
many  sensual  indulgences  and  lusts  that 
urge  him  to  act  with  shamelessness  and 
wrong  ?  "  This  led  Xenophon,  who  wrote 
not  only  his  "  Memorabilia  of  Socrates," 
but  his  "Anabasis"  or  military  Journey 
with  Cyrus  into  Asia  Minor,  and  his 
"Cyropedia"  or  training  of  a  prince,  to 
give  two  meanings  to  the  term  "temper- 
ance " — one,  moderation  in  healthful  in- 
dulgence; the  other,  abstinence  from 
things  dangerous,  as  the  use  of  intoxi- 
cating wines.  (Xenophon,  Memor.  ii, 
i,  1.)  Aristotle  makes  the  same  distinc- 
tion, urging  at  length  its  importance. 
As  to  the  former  he  states  (Nichom.  Eth. 

^  ii,  2 :  6,  T,  8) :  "  By  abstaining  from 
sensual  indulgences  we  become  temperate ; 
and,  when  we  have  become  so,  we  are  best 
able  to  abstain  from  them."  As  to  the 
latter  he  declares  that  positive  law  must 
restrain  and  prohibit  it,  and  he  says: 
"  Just,  then,  as  the  Trojan  elders  felt  re- 
specting Helen  (Iliad,  iii,  158),  must  we 
feel  respecting  unlawful  pleasure:  in  all 
cases  we  must  pronounce  sentence  as  they 
did ;  for  thus  by  sending  it  away  we  shall 
be  less  likely  to  fall  into  fatal  error"  (ii, 
9:  3,4,5).  As  to  the  vice  of  "intem- 
perance," commenting  on  the  Greek  word 
for  "  temperance  "  {egkraiia,  having  "  in- 
ward strength"),  he  compares  (vii,  8:  1) 
licentiousness  with  "  drunkenness,"  stat- 
ing that  "The  former  is  incurable,  the 
latter  curable.  The  former,  as  a  deprav- 
ity (or  functional  disorder),  resembles 
dropsy  or  loss  of  flesh;  but  licentiousness 
resembles  epilepsy  (an  organic  disease) : 
the  former  is  permanent,  the  latter  is  not 
permanent." 

This  view  of  intemperance  as  a  bodily 
disease  and  a  depravity,  derived  from  the 
very  term  to  express  it,  as  "  abstinence  " 
from  drinks  that  derange  the  action  of 
reason  and  self-control,  passed  down 
through  all  subsequent  literature,  enter- 
ing into  the  Greek  of  the  Old  and  New 
Testament  precepts  as  to  the  use  of  in- 
toxicants; being  especially  marked  in 
Paul's  use  of  the  term  before  Felix  and 
in  his  Epistles;  while  it  rules  in  all  the 
early  and  later  Greek  Church  writers, 
and  has  led  to  the  universal  use  of  a  wine 


made  from  fresh  raisins  where  unintoxi- 
cating  wines  are  not  accessible  in  sacred 
rites.  Without  this  careful  notice  of  the 
meaning  of  temperance,  the  laws  of 
Judea,  Egypt,  Greece  and  Eome,  prohi- 
biting the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors,  and 
that  because  they  lead  to  "  intemperance," 
could  not  be  understood;  nor  could  its 
history,  as  recorded  by  Brahminic,  He- 
brew, Greek  or  Koman  writers,  be  com- 
prehended so  as  to  be  a  practical  guide. 

The  history  of  intemperance,  as  of 
other  vices,  is  marked  by  stages  of  in- 
crease and  decrease,  of  indulgence  and 
abstinence — the  prevalence  of  a  demand 
for  express  statutes  against  intemperance 
bringiug  out  its  history.  It  should  be 
carefully  noted  that  ancient  records,  like 
modern  newspaper  reports,  may  mislead 
as  to  the  extent  of  intemperance ;  for,  as 
in  New  York  the  exceptional  cases  of 
drunkenness,  as  of  other  immoralities, 
are  all  reported,  these  violations  of  the 
law  do  not  rej^resent  the  mass  of  the 
people,  whose  observance  of  law  is  not 
mentioned.  In  tracing  this  history,  re- 
gard to  time,  especially  of  leading  eras, 
must  first  be  observed ;  next  the  distinc- 
tion of  races  and  nations,  especially  the 
most  cultured ;  while  in  each  age  and 
nation  it  should  be  carefully  observed, 
first,  that  statutes  prohibiting  intoxicat- 
ing liquors,  and  second,  that  philan- 
thropic provision  of  unintoxicating 
beverages,  are  the  most  palpable  links  in 
the  chain  of  the  history  of  intemjierance. 

First  Era :  Patriarchal  Histor//  (  from 
B.  C.  2350  to  IGOO).— All  writers  "note 
that  intemperance  begins  with  Noah, 
the  second  and  actual  head  of  the  human 
race.  It  is  worthy  of  note,  as  observed 
by  the  ablest  critics  of  sacred  and  secu- 
lar literature,  that  the  intoxication  of 
Noah,  the  head  of  the  three  human 
families,  was  first,  the  result  of  ignorance 
of  law,  and  second,  was  a  lesson  instruc- 
tive in  all  time.  While  Eve  in  tasting 
the  unexpressed  juice  of  the  forbidden 
fruit  was  forewarned  by  the  divine  prohi- 
bition and  yet  was  beguiled  by  the  tempt- 
er, Noah  "was  beginning"  (as  the  Eng- 
lish, following  the  Greek  rendering  of 
Gen.  9:  23  intimates)  "to  be  a  husband- 
man," and  was,  therefore,  ignorant  of  the 
poison  of  decay  in  the  expressed  juice  of 
the  grape,  the  most  healthful  and  luscious 
of  fruits.  The  effects  of  his  intemper- 
ance, on  himself  and  on  two  of  his  sons, 


Historical,  etc.] 


223 


[Historical,  etc. 


Shem  and  Japhet,  the  heads  of  the 
Asiatic  and  European  races,  is  manifestly 
an  indication  of  a  law  leading  to  temper- 
ance; "while  on  Ham,  the  head  of  the 
African  race,  and  especially  on  Canaan, 
the  most  abandoned  son  of  Ham,  it  is  an 
indication  of  an  implanted  hereditary 
appetite  leading  to  intemperance.  This 
appears  in  the  more  than  beastly  licen- 
tiousness, and  in  the  deranging  effects  of 
intoxicating  wines,  which  had  corrupted 
even  the  daughters  of  righteous  Lot  who 
were  betrothed  to  "  Sodomites  "  (Gen.  19 : 
5,  8,  31-36);  a  corruption  whose  cause  is 
especially  kept  in  mind  by  the  Old  Testa- 
ment writers,  as  Moses  (Deut.  33:  33) 
and  the  prophets,  in  their  allusions  to 
Sodom.  It  is  the  key  to  all  former  and 
subsequent  history  as  to  the  evils  of  in- 
temperance, which  Jesus  declares  in  his 
statement  of  the  prime  cause  of  all  asso- 
ciated vices  and  faults,  which  brought 
the  destruction  of  the  flood  in  Noah's 
day  and  of  earthquake  and  fire  on  Sodom ; 
putting  this  first :  "  They  ate,  they  drank" 
(Luke  17: 27, 28) ;— intemperance  through 
lust  leading  on  to  corruption  of  every  re- 
lation in  life. 

In  that  same  age  there  was  a  pure  use 
of  wine  both  by  religious  leaders  in 
•Canaan,  as  Melchizedek  (Gen.  14:  18), 
who  was  superior  in  pious  devotion  to 
Abraham  (Heb.  7:  4,  7),  and  in  Chaldea, 
where  even  Job,  who  lived  140  years  after  a 
family  of  sons  and  daughters  had  attained 
mature  age,  had  reason  to  fear  that  a 
curse  might  follow  their  feasts  (Job  1 : 
4,5,13;  8:4;  42:16).  The  most  im- 
portant fact  in  the  patriarchal  history  is 
the  discovery  of  a  mode  of  preserving 
wines  from  ferment,  indicated  in  the 
"tirosh"  blessed  by  Isaac  (Gen.  27:  28, 
37).  The  mode  of  preparation  of  these 
unfermented  wines  is  depicted  on  tomb- 
walls  of  that  age. 

Second  Era :  Early  Asiatic  and  African 
Ilistorij  {from  B.  C.  'l600  to  1100).— This 
period,  extending  back  to  an  earlier  his- 
tory in  Babylonia,  Egypt  and  India,  the 
three  centres  of  earliest  civilization  and 
culture,  the  period  of  written  history  and 
of  ancient  Asiatic  literature,  embraces 
the  ages  of  Moses  and  of  the  Hebrew 
commonwealth  ruled  by  Judges.  The 
history  of  intemperance  in  this  age  is  to 
be  traced,  first,  in  the  early  Vedas  of 
India,  to  which  Moses  seems  to  allude 
(Deut.   8  :  4),  since   he   uses   numerous 


terms  borrowed  from  the  Sanscrit  lan- 
guage; second,  in  the  books  of  Moses,  of 
Joshua  and  Judges;  and  third,  in  the 
statements  of  Herodotus  and  later  Greek 
historians.  In  Egypt  the  details  of  the 
vice  of  intemperance  in  the  use  both  of 
luxuries  and  wines  are  pictured  on  the 
walls  of  early  tombs;  while  three  facts 
cause  this  violation  to  stand  put  in  prom- 
inence :  (1)  The  very  early  discovery  of 
the  mode  of  preserving  wines  free  from 
ferment,  which  unintoxicating  wines 
were  stored  in  such  abundance,  as  the 
tomb-walls  indicate,  that  it  is  doubtful 
whether  the  pictures  of  disgusting  spew- 
ing at  feasts  do  not  represent  the  intem- 
perance of  luxury  rather  than  that  of  in- 
toxication ;  (2)  The  fact  that  abstinent 
societies,  bearing  the  Hebrew  name  of 
"Nazarites,"  had  grown  up  before  Moses's 
day,  for  whom  he  gives  laws  as  an  already 
existing  association  (Num.  G  :  1-15),  and 
whose  very  existence  indicates  a  demand 
growing  out  of  prevalent  intemperance; 
(3)  The  prohibition  of  wines  to  priests, 
found  written  on  an  Egyptian  scroll  of 
papyrus,  prior  to  and  confirming  later 
statements  of  Herodotus,  Diodorus  and 
others,  in  which  these  words  occur: 
"  Thou  knowest  that  wine  is  an  abomina- 
tion. Thou  hast  taken  an  oath  as  to 
strong  drink  that  thou  wouldst  not  take 
such  into  thee.  Hast  thou  forgotten  thy 
vow  t 

In  India  the  existence  of  early  intem- 
perance is  indicated  by  these  facts:  (1) 
That  in  early  education  entire  abstinence 
is  required,  and  that  entire  abstinence  is 
a  permanent  law  for  Brahmins  or  the 
priestly  class ;  (2)  That  the  military  class 
are  specially  warned  against  indulgence; 
(3)  That  abstinence  is  urged  as  a  virtue 
on  lower  classes,  as  merchants,  and  (4) 
That  intemperance  is  the  prominent  vice 
declared  to  unfit  men  for  a  pure  and 
happy  life  beyond  the  grave.  Among 
the  statutes  of  Menu,  who  gives  a  di- 
gest of  the  laws  of  the  Vedas,  is  one 
which  forbids  youth  to  have  any  inter- 
course with  "a  drinker  of  intoxicating 
liquors"  (iii,  159).  The  life-long  ab- 
stinence of  Brahmins  is  thus  enjoined: 
"Any  twice-born  man  (the  designation 
^  of  the  priestly  class),  who  has  intention- 
ally drunk  spirits  of  rice,  must  drink 
more  of  the  same  spirit  on  fire,"  "  or  he 
may  drink  boiling,  until  he  die,  the  urine 
of  a  cow"  (xi,  91).      If  he  have  drunk 


Historical,  etc.]                                 223  [Historical,  etc. 

intoxicants     "  unknowingly,"     penalties  years  cf  the  Judges  show  the  alternating 

lasting  an  entire  year   are  imposed  (xi,  history  of  the  reign  of  intemperance  and 

92).     As  to  kings,  it  is  declared  that  if  abstinence;  the  vow  of  Samson's  mother , 

guilty  of  the  "  ten  vices,"  among  which  and  of  Hannah  indicating  a  spirit  of  the 

"drunkenness"  is  jirominent,   '"a   king  age  that  called  for  it  (Judges  13  :  4,  7; 

must  lose  both  his  wealth  and  his  virtue  comp.  9:  37;  16:  25;  1  Sam.  1:  13, 15,  28; 

.     .     .     and  even  his  life  "  (vii,  4G,  47,  comp.  2  :    12-36).     Interwoven     is    the 

50).     As  to  the  future  life,  this  penalty  picture  of  country  delight  in  the  "  fruit 

is  recorded :  "  A  priest  who   has  drunk  of  the  vine,"  seen  in   Boaz  and  his  fields 

spirituous  liquors  shall  migrate  into  the  (Ruth  2  :   14),  whose  perpetuation   now 

form  of  a  smaller  or  larger  worm  or  insect,  in  the  south  of  France  led  Dr.  Duff  to 

of  a  moth  or  of  a  fly,  feeding  on  ordure,  new  views  of   the  simple  "  fruit  of  the 

or  of  some  carnivorous  animal "  (xii,  56).  vine"  appointed  by  Christ  for  laborers 

This  vice  in  Chaldea  is  only  indirectly  in  his  vineyard, 

indicated  at  this  era,  in  records  not  yet  Third  Era:  Ancient  Adatic  and  Early 

fully  deciphered.  Grecian  MiUtarji  Government  (from  about 

In  the  history  of  Israel  its  records  be-  B.  C.  1100  to  500).— This  era  corresponds 
long  to  the  subject  of  Bible  Wines,  very  nearly  to  that  of  the  kings  of  Israel 
The  united  vices  of  Egypt,  developed  and  Judah,  and  to  the  long  list  of  Gre- 
both  in  the  Israelites  and  with  the  cian  and  Roman,  Babylonian  and  Persian, 
"  mixed  multitude "  that  went  out  with  Chinese  and  other  writers  who  have  di- 
them,  break  out  at  Sinai  in  intemperance,  rectly  or  indirectly  presented  this  history, 
as  the  leading  vice,  to  whose  influence  the  Here,  as  in  the  previous  history,  the  sad 
historic  Psahnist  and  Christ's  great  Apos-  fulfillments  of  the  warnings  of  both  Moses 
tie  attribute  all  their  future  vices  and  the  and  Samuel  as  to  temptations  of  monarch- 
penalties  following,  as  embodied  in  the  ical  or  military  government  follows 
statement:  "The  people  sat  down  to  eat  (Deut,  17:  14-17;  1  Sam.  8:  5-18)  a  rec- 
and  drink,  and  rose  upto  i^lay  "  (Ex.  12:  ord  belonging  to  Bible  history.  The 
38;  32:6,  19;  Psal.  106:  14;  1  Cor.  10:  most  instructive  pages  of  the  history  of 
7).  Moses  himself  in  his  farewell  ad-  intemperance  are  found  in  its  alternating 
dress  links  this,  as  does  Jesus  afterwards,  revival  and  decline,  in  rulers  like  David 
with  the  vice  of  Sodom  ;  intemperance  and  Solomon,  of  Belshazzar  and  Cyrus, 
being  the  "  root  of  gall "  in  all  history  according  as  the  spirit  of  abstinence  from 
(Deut.  29:16-28;  Luke  17:28).  This  or  indulgence  in  intoxicating  wines  ruled. 
law  of  intemperance  and  its  ever  attend-  In  this  respect  the  history  of  the  kings 
ing  penalty  (seen  in  the  infliction  of  death  and  kingdoms  of  Israel  and  Judah  is  like 
on  a  drunkard's  son,  Deut.  21:  18-21),  that  of  Babylonia  and  Persia.  In  David's 
is  one  of  the  facts  niost  clearly  revealed  early  life  as  a  shepherd  his  beverage  was 
(Deut.  29 :  29) ;  while  cowardice,  which  the  fresh-pressed  juice  of  the  grape 
violation  of  the  law  of  temperance  en-  (Psal.  23  :  6;  and  2  Sam.  6  :  19);  as  all 
genders,  brought  all  their  national  failures  visitors  to  Palestine,  Italy  and  southern 
and  sufferings  (Deut.  32:28-38).  It  is  France  have  recognized  in  present  cus- 
a  natural  connection  which  appears  in  toms,  and  as  has  been  elaborated  in  all 
the  facts  which  follow  this  outbreak  of  ages  of  the  Christian  Church  by  early 
intemperance  while  Moses  is  receiving  Greeks,  as  Origen  and  Epiphanius  in  the 
their  law  at  Sinai  :  the  statute  requiring  Greek,  by  Cyprian,  Ambrose  and  Jerome 
religious  teachers  to  abstain  from  intoxi-  in  the  Roman,  and  by  Cocceius  in  the 
eating  wine,  so  like  to  that  of  the  Brah-  early  Reformed  churches.  But  in  early 
mins  of  India  (Lev.  10:  9);  the  laAvs  for  life  he  met  men  like  Nabal,  who  in  lux- 
the  Nazarite  abstainers  (Num.  6  :  1-21);  urious  ease  "drank  himself  drunk"  on 
the  special  direction  that  the  wine  of  the  intoxicating  wine  (1  Sam.  25 :  36).  When, 
people's  offering  shall  be  "fresh  unfer-  again,  his  home  was  invaded  and  his 
mented  grape-juice"  (Num.  18:12);  and  family  carried  away  by  marauding  desert 
the  cowardice  of  the  military  leaders,  and  hordes,  he  was  able  with  a  handful  of 
their  subsequent  rashness,  leading  to  de-  men,  ruled  by  abstinence,  to  overtake  and 
feat,  are  just  the  history  repeated  in  all  rout  an  army  "eating  and  drinking  and 
lands  down  to  that  of  the  French  in  1870  dancing"  (1  Sam.  30  :  16).  His  Psalms, 
(Num.  13:  31;    14:  40-45).     The   400  as  well  as  the  history  of  his  degenerate 


Historical,  etc.] 


234 


[Historical,  etc. 


sons,  show  the  curse  on  his  family  and 
his  kingdom  which  intemperance  brought. 
Ammon,  brother  of  Absalom,  is  guilty  of 
incest;  he  is  next  carousing,  "  merry  with 
wine;"    in   his   drunken   debauch  he  is 
assassinated  by  his  brother's  order;  David 
is   overcome   with    uncontrollable  grief; 
his  sons  share  his  humiliation  and  bitter 
agony ;  the  slayer  is  prompted  to  rebellion ; 
he  dies  a  wretched  death,  and  David's  cup 
of  woe  overflows  (2  Sam.  13 :  6-14, 28,  29, 
31,  36,  37-39;    14:  24,  28.  33;  15:  3,  4, 
23,  30;  16  :  5-8;  18  :  13).     Such  experi- 
ences, no  wonder,  drew  out  the  confession 
of  personal  indignity :  "  With  hypocritical 
mockers  in  feasts,  they  gnashed  upon  me 
with  their  teeth"   (Psal.  35  :  16);    and 
again  the  lament,  afterwards  verified  in 
this  prophecy  of  Jesus,  "  I  was  the  song 
of  the  drunkards  "  (Psal.  69  :  12;  compare 
verse  21  with  Mat.  27:  34-44).     No  won- 
der that  in  the  only  four  cases  of  David's 
use   of    the   term    "yayin"    (wine),   one 
pictures  the  delight  of  his  early  jDure  life 
(Psal.  104 :  15),  on  whose  nature  all  stu- 
dents, Hebrew  or  Christian,  were  agreed ; 
while  the  other  tbree  are  in  the  following 
words:  "  Thou  hast  made  us  to  drink  the 
wine   of   astonishment"    (Psal.  60  :  3); 
"In  the  hand  of  the  Lord  is  a  cup,  and 
the  wine   is   red"   (Psal.  75  :   8);  "The 
Lord  awaked     ...     as  a  mighty  man 
that  shouteth  by  reason  of  wine  "  (Psal. 
78:  65).     Solomon's  youtbful  experience 
of  the  delights  of  intoxicating  beverages 
and  his  warnings  against  the  intoxicating 
wines  are  central  in  Asiatic  as  well  as 
Hebrew  history,  since  they  fill  the  three 
works  of  his  life  as  divine  teaching.     To 
the  maiden  of  his  early,  pure  attachment, 
in  her  country  liome,  to  whom  he  speaks, 
"  Thy  love   is  better  than  wine "  (Cant. 
1  :  2,  4,  and  4  :   10),  and  she  responds, 
"He    brought    me    to    the    banqueting 
house,  and  his  banner  over  me  Avas  love  " 
(2  :   4), — to    this    maiden,  Solomon,    in 
the  purity  of  his  youth,  indicates  the  pure 
fruit  of  the   wine  then  drunk  thus :  "  I 
have   drunk   my   wine   with   my  milk" 
(5 :  1) ;  "  The  best  wine  for  my  beloved  " 
(7:  9);  "I  would  cause  thee  to  drink  of 
spiced  wine"  (8:  2).     In  the  poem  of  his 
mature  years,  he  traces  all  vices,  entice- 
ment to  licentiousness,  neglect  of  parental 
remonstrances,  demoralizing  passion,  and 
finally  insensibility  to  all  degradation,  to 
intoxicating   wine.     He   speaks  of  "  the 
wine  of  violence"  (Prov.  4:  17);  of  the 


abandoned  seducer's  "  mingled  "  and  in- 
flaming wine  (9 :  2,  5) ;  and  he  declares, 
"  Wine  is  a  mocker,  strong  drink  is  rag- 
ing" (20  :  1).  Clustered  in  connection 
are  these  associated  warnings :  "  Be  not 
among  wine  bibbers;  The  drunkard  and 
the  glutton  shall  come  to  poverty ;  Hearken 
unto  thy  father  that  begat  thee,  and  to  thy 
mother  when  she  is  old ;  The  strange 
woman  lieth  in  wait,  as  for  a  prey,  and 
increaseth  the  transgressors  among  men. 
Who  hath  woe,  who  hath  sorrow  ?  Who 
hath  contentions  ?  Who  hath  babblings  ? 
Who  hath  wounds  without  cause  ?  Who 
hath  redness  of  eyes  ?  The}  that  tarry 
long  at  the  wine;  they  that  go  to  seek 
mixed  wine.  Look  not  on  the  wine  when 
it  is  red,  when  it  giveth  its  color  in  the 
cup,  when  it  moveth  itself  aright.  At 
last  it  biteth  like  a  serpent,  and  stingeth 
like  an  adder.  Thine  eyes  shall  behold 
strange  women,  and  thine  heart  shall  ut- 
ter perverse  things.  Yea,  thou  shalt  be 
as  he  that  lieth  down  in  the  midst  of  the 
sea,  or  as  he  that  lieth  upon  the  top  of  a 
mast.  They  have  stricken  me,  shalt  thou 
say,  and  I  was  not  sick ;  they  have  l:)eaten 
me,  and  I  felt  it  not.  When  shall  I 
awake  ?  I  will  seek  it  yet  again  "  (Prov. 
23:  20-35).  The  annals  of  literature  do 
not  contain  a  more  perfect  picture  -  not 
even  Paul's  picture  in  Eomans  I,  and 
Tacitus's  history  of  Nero's  age,  as  the 
statements  of  both  writers  are  now  re- 
vealed in  unburied  Pompeii  — than  this 
by  Solomon  of  the  successive  stages  of 
drunken  debauch,  ending  with  the  spew- 
ing as  in  seasickness,  the  stupid  insensi- 
bility to  the  blows  of  excited  comrades, 
and  the  mad  return  to  drink  again,  like 
"the  dog  to  his  vomit,  and  the  swine 
to  wallowing  in  the  mire,"  so  often  alluded 
to  by  Solomon  (Prov.  23:  8;  25:  16;  26: 
11),  by  Isaiah  (19 :  14 ;  28 : 8),  by  Jeremiah 
48:26),  by  Jesus  (Matt.  7  :  6)  and  by 
Peter  (2  Peter  2 :  22).  So  like  in  all  its 
links  is  the  chain  of  the  fruits  of  intem- 
perance, that  this  last  and  most  disgust- 
ing degradation  of  animals  had  passed  in 
early  history  into  a  proverb.  The  most 
instructive  of  all  is  the  fact  that  Solomon, 
like  all  men  early  and  truly  taught  and 
wrought  of  God,  confesses  his  own  folly 
when,  having  become  more  than  sated 
with  the  luxuries  of  the  king,  he  in  his 
old  age  turned  "preacher"  (Eccl.  6:1; 
12 :  2,  3)',  when  he  sought  to  reach  youth 
and  men  of  station  because,  like  reformed 


Historical,  etc.] 


225 


[Historical,  etc. 


drinkers  in  this  and  all  ages,  he  "  could  be 
touched  with  the  feeling  of  their  infirmi- 
ties," even  as  the  stainless  Redeemer  him- 
self could  not  be  (Eccl.  1:  10,  17;  2:  3, 
24-2G;  11:  9,  10). 

The  division  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel 
brought  the  northern  Israelites  into  closer 
contact  with  foreign  nations,  and  intro- 
duced their  habits  of  intemperance,  as  the 
prophetic  writers  of  that  age  indicate. 
Isaiah's  picture  is  most  touching,  of  the  Di- 
vina  Father,  who  had  especially  chosen  Is- 
rael for  his  people,  looking  down  to  see  the 
corrupted  fruit  and  the  corrupter  wine  of 
his  vineyard,  while  of  rulers  he  writes  : 
"  They  rise  early  in  the  morning  to  fol- 
low strong  driiik,  that  continue  until 
night  till  wine  inflame  them,"  that  boast 
because  ''  mighty  to  drink  wine  " — this 
intemperance  sapping  their  vigor,  inflam- 
ing passion  and  proving  thus  the  cause 
of  their  captivity  (5 :  1-22).  Then  Egypt 
comes  in,  "caused  to  err  in  every  work  as 
a  drunken  man  staggereth  in  his  vomit " 
(19  :  14).  Then  Tyre,  the  Phoenician 
mart,  sighs  because  intemperance  has 
brought  neglected  fields;  because  "the 
fresh  new  wine  nourisheth,  there  is  a  cry 
for  wine  in  the  streets,"  and  "strong 
drink  is  bitter"  (24:  7-11).  Then  comes 
the  fearful  penalty  on  "the  drunkards 
of  Ephraim,"  the  glorious  beauty  of  their 
fat  valleys  faded,  because,  "overcome 
with  wine,  they  have  erred  through  wine  " 
(28:  1-14);  the  final  result  being  bloody 
battles,  they  becoming  "drunken  but 
not  with  wine,  drunken  with  their  own 
blood"  (29:  9;  49:  26;  51:  21).  The 
divine  appeal,  quoted  in  every  hamlet  to 
this  day,  "Come,  buy  wine  and  milk 
without  money  and  without  price"  (55: 
1),  is  literally  fulfilled  where  temperance 
reigns. 

Hosea,  writing  in  the  same  land  and 
time,  touches  the  root  of  associated 
evils  when  he  writes:  "Whoredom  and 
wine  and  new  wine  take  away  the  heart " 
(4:11);  and  again,  when  of  debauched 
Ephraim  he  says :  "  The  princes  have 
made  him  sick  with  wine  "  (7 :  5).  Joel 
brings  out  the  yet  darker  picture  that 
drinkers  of  wine  will  sell  their  own 
daughters  into  lives  of  infamy  for  wine 
(1:5;  3  :  3).  Amos,  calling  to  mind  an 
earthquake  sent  as  a  warning,  remon- 
strates with  those  who  sought  to  corrupt  ab- 
stainers, giving  them  wine  and  themselves 
drinking  it   in  bowls  (1:1;  2:12;  6:6). 


Nahum,  picturing  intemperance  in  Nine- 
veh, and  its  effect  as  "  drying  thorns  i'or 
burning,"  says:  "  while  they  are  drunken 
as  drunkards  they  shall  be  devoured  as 
stubble  fully  dry"  (1:1,10).  Finally, 
Habakkuk,  picturing  the  craving  for 
licentious  indecency,  awakened  intention- 
ally now  as  in  all  ages  in  drinking 
saloons,  utters  the  warning:  "Woe  unto 
him  that  giveth  his  neighbor  drink;  that 
putteth  thy  bottle  to  them,  that  maketh 
them  drunken  also,  that  thou  mayest 
look  on  their  nakedness." 

Turning  from  Israel  to  more  isolated 
Judah,  even  among  them  intemperance 
and  its  penalties  appear.  While  the  con- 
nections of  the  northern  kingdom  are 
more  extended  -with  Syria  (where  Da- 
vid's son  Absalom  was  corrupted  at  the 
court  of  his  mother's  father),  with  Tyre 
(among  whose  merchants  Solomon's  serv- 
ants learned  luxury),  and  indirectly  with 
Nineveh  on  the  Tigris  and  Babylon  on  the 
Euphrates, — Judah's  prophets  mention 
unlike  and  like  associations;  Jeremiah 
picturing  influences  coming  from  Edoni 
and  Egypt,  Daniel  those  of  captives 
in  Babylon,  and  Ezekiel  of  captives 
on  the'  Tigris.  Jeremiah  pictures 
the  tauntings,  like  those  of  David, 
like  those  now  met  from  "  moderate 
drinkers,"  defending  their  indulgence 
and  boasting  their  power  to  stop  with 
"  moderation ;  "  but  Jeremiah  declares 
that  even  their  kings,  priests  and 
prophets  will  drift  into  "drunkenness" 
(13  :  13,  14);  for  the  "pastors,"  unlike 
the  shepherd  David,  are  "  overcome  with 
wine  "  and  "  scatter  the  sheep,"  while,  as 
now,  their  excited  harangues  are  "  false 
dreams"  (23  :1,  9-12,  21-34).  Glanc- 
ing at  the  whole  circuit  of  surrounding 
nations,  from  Arabia  on  the  southeast 
to  the  Medes  on  the  northeast,  and  from 
Egypt  to  Tyre  on  the  west,  in  bold  figure 
the  prophet  represents  the  Lord  of  Hosts, 
the  God  of  Israel,  because  they  will  not 
heed  the  voice  of  Avarning,  exclaiming: 
"  Drink  ye,  and  be  drunken,  and  spew 
and  fall,  and  rise  no  more!  because  of 
the  sword  which  I  will  send  among  you  " 
(25 :  15-28).  To  test  Judah's  spirit  of 
obedience  to  their  divine  lawgiver,  the 
prophet  brings  into  the  temple  the  Recha- 
bites,  true,  because  of  their  father's 
teachings,  to  their  vow  of  abstinence 
(35 : 1-14).  Finally,  he  pictures  Edom» 
nigh  to  Jerusalem,  and  Babylon,  where 


Historical,  etc.]                                 226  [Historical,  etc, 

they  were   to  be   tried   in   captivity,  as  the   Hebrew   inspired   poets.       By   gods 

.seducers,    speaking  of  Babylon  as    "  the  and  demi-gods.  Homer,  whose  poems  are 

golden  cup  in  the  Lord's  hand,"  of  whom  all  studded  with  recognitions  of  the  one 

it   is   said:    "  8he    made   all    the    earth  living  and  true  God,  the  maker  and  ruler 

drunken ;   the  nations  have  drunken  of  of  all,  means  men  who  claim  to  be  and 

her  wine;  therefore  the  nations  are  mad ;  ought   to   be   his  representatives;  while, 

Babylon  is  suddenly  fallen  and  destroyed"  too,  in  the  Asiatic  Trojans,  in  whose  city 

(Jer.  51 :  7,  8) ;  while  of  Edom  he  writes:  and  by  his  own    family  the  seducer  of 

**  The   cup  also  shall  pass  through  unto  the  Grecian  Helen  is  for  ten  years  sus- 

thee;  thou  shalt   be  drunken,  and  make  tained  both  by  popular  and  family  sup- 

thyself  naked"  (Lam.  4:  21).  port.  Homer,   as   Grecian,    Koman    and 

It  is  in  perfect  keeping  with  these  later  sages  have  noted,  means  to  picture 
Hebrew  records,  written  at  a  distance,  to  just  what  Daniel  describes  in  the  divine 
find  Daniel  and  Xenophon  in  accord  as  claim  of  Nebuchadnezzar  that  his  image 
eye-witnesses  of  intemperance  and  its  should  be  worshipped,  and  the  acquiescence 
curse  in  the  rich  valley  of  the  Euphrates  of  Darius  in  the  (command  that  no  prayer 
and  Tigris,  the  early  home  of  mankind,  should  for  30  days  be  offered  to  any  God 
and  of  Persia  and  Media  beyond  -  all  of  but  him;  though  both  Nebuchadnezzar 
whom  began  with  the  lesson  of  Noah's  and  Darius  recognized  and  worshipped 
experience,  while  only  true  piety  saved  the  one  true  god  iDan.  2  :  47;  3  :  6,  29; 
the  rulers  and  people  from  fall.  Daniel  6  :  6-9,  20,  26).  In  the  Iliad  the  simple 
finds  the  king's  wine  intoxicating  and  fare  of  Grecians  in  the  camp  is  presented, 
will  not  drink  of  it,  proving  the  virtue  of  8partan-like  in  rejection  of  intoxicating 
abstinence  by  using  only  wine  that  was  wines;  while  in  the  Odyssey  the  luxurious 
the  fresh  product  of  the  vine,  drank  by  feasts  of  indolent  courtiers  fill  the  nar- 
the  Pharaoh  of  Jacob's  day  (Dan.  1 : 5,  rative.  The  Greek  warriors,  compelled 
8-21  and  10  :  3;  compare  with  Gen.  to  sit  at  royal  banquets,  drank  only 
40  :  9-13),  The  mingling  of  all  the  vices  "diluted  wine,"  and  this  sparingly,  pour- 
that  have  ruined  princes  and  people  has  ing  out  most  of  it  as  a  libation  to  deity, 
its  climax  in  Belshazzar,  feasting  with  the  idea  of  which  is  the  sacrifice  of  luxu- 
his  concubines,  sacrilegiously  sending  for  ry  and  especially  the  maintaining  of 
the  sacred  vessels  dedicated  to  religious  abstinence  from  a  sense  of  responsibility 
rites  by  Moses  and  Solomon,  and  drink-  (Iliad,  i,  598;  ii,  128;  iii,  391;  iv,  3,  207; 
ing  wine  out  of  them;  while  that  very  vi,  266;  vii,  313-324;  xix,  38,  &c.),- — the 
night  the  Persian  invaders,  taking  advan-  custom,  still  preserved,  of  christening  a 
tage  of  this  insane  revelry  of  Babylonian  ship  by  pouring  out  wine  on  its  deck  im- 
leaders,  and  breaking  into  the  cityj  plying  that  wine  is  abjured  by  seamen  to 
brought  with  them  a  purer  sway  (Dan.  whom  sacred  trusts  of  life  and  property 
5: 1-4,  30,  31;  10: 1;  comp.  Ezral :  1-31).  are  committed.  In  the  Odyssey  the  ac- 
That  better  day  dawned  because  of  the  counts  of  the  luxurious  banquets  spread 
pure  life  of  that  Cyrus  pictured  by  Xeno-  by  Telemachus  for  suitors  who  hoped  to 
phon ;  and  the  restoration  of  God's  law,  persuade  his  mother,  Penelope,  that  her 
binding  in  all  ages  alike  on  political  and  .long-absent  husband,  Ulysses,  is  dead, 
religious  leaders,  was  thus  prophesied  by  fill  the  first  book,  Telemachus  revealing 
Ezekiel:  "Neither  shall  any  priest  drink  his  indignation  at  the  luxury.  The  5th 
wine  when  they  enter  into  the  inner  Book  brings  in  the  two  goat-skin  bottles, 
court"  (44:21).  " soaked  in  fragrant  oil,"  to  guard  from 

These  constant  allusions  in  the  Hebrew  ferment ;  one  filled  with  water,  the  other 
Scriptures  to  intemperance  in  Asiatic  with  "  sable  wine  "  as  supplies  on  the  raft 
nations  prepare  us  for  the  statements  of  by  which  Ulysses  escaped  from  Calypso's 
Greek  poets  like  Homer,  of  historians  Isle.  The  8th  Book  describes  the  ban- 
like Xenophon,  and  of  philosophers  both  quet  spread  by  Antinous  for  his  unknown 
of  Greece  and  Rome.  Even  Grecian  and  guest,  at  which  Ulysses  alone,  who  is  the 
Roman  moralists  censured  Homer,  who  unknown  guest,  pours  out  the  wine 
wrote  about  B.  C.  900,  for  picturing  gods  offered  him  as  a  libation  to  deity.  The 
as  both  lustful  and  given  to  wine;  and  10th  contains  his  account  of  the 
there  is  a  species  of  criticism  that  in  our  "  drugged  wine,"  by  which  Circe  trans- 
day  perverts  the  very  idea  of  Homer  as  of  formed  some  of  his  men  into  "  swine," 


Historical,  etc.]                                227  [Historical,  etc. 

and  the  20th  describes  Ulysses's  in-  overshadowing  the  villages.  Of  the 
dignation  at  the  luxury  which  he  found  Persians,  Herodotus  makes  a  record 
reigning  at  his  own  court  (which  he  has  almost  word  for  word  that  of  Tacitus  on 
entered  unknown),  compelled,  as  seen  in  the  ancient  Germans:  "The  Persians  are 
Book  i,  by  the  degenerate  princes  who  much  addicted  to  wine,  but  they  are  not 
were  seeking  his  throne.  No  unadorned  allowed  to  vomit  in  the  presence  of 
history  could  compare  with  these  earliest  another.  These  customs  are  observed  to 
Grecian  poems  in  teaching  the  evils  of  this  day.  They  are  wont  to  debate  im- 
intemperance ;  while  the  irreverent  cast  portant  affairs  when  intoxicated;  but 
some  have  supposed  in  them  is  offset  by  whatever  they  have  determined  on  in  such 
the  fact  that  at  the  banquets  of  pure  deliberations  is,  on  the  following  day 
deities  sweet  "nectar"  is  used,  styled  when  they  are  sober,  proposed  to  them 
"  aporrox,"  the  drippings  of  the  grape-  by  the  master  of  the  house  where  they 
clusters  bursting  when  fully  ripe  (Odys.  are  met  to  consult;  and  if  they  approve 
ix,  359).  of  it  when  sober  also,  then  they  adopt  it 
Herodotus,  writing  four  and  a  half  — if  not,  they  reject  it.  Moreover,  what- 
centuries  after  Homer,  about  B.  C.  450,  ever  they  first  resolved  on  when  sober, 
brings  out  facts  as  to  intemperance  and  they  reconsider  when  intoxicated."  The 
its  laws  in  Egypt,  Persia  and  Greece,  policy  that  ruled  this  barbarian  practice. 
At  the  time  of  his  visit,  the  Persian  sway  as  it  existed  among  the  early  Germans, 
had  brought  a  new  era.  Of  the  Egyptian  Tacitus  explains  by  saying  that  men  when 
priests  he  says :  "  They  are  of  all  men  the  intoxicated  reveal  their  real  convictions, 
most  scrupulously  attentive  to  the  wor-  which  when  sober  they  might  conceal, 
ship  of  the  Gods."  Among  their  rules  The  vital  truths  here  revealed  are 
of  diet  and  sanitary  laws,  as  minute  as  these:  first,  in  practice,  as  all  history 
those  of  Moses  for  Levites,  is  mentioned :  attests,  drinking  intoxicants  is  a  social 
"Wine  from  the  grape  {oinos  ampeUnos)  vice,  seldom  found  in  private  homes,  never 
is  given  them  "  (ii,  37),  recalling  Joseph's  except  in  companies,  especially  in  "soci- 
day  in  Moses's  record.  Speaking  of  the  eties  "  gathered  for  excited  debate,  where 
people  "  who  inhabit  that  part  of  Egypt  leaders  study  how  to  rule;  second,  this 
which  is  sown  with  grain  "  (ii,  77),  after  vice  of  drinking  is  associated  with  con- 
describing  their  respect  for  ancient  cus-  vivial  mirth,  to  drown  the  care  that  ought 
toms  and  regard  for  health,  Herodotus  to  rest  on  men  with  families;  third,  the 
says :  "  Tliey  feed  on  bread  made  of  spelt  common  place  of  drinking  is  the  saloon, 
(olura),  which  they  call  kyllestis;  and  where  social  becomes  private  vice,  in  the 
they  use  wine  made  of  barley  (^TjY//e), for  interest  of  the  "master  of  the  house'- 
they  have  no  vines  in  that  country."  and  not  of  his  guests,  and  the  saloon  is 
This  accords  with  all  ancient  history  frequented  in  all  ages  by  fosterers  of 
and  modern  observation  ;  for  the  every  vice  and  crime.  The  reasonings  of 
vine  is  not  indigenous  to  the  alluvial  Plato  and  Aristotle  on  the  philosophy  of 
soil  of  lower  Egypt;  it  cannot  be  culti-  intemperance  are  suggested  logically  in 
vated  except  on  the  lime-stone  cliffs  of  the  mind  of  the  readerwho  chances  upon 
the  upper  country;  and  it  is  only  in  the  the  following  record  of  early  Grecian  his- 
tombs  of  that  upper  region  that  the  tory  in  Herodotus  (vi,  84) :  Cleomenes,  a 
ancient  representations  of  grape  culture  Spartan  General,  having  consulted  the 
and  wine-making  are  found.  This  record  oracle  at  Delphi  to  learn  whether  he 
agrees  also  both  with  modern  fact  and  should  conquer  the  Argives,  and  being 
ancient  monumental  records,  showing  deceived  by  the  frequent  device  of  the 
that  intemperance  was  confined  to  courts  use  of  two  Greek  accusatives  with  an  in- 
and  was  not  the  vice  of  common  people,  finitive,  in  an  oracle  susceptible  of  being 
In  describing  the  embalming  of  the  dead  read  either  that  "  Cleomenes  shall  defeat 
(ii,  86),  he  states  that  the  embalmers,  the  Argives "  or  that  "  the  Argives  shall 
after  taking  out  the  entrails  from  the  ab-  defeat  Cleomenes,"  and  being  enraged  at 
domen,  wash  out  the  cavity  with  "  palm  the  deception,  demanded  that  he  himself 
wine;"  dead  bodies,  not  living  bodies,  should  offer  sacrifice  on  the  altar;  vhen, 
being  preserved  by  poisonous  drugs,  being  forbidden  by  the  priests,  he  com- 
This  wine  is  still  made  as  an  intoxicant  manded  his  helots  to  "  drag  the  priest 
in  western  Africa   from  the  date-palms  from  the  altar  and  scourge  him,  while  he 


Historical,  etc.] 


228 


[Historical,  etc. 


himself  sacrificed."  Returning  to  Sparta  i 
he  was  found  to  be  insane,  and  Herodotus 
adds :  "  Now  the  Argives  say  that  on  this 
account  Cleomenes  became  insane  and 
perished  miserably.  But  the  Spartans 
*^^hemselves  say  that  Cleomenes  became 
insane  from  divine  influence,  but  that  by 
associating  with  the  Scythians  he  became 
the  drinker  of  unmixed  wine,  and  from 
that  cause  became  mad."  The  student 
of  the  "  philosophy  of  history,"  who  finds 
the  same  truth  recognized  in  all  lands 
and  ages,  from  the  Brahmins  of  India  to 
France  in  1870,  and  studies  the  fact  that 
not  only  men  responsible  as  expounders 
of  divine  oracles,  but  as  leaders  of  armies, 
must  abstain  from  intoxicating  wines — 
that  student  alone  reaches  the  root  of  the 
evils  of  intemperance. 
'  Xenophon's  records  prepare  the  way 
directly  for  the  next  era,  since  he  as  the 
pupil  of  Socrates  brought  to  his  master 
and  fellow-disciples  facts  confirming  their 
reasonings  and  his  own  convictions. 

Fourth  Era:  Grecian  Science  and 
Philosophy  Applied  to  the  Social  Vice  of 
Intemperance.— ^\e,ry  step  in  historic 
survey  gathers  facts  and  suggests  causes 
which  permit  at  last  inductive  science; 
and  yet  more,  it  gives  to  statesmen  a  de- 
ductive philosophy  guiding  to  laws  that 
alone  can  meet  the  evil.  This  last  stage 
covers  all  the  past  and  comes  down  with 
its  lessons  to  the  present  day.  It  begins 
with  the  school  of  Socrates  at  Athens,  in 
which  Xenophon,  Plato  and  Aristotle 
were  taught ;  it  takes  in  the  principles 
that  led  to  the  successive  laws  of  the 
earlier  Greek  legislators,  Minos,  Lycur- 
gus  and  Solon ;  it  incorporates  the  expe- 
rience of  Grecian  visitors  to  Egypt  such 
as  Phericides,  Pythagoras  and  Herodotus ; 
it  adds  also  the  profound  reasonings  of 
the  Vedas  of  India  sent  home  by  Alex- 
ander to  his  teacher  Aristotle;  and  it 
verifies  the  definition  of  philosophy  given 
by  Aristotle  and  adopted  by  Sir  William 
Hamilton,  that  "philosophy  is  the  science 
•of  sciences  and  art  of  arts." 

For,  in  the  very  day  of  the  reasonings  of 
'Plato  and  Aristotle  as  to  intoxicants  and 
tiieir  law,  Rome  had  tested  in  statutes  as 
to  intemperance  the  theories  of  Grecian 
sages;  the  rule  of  Roman  statutes  had 
given  stability  and  grandeur  to  their 
■  Republic ;  and  science,  tested  by  statutes, 
had  fixed  the  tried  and  tested  model  for 
all  future   legislation  against  intemper- 


ance. In  his  "  Anabasis,"  or  expedition 
with  Cyrus,  and  the  retreat  with  his 
10,000  Greeks  from  beyond  the  Tigris, 
Xenophon,  preparing  the  way  for  Alexan- 
der, showed  the  value  of  abstinence  from 
intoxicants  in  camps,  marches  and  armed 
conflict.  In  his  "  Oikonomikos  Logos," 
or  economic  treatise,  from  which  Virgil 
and  Cicero  as  well  as  Cato  and  Columella 
copied,  lessons  of  rural  temperance  were 
taught,  which  were  followed  for  ages 
throughout  Greece  and  Italy.  In  his 
master  work,  his  "  Cyropaedia "or"  Train- 
ing of  a  Prince,"  Xenophon  pictures  the 
heir  to  the  throne  of  the  Medes,  on  a 
visit  to  his  grandfather,  the  aged  king  of 
Persia,  present  at  a  royal  banquet,  watch- 
ing with  disgust  the  intoxication,  lewd- 
ness and  scurrility  reigning,  refusing  the 
wine  proffered  to  him  because,  as  he 
told  his  grandfather,  he  thought  there 
was  "poison  in  the  cup,"  citing  as 
his  reason,  when  asked,  the  king's 
own  acts  under  its  influence,  and 
finally,  when  with  surprise  the  king  in- 
quires :  "  Why,  child,  have  you  never 
seen  the  same  happen  to  your  father  ?  " 
replying  earnestly,  "  No,  never  !  "  (Cyro., 
B.  i.)  In  his  two  added  and  most  valua- 
ble works,  his  "  Apomnemoneumata  So- 
kratous,"  or  "  Memoirs  of  Socratt-s,"  and 
his  "  Symposion  PhilosophOn,"  or  "  Ban- 
quet of  Philosophers,"  Xenophon  shows, 
as  does  Plato  after  his  master's  execution, 
and  as  did  the  disciples  of  Jesus,  the 
natural  law  and  truth  in  precept,  which 
ruled  the  teachings  though  not  in  many 
respects  the  practice  of  Socrates.  Again, 
Hippocrates,  the  Greek  physician,  of  the 
same  age  with  Xenophon,  about  B.  C. 
420,  gave  the  science  of  the  action  of  in- 
toxicating wine,  his  conclusions  being 
accepted  for  five  centuries  by  Greek  suc- 
cessors, like  Dioscorides,  Aristteus  and 
Galen,  and  later  by  medical  teachers  in 
all  subsequent  ages.  French  medical  en- 
cyclopedists of  the  present  century 
devote  volumes  to  the  confirmation  of 
the  science  of  Hippocrates  and  of  his 
followers,  and  the  Universitv  of  Paris  has 
issued  a  volume  of  his  aphorisms  for 
medical  students.  In  his  "  Diate  Oxenn," 
or  "  Treatment  of  Acute  Diseases,"  Hip- 
pocrates describes  the  symptoms  of  varied 
ailments,  and  prescribes  for  cases  requir- 
ing sweet,  strong  or  black  wines,  hy- 
dromel  (honey  and  water)  or  oxymel 
(honey  and  vinegar) ;  all  of  which  were  to 


Historical,  etc.] 


[Historical,  etc. 


be  prepared,  as  the  French  writers  note, 
from  "fresh-pressed  grape-Juice"'  before 
alcoholic  ferment  had  begun.  Of  their 
action,  Hippocrates  says :  "  The  sweet 
affects  the  head  less,  attacking  the  brain 
more  feebly,  while  it  evacuates  the  bowels 
more.  There  is  a  difference,  also,  as  to 
their  nutritive  powers,  between  undiluted 
wine  and  undiluted  honey  (or  syrup).  If 
a  man  drink  double  the  quantity  of  pure 
wine  he  will  find  himself  no  more  strength- 
ened than  from  half  the  same  quantity  of 
honey-syrup."  Hippocrates  lays  down 
the  precept  that  no  medicinal  use  of  in- 
^  toxicating  wine,  as  his  French  commenta- 
tors declare,  is  allowable,  except  as  an 
anaesthetic  in  cases  of  extreme  pain; 
citing  in  his  "  Aphorisms "  (vii,  48) 
'strangury,"  or  inflammation  of  the  blad- 
der, as  an  illustration.  Athenteus,  a 
general  literary  collector,  cites  the  follow- 
ing as  a  prescription  by  Hippocrates: 
"  Take  wine-syrup  {tiiiion  gleukoii),  either 
mixed  with  water  and  heated,  especially 
that  called  protropos  (grape-dripping)  of 
the  sweet  Lesbian;  for  the  syrup-sweet 
wine  {gliikaz'ni  oiiws)  does  not  oppress 
the  liead  and  affect  the  mind,  but  purges 
[diachoreei)  more  easily  than  sweet  wine 
{(n)iou  edeos)."  Dioscorides,  writing  on 
Materia  Medica  {Hyles  latrikes)  devoted 
Book  v  of  his  work  to  the  medicinal 
properties  of  various  preparations  made 
from  fresh  grape-juice,  stating  (c.  9)  that 
"  sweet  wine  {oinos  edus)  is  flatulent 
(pile  III  nail /cos)  in  the  stomach  and  bow- 
els;" again  (c.  11)  he  says  that  *' jellied 
wines  {oinoi  pacheis)  are  clogging  to  the 
digestive  organs,"  while  "  the  thin 
wines  {oinni  leptoi)  are  "  less  flesh-produc- 
ing;"  and  yet  again  (c.  15),  that  "  honied 
wine  (oi)ios  melitete.s)  is  given  in  chronic 
fevers  {chroniois  puretois)  to  those  having 
weak  digestive  organs."  Aristseus,  about 
A.  D.  100,  in  treating  "  on  the  causes, 
signs  and  cures "  of  varied  diseases, 
makes  these  statements :  "  The  use  of 
wine  causes  angina  pecion'.s,  hemorrhage 
from  the  head,  inflammation  of  the  liver, 
insanity,  paralysis,  apolexy;  and  is  the 
most  frequent  cause  of  ordinary  disease." 
He  adds  this  warning  to  medical  jirac- 
titioners  in  prescribing  it:  ''Wine  is  a 
medicament  in  cholera  and  syncope, 
though  its  use  is  attended  witli  danger," — 
unwise  medical  prescriptions,  especially 
of  wine,  being  then  as  now  a  chief  lure 
to  intemperance.     Galen,  the  most  com- 


prehensive and  voluminous  of  all  the 
ancient  medical  writers,  born  about  A.  D. 
130,  and  eminent  at  Home  for  two  suc- 
ceeding generations,  is  full  in  his  state- 
ments as  to  the  cause  and  cure  of 
intemperance.  In  his  treatise  on  "  Simple 
Remedies,"  alluding,  as  Arista^us  does,  to 
danger  from  medical  jDrescriptions,  he 
says  (B.  ix,  c.  "215) :  "  Wine  is  the  second 
rank  {taxis)  in  the  heating  prescriptions 
{thermal no ntOn);  old  wine  is  of  the 
third,  and  preserved  grape-juice  {glen/cos) 
is  of  the  first  rank,  " — a  recommendation 
in  accord  with  that  of  the  most  eminent 
English  and  American  physicians,  that 
brandies  be  burned  when  used  medici- 
nally, the  natural  ingredients  of  grape- 
juice,  not  the  alcohol,  being  serviceable. 
Galen's  statement  is,  as  the  connection 
shows,  that  simple  grape-syrup  is  the  first 
and  best  in  common  medical  j^i'escrip- 
tions. 

It  is  a  fact  too  much  overlooked  that 
both  French  and  German  medical 
science  has  called  for  repeated  editions 
of  these  ancient  Greek  medical  writers, 
and  that  the  advance  of  tested  hygienic 
and  therapeutic  agents  has  constrained 
men  of  eminence,  who  could  hazard  fidel- 
ity in  taking  their  stand  against  the 
social  drinking  customs,  to  repeat,  and 
with  growing  emphasis,  the  warnings  of 
these  men,  whose  science  entered  into  the 
philosophy  that  culminated  in  the 
schools  of  Plato  and  Aristotle,  and  that 
ruled  both  the  Roman  kingdom  and  Re- 
public, as  Pliny  traced  it,  from  Numa  to 
the  Catoes.  Opening  the  volumes  of 
Plato,  the  fact  is  significant  that  he 
makes  the  philosophy  of  his  books  on 
"■  Laws  "  turn  upon  the  discussion  of  the 
principle  that  had  ruled  legislation  in 
repressing  habits  of  intemperance.  Three 
advocates  of  special  systems,  the  Spartan 
military  rule  of  forcible  punishment,  the 
Athenian  freedom  ruled  by  education,  and 
the  balanced  Cretan  system,  recognizing 
the  necessity  of  both  combined,  all  tend 
to  '•  Prohibition,"  at  once  inculcated  in 
childhood  and  enforced  by  legal  enact- 
ment, as  well  as  by  public  sentiment 
prompting  to  personal  abstinence  from 
intoxicants.  This  discussion  fills  the  first 
two  of  Plato's  13  books,  since  truth  on 
this  question  of  legislation  establishes  the 
principle  of  all  legislation  against  vice 
and  crime,  intemperance  being  the  chief 
source   of    all   vices   and    crimes.      The 


Historical,  etc.] 


230 


[Historical,  etc. 


Spartan  states  that  Sparta's  law  banished 
intoxicating  wine  from  festal  banquets, 
and  so  guarded  public  order.  But  the 
barbarity  of  pure  military  rule  is  seen 
in  the  method  of  awakening  disgust  at 
intemperance  by  the  custom  afterwards 
thus  stated  by  Plutarch:  "Sometimes 
they  made  the  helots  drink  till  they 
were  intoxicated,  and  in  that  condition 
led  them  into  the  public  halls,  to  show 
the  young  men  what  drunkenness  was." 

The  Athenian,  after  long  discussion,  at 
last  admits :  "  Shall  we  not  lay  down  a 
law  in  the  first  place  that  boys  shall  not 
taste  wine  at  all  till  they  are  18  years  of 
age?" — thus  proposing  a  prohibition 
against  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  to 
"minors."  Finally,  while  urging  still 
that  moral  sentiment  should  rule  mature 
men,  the  penalty  of  loss  of  office  ruling 
in  political  appointments,  the  Athenian 
allows  that  enactments  to  this  effect 
should  be  made  and  enforced :  "  That  no 
one  when  in  camp  is  to  taste  of  that 
drink,  but  to  subsist  on  water  during  all 
that  period;  that  in  the  city  neither  a 
male  nor  a  female  servant  should  ever 
taste  it;  nor  should  magistrates  during 
the  year  of  their  office,  nor  pilots,  nor 
Judges  when  engaged  in  their  official 
business,  nor  any  citizen  who  goes  to  any 
council  to  deliberate  upon  any  matter  of 
moment."  Going  yet  farther,  since  the 
idea  of  personal  liberty  and  of  sumptuary 
laws,  always  urged  by  dealers  in  intoxi- 
cants, was  rife  in  Athens  as  it  is  in 
American  cities,  the  Athenian  adds: 
"  Many  other  cases  one  might  mention  in 
which  wine  ought  not  to  be  drunk  by 
those  who  possess  mind,  and  share  in 
framing  laws :  so  that,  according  to  this 
reasoning,  there  is  to  no  state  any  need 
of  many  vineyards,  but  other  kinds  of 
agriculture  should  be  required  by  law, 
and  those  providing  every  article  of 
diet." 

No  American  can  read  these  illustra- 
tions and  conclusions  urged  by  the  ablest 
minds  the  world  ever  produced,  whose 
wisdom  all  succeeding  generations  have 
recognized,  and  not  be  struck  with  the 
fact  that  Prohibitory  law,  a  Just  defence 
from  the  illegitimate  claim  of  a  few  un- 
scrupulous dealers  that  they  have  a  right  to 
make  money  by  corrupting  youth,  seduc- 
ing husbands,  impoverishing  fathers, 
compelling  the  chief  and  worst  service  of 
police,  exacting  the  main  tax  on  all  citi- 


zens for  the  support  of  Courts, — that 
Prohibitory  law  is  demanded  by  justice, 
by  duty  to  families  and  by  the  safety  of 
the  very  life  of  communities.  This 
ancient  philosophy  took  final  form  in 
the  treatises  of  Aristotle  on  Ethics,  Pol- 
itics and  Economics,  whose  sway  ruled 
the  Roman  Republic  and  guarded  for 
centuries  its  virtue.  Aristotle's  definition 
is  given  as  the  clue  at  the  opening  of 
this  historic  survey.  In  his  "•  Meter- 
eorics,"  from  whose  treasures  of  ancient 
physical  science  Sir  William  Hamilton 
has  drawn,  Aristotle  makes  various  state- 
ments as  to  the  properties  of  wines. 
After  speaking  of  different  liquids,  as  of 
water  completely  evaporated  by  heat  and 
of  milk  converted  into  whey  and  curd 
(iv,  3),  he  says  (iv,  7):  "There  is  a  cer- 
tain wine,  the  unfermented  gleukos, 
which  may  be  both  congealed  {jjeynutei) 
by  cold  and  evaporated  {epsetai)  by  heat," 
statements  which  settle  the  doubt  whether 
unfermented  wine  has  existed,  and  at  the 
same  time  prove  that  it  was  sought  by 
Greek  sages  and  physicians  as  a  safeguard 
against  intemperance.  In  his  "  Problems  " 
he  asks :  "'  Why  are  persons  much  in- 
toxicated stupefied,  while  those  slightly 
intoxicated  are  like  madmen  ?  AVliy  do 
men  stupified  by  wine  fall  on  their  backs, 
Avhile  men  crazed  by  wine  fall  on  their 
faces?  Why  are  wine-drinkers  made 
dizzy,  and  their  vision  affected  ?  Why 
are  persons  fond  of  sweet  wine  {gleukon 
oinou)  not  wine-bibbers  {oiiwphli/ges),  or 
overcome  by  wine  ?"  Among  hygienic 
questions  are  these:  "  Why  are  those  who 
drink  -wine  slightly  diluted  subject  to 
headaches,  while  wine  much  diluted  pro- 
duces vomiting  and  purging?  Why  do 
those  who  drink  undiluted  wine  have 
more  headache  next  day  than  those  who 
drink  diluted  wine  ?  Why  does  wine 
greatly  diluted  produce  vomiting,  while 
wine  alone  does  not  ?  Why  does  sweet 
wine  counteract  the  effect  of  undiluted 
wine  ?  Why  is  oil  beneficial  in  intoxica- 
tion ? "  No  wonder  men  of  science  see 
the  mastery  of  facts  in  the  very  questions 
of  Aristotle.  His  replies  indicate  logical 
induction  from  facts,  as  tliis  suggestion 
on  the  last  question :  "  Because  oil  is 
diuretic,  and  })repares  the  body  for  the 
discharge  of  the  liquor."  In  his  "  Ethics," 
Aristotle  states  this  double  law  of  temper- 
ance as  abstinence  from  intoxicants:  "  By 
aljstainin(j  from  sensual  indulgences  we 


Historical,  etc.] 


231 


[Historical,  etc. 


become  temperate;  and  when  we  have 
become  so,  we  are  best  able  to  abstain 
from  them," — wliich  double  law  he  ap- 
plies to  varied  indulgences  (B.  ii,  e.  2, 
sections  6,  T,  8),  insisting  that  bodily  re- 
straint must  be  enforced  by  the  pliysiaU 
restraint  of  law.  As  to  the  criminality 
of  inebriates,  he  writes  thus:  "He  who 
is  under  the  influence  of  drunkenness  is 
seen  to  act  not  through  ignorance,  but 
with  ignorance"  (iii,  7  :  15).  In  his 
"  Politics,"  he  states  that  "'  public 
tables "  or  eating-houses  are  to  be  con- 
trolled by  statutes  (vii,  12),  and  he  urges 
that  the  Spartans  erred  as  to  the  end 
sought,  making  "war  and  victory  the 
end  of  government,"  and  that  hence  in 
peace  the  spirit  of  indulgence  went  to  ex- 
cess. Hence  Aristotle  urges  that  as 
parents  restrain  first  the  bodily  acts  of 
children,  and  tJien  give  moral  precepts,  so 
Prohibitory  statutes  should  "  restrain  the 
appetites  for  the  sake  of  the  mind " 
(vii,  15). 

"  Temperance  "  was  understood  by  the 
voluptuous  Herod,  listening  to  John,  the 
herald  of  Jesus.  It  ruled  in  Jesus  from 
the  hour  he  made  "fresh  wine,"  like 
"fresh  fruit"  {kalon  designating  both), 
till  the  night  he  initiated  his  supper  in 
the  cup  filled  with  "  the  fruit  of  the  vine ;  " 
and  though  sleepless  till  morn,  and 
faint  when  on  the  cross,  "  when  he 
tasted  the  wine  "  offered  him,  he  "  would 
not  drink  of  it."  This  "  temj)erance " 
is  the  antidote  for  the  sin  of  drunkenness 
that  is  constantly  urged  in  the  preaching 
and  the  writings  of  Paul  addressed  to 
men  of  all  nations,  while  the  medical 
knowledge  of  Luke,  his  constant  compan- 
ion, as  a  Greek  physician,  and  the  divine 
inspiration  of  the  great  Christian  apostle, 
were  recii^rocally  interchanged.  It  guided 
the  thought  and  prompted  the  duty  of 
faithful  Christian  leaders  in  each  succeed- 
ing century;  as  a  careful  study  of  their 
writings  and  their  direct  citations  in  meet- 
ing corruption  in  courts  and  heathen  pop- 
ular customs  abundantly  show.  Such 
preachers  and  teachers  were  Irenacus  in 
Southern  France  and  Justin  and  Clement 
at  Alexandria  (Egypt)  in  the  2d  Century  ; 
Zeno  iti  Northern  Italy,  Tertullian  at 
Carthage  and  Origen  at  Alexandria  in  the 
3d  Century  ;  Hilarius  in  France,  Am- 
brose in  Italy,  Lactantius,  the  teacher  of 
Constanthie's  sons,  and  Chrysostom,  the 
court   preacher   at  Constantinople,  Basil 


in  Asia  Minor,  Ephiphanius  in  Cyprus, 
Eusebius,  the  church  historian,  and  Cyril 
in  Palestine,  Athanasius  at  Alexandria 
and  Arnobius  at  Carthage,  that  galaxy  of 
master-spirits  raised  up  together  in  the 
4th  Century  to  meet  the  worldly  spirit 
that  was  crowding  into  the  Christian 
churches  under  the  first  Christian  Em- 
porers  ;  and  again,  Theodoret  on  the  Eu- 
phrates, Jerome  in  Palestine  and  Augus- 
tine at  Rome  and  Carthage,  needed  in 
the  5th  Century  to  echo  and  add  to  the 
voices  of  the  jaas't.  It  awoke  again  in  the 
Middle  Ages,  when  Popes  and  Bishops, 
monks  and  evangelists  were  called  to 
stem  the  tide  of  the  "heavy-headed  rev- 
elry "  pictured  by  Shakespeare  in  his 
"Hamlet,"  growing  out  of  demoralizing 
customs  hereditary  in  Germany  from  the 
days  of  Ca3sar  and  Tacitus;  customs  of 
Central  Europe  against  which  Charle- 
magne struggled  by  moral  appeal  and  by 
Imperial  edicts.  These  reasonings  are 
embodied  in  the  volumes  of  Thomas 
Aquinas,  master  of  all  learning,  Hebrew, 
Christian  and  Mohammedan,  Grecian,  Ro- 
man and  ecclesiastical ;  who,  as  the  great 
teacher  of  the  century,  goes  back  to  Aris- 
totle, translating  as  authoritative  entire 
treatises. 

That  same  science  and  philosphy  enter 
into  the  modern  legislation  of  Europe; 
Montesquieu  in  his  "  Spirit  of  Laws,"  and 
Rollin  in  his  "Ancient  History,"  going 
back  to  the  same  authority  in  rousing  the 
spirit  of  political  and  religious  reform 
which  has  led  the  ablest  statesmen  to  be- 
come abstainers  from  intoxicants,  and  to 
inaugurate  restrictive  laws  tending  more 
and  more  to  the  Grecian  science  and  the 
Roman  virtue  that  ruled  for  centuries  in 
Prohibitory  statutes.  The  successive 
steps  of  English  political  reform,  traced 
by  Whewell,  the  author  of  the  "  History 
of  the  Inductive  Sciences,"  in  his  "'  Pla- 
tonic Dialogues  "  and  his  "'  Morality  and 
Polity,"  directly  back  to  the  Grecian 
philosophy  of  Aristotle,  so  far  as  they  re- 
late to  laws  for  overcoming  intemperance, 
brought  together  in  a  prize  essay  by  James 
Smith,  M.  A.,  of  Scotland  (published 
at  London  in  1875),  indicate  that 
Grecian  and  Roman  prohibitive  statutes 
are  "  natural,"  and  hence  "  divine  law." 
Under  the  reign  of  Henry  VII,  from  1485 
to  1509,  an  act  of  Parliament  (11  Henry 
VII)  was  passed,  providing  :  "It  shall  be 
lawful  to  two  Justices  to  reject  and  put 


Historical,  etc.] 


233 


[Holland. 


away  common  ale-selling  in  towns  and 
places  where  they  think  convenient." 
On  this  principle  of  practical  philosophy, 
under  Edward  VI,  in  1552  (5  and  6  Ed- 
ward VI),  statutes  of  enforcement  were 
added,  whose  effective  agency  is  thus 
cited  in  the  instructions  to  the  Lord 
Keeper  and  his  aids  by  the  Circuit  Judges 
in  11)02,  late  in  the  reign  of  Elizabeth: 
"  That  they  should  ascertain  for  the 
Queen's  information  how  many  ale-houses 
the  Justices  of  the  Peace  had  pulled 
down,  so  that  the  good  Justices  might  be 
rewarded  and  the  evils  removed."  In 
183!)  Lord  Brougham,  in  the  House  of 
Lords,  urging  the  enforcement  of  these 
old  statutes,  used  almost  the  very  lan- 
guage of  the  Grecian  and  Roman  reason- 
ing, exclaiming  :  "  To  what  good  was  it 
that  the  Legislature  should  pass  laws  to 
punish  crimes,  or  that  their  lordships 
should  occupy  themselves  in  improving 
the  morals  of  the  people  by  giving  them 
education  !  What  could  be  the  use  of 
sowing  a  little  seed  here  and  plucking  up 
a  weed  there,  if  these  beer-shops  were  to  be 
continued,  that  they  might  go  on  to  sow 
the  seed  of  immorality  broadcast  over 
the  land  ! " 

The  thorough  student  of  American 
polity,  founded,  as  recognized  by  English, 
French  and  early  American  statesmen, 
on  the  very  model  of  Grecian  science  and 
Roman  jurisprudence,  must  be  self- 
blinded  if  he  does  not  see  and  accept  the 
logic  of  Prohibitory  as  well  as  restrictive 
laws  as  to  the  unmitigated  public  evil  of 
intemperance.  Under  Elizabeth  and 
James  I,  at  the  very  origin  of  the  first 
American  colonies,  Lord  Coke's  spirit, 
first  as  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Commons, 
then  as  Chief-Justice  of  the  Court  of 
Common  Pleas,  and  finally  as  Chief- 
Justice  of  the  King's  Bench,  had  instilled 
into  the  minds  of  the  people  of  England 
the  ideas  of  representative  government, 
which  the  leaders  in  all  the  colonies 
carried  with  them.  Under  Louis  XIV, 
Montesquieu  in  his  "  Esprit  des  Lois  " 
(issued  in  1748)  had  traced  back  to  Aris- 
totle's principles  the  moral  power,  the 
popular  "  virtue,"  secured  under  the  long- 
lived  Roman  Republic,  gradually  over- 
shadowed by  the  military  rule  of  North- 
ern Europe  in  the  Middle  Ages,  but  re- 
gained most  fully  in  the  British  Govern- 
ment, ruled  as  it  then  was  under  George 


II  by  the  will  of  the  people's  representa- 
tives in  the  House  of  Commons. 

That  "  spirit  of  laws,"  as  certain  to 
rule  as  gravity  in  preserving  stable  insti- 
tutions, has  ruled  and  must  rule  Ameri- 
cans. To  confirm  and  emphasize  this 
fact,  Paley,  writing  during  the  American 
Revolution,  had  no  other  resort  in  oppos- 
ing the  American  spirit  than  directly  to 
deny  the  principles  of  Aristotle  as  to 
popular  representative  rule  ;  while  in 
striking  contrast  Whewell,  the  author  of 
the  "  History  of  the  Inductive  Sciences," 
in  his  "  Morality  and  Polity,"  issued 
about  the  time  of  the  war  for  American 
Union,  begins  by  re-affirming  the  science 
of  Aristotle;  while,  also,  Gladstone  in 
England  and  Guizot  in  France  have  in 
their  profound  studies  avowed  the  con- 
sistent rule  of  that  science  in  American 
polity.  In  legislation  against  intemper- 
ance, Grecian  science,  Roman  virtue  and 
British  precedents  assure  the  equity  and 
therefore  the  triumph  of  Prohibitory 
statutes.  G.  W.  Samson. 

Holland.^ — About  40  years  ago  a 
Dutch  clergyman,  Rev.  Dr.  Adema  von 
Scheltenia,  became  interested  in  the  tem- 
perance movement  in  England,  Taking 
the  pledge  himself  he  immediately  set  to 
work  to  spread  the  cause  among  his  coun- 
trymen. He  has  translated  into  Dutch 
numerous  temperance  books  and  pam- 
phlets, including  Dr.  Richardson's  "  Tem- 
perance Lessoii-Book,"  a  copy  of  which  is 
now  to  be  found ,  with  the  Bible,  in  every 
prisoner's  cell  in  Holland.  In  a  recent 
letter  he  says  that  the  number  of  hymns 
and  songs  translated  by  him  is  in  excess 
of  1,400.  These  include  most  of  San- 
key's,  Philip  Phillips's,  G27  hymns  for  the 
Dutch  Sunday-schools  in  America,  and 
the  hymns  used  in  the  juvenile  branch  of 
the  Good  Templar  Order,  Dr.  Schel- 
tema  adds  that  he  is  beginning  to  reap 
some  fruits  from  his  long  labors.  Tem- 
perance work  has  been  inaugurated 
among  the  children  of  the  various  local- 
ities, but  tlie  aversion  to  administering 
the  pledge  to  them  is  so  strong  that  it  is 
difficult  to  effect  organization.  A  lady. 
Miss  Velthuysen,  is  performing  excellent 
work  in  this  field,  gathering  the  children 
together  and  instructing  them  about  the 
effects  of  alcohol  upon  the  human  system. 

1  The  editor  is  indebted  to  Miss  Charlotte  A.  Gray  of 
Belgium,  and  to  Joseph  Malins  of  Manchester,  Eng. 


Home  Protection.] 


233 


[Hops. 


She  received  the  first  impulse  from  the 
Woman's  Christian  Temperance  Union 
of  the  United  States  and  has  been  great- 
ly encouraged  and  aided  by  the  Band  of 
Hope  Union  of  England. 

The  early  movement  in  the  Continental 
countries   against   the   "  abuse "  of    the 
stronger   liquors,  resulting   chiefly   from 
the  efforts  of  Robert  Baird,  had  some  de- 
velopment    in      Holland.      In     ISi'i    a 
"  Vereeniging  tot  Afschaffing  van  sterken 
Drank,"    or    Temperance    League,    was 
started,  but   not  on   a   total   abstinence 
basis ;  and  it  still  has  a  nominal  existence, 
with     Baron   de    Lynden   as   a   leading 
spirit.     In  consequence  of  the  efforts  of 
this  society  and  other  influences,  a  law 
similar  in  some  respects  to  certain  so-called 
restrictive  measures  in  the  United  States 
was  enacted.  At  that  time  Holland  had  no 
less  than    40,000  dramshops  licensed  to 
sell  spirits.     The  new  law  provided  that 
many  of  the  licenses  should  be  discontinued, 
and  that  upon  the  death  of  license-hold- 
ers their  houses  should  not  be  re-licensed, 
and  that    unmarried  women,  all  persons 
in   the   employ  of   the   Government,   all 
brothel-keepers,  etc.,  should  not  receive 
licenses  to  sell  liquors.     Within  two  years 
1"2,000  drinking-places  were  closed,  and 
the   number   of   dramshops  was  reduced 
from  one  for  every  89  inhabitants  in  1880 
to  one  for  every  125  inhabitants  in  1882. 
In  1887  the  aggregate  number  had  been 
still  farther  reduced  to  28,000 — -a  decrease 
of  19,000  in  seven  years.     The  reduction 
is  to  continue  until  the  year  1901,  when 
it  is  estimated  that  only   12,000  will  re- 
main,  or   one  to  250  inhabitants  in  vil- 
lages and  one  to  500  in  the  larger  towns. 
But  while  the  number  of  rumshops  has 
been   reduced   fully  40   per   cent.,  there 
has  been  no  considerable  diminution  in 
the  quantity  of  liquors  consumed.     From 
the  year  18G0  the  consumption  per  capita 
steadily   increased   until    1877,   when   it 
reached  the  maximum  point.  The  follow- 
ing figures  of  the  per  capita  consumption 
are  official: 

Spirits,    Beer,    Wine, 

liters.      liters,     liters. 

1860 6     12     2 

1877 10     20     2 

1886 9     20     2 

Home  Protection. — This  term,  as 
applied  to  the  temperance  movement, 
originated  in  1876,  when  Miss  Frances  E. 
Willard,  then  Corresponding  Secretary  of 
the   National   Woman's  Christian  Tem- 


perance Union,  used  it  as  the  title  of  an 
address  before  the  Woman's  Congress  in 
St.  George's  Hall,  Philadelphia,  to  indicate 
woman's  ballot  as  the  most  jjotent  weapon 
for  Prohibitionists.     The  address  was  re- 
peated with  amplifications  at  Henry  C. 
Bowen's  4th  of  July  celebration  at  AVood- 
stock  in  1877,  and  was  published  in  the 
hulependent  and  also  in  a  "•  Home   Pro- 
tection Manual,"  of  which  Miss  Willard 
gave   away    12,000   copies.      The  Home 
Protection  movement,  as  it  was  called, 
spread  through  the  W.   C.  T.  U. ;    and 
every  National    Convention  of   that  or- 
ganization since    1877    has   made    some 
expression   favorable  to  woman's  ballot, 
demanding  enfranchisement  not  so  much 
as  a  matter  of  abstract  right  as  for  the 
sake  of  advancing   home   protection   by 
saloon  destruction.     In  1882  the  old-line 
Prohibition  party  held  a  convention  in 
Farwell  Hall,  Chicago,  in  response  to  a 
call   in   which   the   names   of    John    B. 
Finch,  George  W.  Bain,  A.  J.  Jutkins 
and  Frances  E.  Willard  were  associated 
with  those   of    Gideon   T.    Stewart  and 
other  pioneers    in    the   party   agitation. 
The  demand  for  woman's  ballot,  always  a 
feature  of  the  Prohibition  platform,  was 
repeated  and  emphasized,  and  the  name 
of  the  party  was  changed  to  "  Prohibition 
and  Home  Protection  Party,"  Miss  Wil- 
lard and    Mrs.    Sallie   F.    Chapin   being 
made   members-at-large   of   its  National 
Committee.     At  Pittsburgh  in  1884,  the 
words  "  Home  Protection  "  were  dropped 
from   the   party's   name,  greatly   to   the 
regret  of  many  women.     But  the  princi- 
ple  represented   by   the   movement   was 
not  repudiated. 

The  term  "  Home  Protection "  has  a 
wider  significance,  however,  than  that 
given  it  by  its  application  to  the  particu- 
lar movement  above  alluded  to.  It  ex- 
pressively defines  one  of  the  main  pur- 
poses of  all  Prohibitionists,  whether 
supporters  or  opponents  of  Woman 
Suffrage. 

Hops, — The  flowers  of  the  female  hop 
plant  {Humulvs  Lupulus).  Hops  are 
now  considered  indisjjensable  in  the 
brewing  process — at  least  in  any  honestly- 
managed  brewing  process, — although  they 
were  not  systematically  cultivated  for 
brewing  purposes  until  near  the  begin- 
ning of  the  17th  Century.  They  check 
the  acetous  fermentation,  and  impart  to 


Hops.] 


234 


[Hunt,  Thomas  Foage. 


the  beer  the  bitter  aroma  that  is  relished 
by  drinkers.  The  stupefying  effect  of 
malt  liquors  is  produced  chiefly  by  the 
hops.  The  beers  richest  in  hops  are  the 
ones  most  esteemed  by  connoisseurs: 
hence  larger  quantities  of  hops  are  used 
in  export  beers  than  in  any  other  kinds. 

Substitutes  for  hops  are  employed  by 
dishonest  brewers,  especially  highly 
poisonous  alkaloids  like  strychnine  and 
picrotoxine.  Picric  acid  is  also  a  com- 
mon substitute.  C.  A.  Crampton,  in  a 
very  conservative  report  on  adulterations 
of  liquors  made  to  the  United  States 
Department  of  Agriculture  in  1887,  says : 
"Picrotoxine  and  picric  acid  have  un- 
doubtedly been  found  in  beers,  and 
probably  more  cases  of  such  adulteration 
would  occasionally  have  been  discovered 
were  it  not  for  the  difficulty  of  the  analy- 
sis and  the  small  quantity  of  matter 
required  for  imparting  a  bitter  taste."  ^ 

The  total  domestic  beer  product  of  the 
United  States  is  now  about  25,000,000  bar- 
rels annually ;  and  since  2  lbs.  is  a  moder- 
ate estimate  of  the  amount  of  hops  needed 
for  making  a  barrel  of  beer,  it  is  apparent 
that  the  aggregate  consumption  of  hops 
in  this  country  should  be  at  least  50,000,- 
000  lbs.  annually,  if  our  brewers  use 
honest  metbods  (see  Farmers).  There 
are  no  official  returns  of  the  annual  hop- 
crops.  In  1880  there  were  26,540,378 
lbs.  of  hops  grown  according  to  the  Cen- 
sus; the  imports  in  that  year  amounted 
to  497,243  lbs.,  and  the  exports  to  9,001,- 
128  lbs, leaving  17,952,493  lbs.  consumed 
by  United  States  brewers. 

It  is  estimated  that  in  1889  the  hop- 
yield  of  the  United  States  was  about 
36,000,000  lbs. 2  During  the  year  ending 
June  30,  1889,  Ave  imported  4,176,158 
lbs.  and  exported  12,589,262  lbs.  of 
domestic  hops  and  284,344  lbs.  of  foreign 
hops. 

The  principal  hop-growing  State  is 
New  York,  which  in  1380  yielded  21,628,- 
931  lbs.  of  the  entire  product  of  26,546,- 
378  lbs.  The  New  York  counties  of 
Oneida,  Otsego,  Schoharie  and  Madison 
produce  more  than  half  of  the  whole  crop 
of  the  country.  The  States  of  California, 
Oregon  and  Washington,  which  in  1880 
produced  2,391,725  lbs.,  now  rival  New 
Y'^ork :  in    1889   these   three  States  grew 


1  Report  of  the  Department  of  Agriculture  for    1887, 
p.  193. 

2  "  Tariff  Reform  "  Documents,  vol.  .3,  No.  7. 


about  16,000,000  lbs.,  as  against  18,000,- 
000  in  New  Y'ork.  The  other  States  in 
which  hop  culture  is  of  some  importance 
are  Wisconsin,  Michigan,  Vermont,  New 
Hampshire,  Pennsylvania  and  Maine. 

Official  returns  shoAv  the  hop-yields  for 
several  European  countries  in  recent 
years  to  have  been  as  follows :  ^ 

188.5.  188C. 

lbs.  lbs. 

Great  Britain ."57,027,040  8li,0;J'^,128 

Germany 73,19.5,14.5  6ti,.584,43a 

France     10,891,001)  9,071,709 

Austria 12,796.380  10,8.52,144 

Netherlands 403,442  709,881 

Humphrey,  Heman. — Born  in  West 

Simsbury,  Conn.,  March  26,  1779,  and 
died  in  Pittsfield,  Mass.,  April  3,  1861, 
He  graduated  from  Yale  College  in  1805. 
He  was  pastor  of  the  Congregational 
Church  in  Fairfield,  Conn.,  for  ten  years 
and  held  the  same  position  in  Pittsfield, 
Mass.,  for  five  years.  In  1813  he  drew 
up  a  report  to  the  Fairfield  Association  of 
Ministers  which  is  believed  to  have  been 
the  first  temperance  tract  published  in 
America.  He  was  elected  President  of 
Amherst  College  in  1823,  and  continued 
in  that  office  until  1845.  In  1810  he 
preached  a  series  of  six  sermons  on  in- 
temperance, and  in  1813  published  in  the 
PanopUst  six  articles  on  the  "Cause, Origin, 
Effects  and  Remedy  of  Intemperance  in 
the  United  States."  His  "  Parallel  be- 
tween Intemperance  and  the  Slave-trade  " 
was  an  able  arraignment  of  both  evils. 
The  "  Debates  of  Conscience  with  a  Dis- 
tiller, Wholesale  Dealer  and  Retailer  "  was 
widely  circulated.  As  early  as  1833  he 
opposed  all  license  laws.  "  It  is  as  plain  to 
me,"  he  said,  "  as  the  sun  in  a  clear  sum- 
mer sky,  that  the  license  laws  of  our 
country  constitute  one  of  the  main  pil- 
lars on  w.hich  the  stupendous  fabric  of 
intemperance  now  rests." 

Hunt,  Thomas  Poage. — Born  in 
Charlotte  County,  Va.,  in  1794,  and  died 
in  AVyoming  Valley,  Pa.,  Dec.  5,  1876. 
He  studied  theology  and  w^as  licensed  to 
preach  in  1824.  In  1830,  after  holding 
the  pastorates  of  several  churches  in  Vir- 
ginia and  North  Carolina,  he  accepted 
Ihe  position  of  Agent  for  the  North  Car- 
olina State  Temperance  Society.  He  re- 
moved to  Philadelphia  in  1836,  and  to 
Wyoming   Valley,  Pa.,  in    1839.      From 

3  Report  of  the  United  States  Department  of  Agriculture 
for  1888,  pp.  472-3. 


Idaho] 


[Idiocy. 


1840  to  1845  he  was  agent  for  Lafay- 
ette College.  He  was  a  pioneer  in  the 
temperance  lecture  field,  and  during  tlie 
earlier  years  of  the  movement  he  traveled 
through  Pennsylvania  and  parts  of  the 
other  Middle  States,  preaching  and  de- 
livering addresses  on  intemperance. 
Through  his  persuasions  Dr.  Charles 
Jewett  was  induced  to  become  a  public 
advocate  of  temperance.  His  exposure 
of  frauds  in  the  liquor  traffic,  published 
in  1839,  created  a  stir.  He  had  pro- 
cured from  London  a  number  of  brew- 
ers' guides  and  receipt-books,  and  his 
revelation  of  some  of  the  secrets  of  the 
trade  shocked  the  consumers  and  disgust- 
ed the  vendors  of  alcoholic  beverages,  his 
exposures  of  liquor  adulterations  being 
probably  the  first  authentic  ones  made 
in  this  country.  Originally  a  slave- 
holder, Mr.  Hunt  had  emancipated  his 
slaves  long  before  the  Civil  War,  and  at 
its  outbreak,  although  advanced  in  years, 
he  entered  the  army  as  chaplain  of  a 
Pennsylvania  regiment.  In  this  position 
he  was  enabled  to  reform  many  soldiers 
from  the  drink  habit.  In  later  years  he 
was  familiarly  known  as  ''Father  Hunt." 

Idaho.— See  Index. 

Idiocy. — The  detrimental  action  of 
alcohol  extends  to  every  part  of  the  hu- 
man organism,  and  its  influence  upon 
the  brain  betrays  itself  by  the  well-known 
mental  symptoms  of  intoxication.  The 
proximate  cause  of  those  symptons  is  the 
congestion  of  the  cerebral  blood-vessels 
and  their  pressure  upon  the  delicate  tis- 
sue of  the  brain.  Confusion  of  ideas  and 
the  stupor  following  the  crisis  of  the 
stimulant-fever  subside  after  the  partial 
elimination  of  the  poison,  but  leave  an 
after-effect  which  is  apt  to  become  cul- 
minative  and  hereditary.  The  mem- 
branes of  the  brain,  by  the  frequent  repe- 
tition of  alcoholic  congestion,  become 
thickened,  the  blood  vessels  distorted  and 
often  so  brittle  that  they  are  liable  to  be 
ruptured  and  induce  apoplexy  or  that 
habitual  mental  torpor  and  disinclination 
to  intellectual  efforts  so  characteristic  of 
habitual  drunkards.  In  its  hereditary 
transmission,  that  deterioration  of  the 
cerebral  organism  often  assumes  the  form 
of  permanent  idiocy.  "  We  have  a  far 
larger  experience,"  says  the  physiologist 
Carpenter,  "  of  the  results  of  habitual  al- 


coholic excess  than  we  have  in  regard  to 
any  other  nervine  stimulant,  and  all 
such  experience  is  decidedly  in  favor  of 
the  hereditary  transmission  of  that  ac- 
quired perversion  of  the  normal  nutrition 
of  the  nervous  system  which  it  has  in- 
duced. That  this  manifests  itself  some- 
times in  a  congenital  idiocy,  sometimes 
in  a  predisposition  to  insanity  which  re- 
quires but  a  very  slight  exciting  cause  to 
develop  it,  and  sometimes  in  a  strong 
craving  for  alcoholic  drinks  which  the 
unhappy  subject  of  it  strives  in  vain  to 
resist,  is  the  concurrent  testimony  of  all 
who  have  directed  their  attention  to  the 
inquiry." 

In  a  report  to  the  Massachusetts  Com- 
mission on  Idiocy,  Dr.  S.  G.  Howe  states 
that  "  out  of  359  idiots  the  condition  of 
whose   progenitors    was    ascertained,  99 
were  the    children   of    drunkards.     But 
this    does   not   tell   the    whole  story  by 
any   means.      By  drunkard    is   meant  a 
person  who  is  a  notorious   and    habitual 
sot.     .     .     .     By  pretty  careful  inquiry, 
as  to  the  number  of  idiots  of    the   low- 
est class  whose  parents  were    known   to 
be  temperate  persons,  it  was  found  that 
not  one-quarter  can  be   so   considered." 
Judge  R.  C.  Pitman,  in  quoting  the   in- 
sanity statistics  of  eastern  North  Amer- 
ica, justly  remarks  that  the  suggestive- 
ness  of  such  reports  is  even  more  omi- 
nous than  their  direct  significance.     "  If 
in  so  many  cases  idioct/  was  jDroduced," 
he   says,  "  in   how   vastly   many  more  is 
there  reason  to    believe   that   degrees  of 
degeneracy   falling  short   of   this  recog- 
nized status   resulted  !     When   idiocy  is 
reached,     then    comes    extinction ;    but 
through  how  many  generations  and  with 
what  wide-spread  collaterals  may  imbecil- 
ity of    the    physical,  mental   and   moral 
nature,  or  of  all  combined,  propagate  it- 
self ! " 

That  conjecture  is  confirmed  by  the 
verdict  of  the  best  modern  authorities 
on  the  causes  of  mental  diseases.  Dr.  H. 
]\Iorel,  in  his  work  on  Human  Degener- 
ation (*•'  Des  Dogenerescences  de  I'Espece 
Humaine"),  attributes  the  marasmus  of 
modern  civilization  chiefly  to  "the  abuse 
of  alcoholic  liquors  and  of  certain  nar- 
cotics, such  as  opium.  Under  the  influ- 
ence of  these  poisonous  agents  there , 
have  been  produced  perversions  so  great 
in  the  functions  of  the  nervous  system 
that  the  result,  as  we  have  demonstrated^ 


Illinois.] 


J3G 


[Illiteracy. 


is  the  chief  factor  of  degeneration  in 
modern  times,  whether  in  its  direct  in- 
fluence or  by  hereditary  transmission  in 
the  child."  In  a  memorandum  upon 
"Alcohol  as  a  Cause  of  Vitiation  of 
Human  Stock,"  Dr.  ]S"athan  Allen  re- 
marks that  "  A  prolific  cause  of  degener- 
ation is  the  common  habit  of  taking 
alcohol  into  the  system,  usually  as  the 
basis  of  spirits,  wine  or  beer.  ...  If 
this  process  is  often  repeated,  the 
lower  propensities  are  strengthened  by 
exercise  until,  by  and  by,  they  come  to 
act  automatically,  while  the  restraining 
powers,  or  the  will,  weakened  by  disuse, 
are  practically  nullified.  The  man  is  no 
longer  under  the  control  of  his  volun- 
tary powers,  but  has  come  under  the 
sway  of  automatic  agencies  which  oper- 
ate almost  as  independently  of  his  voli- 
tion as  the  beating  of  his  heart.  .  .  . 
Moreover  the  children  of  parents  whose 
systems  were  tainted  by  alcoholic  poison 
do  start  in  life  under  great  disadvantage. 
AVhile  they  inherit  strong  animal  propen- 
sities and  morbid  appetites  and  tenden- 
cies, constantly  craving  indulgence,  they 
have  weak  restraining  faculties."  Before 
the  Parliamentary  Committee  on  Habitual 
Intemperance,  Dr.  E.  R.  Mitche'l  re- 
corded this  condition,  that  the  "  children 
of  habitual  drunkards  are  in  a  larger  pro- 
portion idiotic  than  other  children,  and 
in  a  larger  degree  liable  to  the  ordinary 
forms  of  acquired  insanity, — i.  e.,  the 
insanity  coming  on  in  later  life." 

It  is  a  suggestive  fact  that  in  at  least 
70  of  100  cases,  hereditary  insanity  is 
transmitted  from  m.ale  ancestors,  i.  e., 
from  the  alcoholized  sex.  Adding  the 
cases  of  idiocy  inherited  from  intem- 
perate mothers  (as  the  gin-drinking 
viragos  of  the  British  manufacturing 
towns),  it  would  be  hardly  an  over-esti- 
mate to  assume  that  75  per  cent,  of  all 
victims  of  mental  disease  owe  their  afflic- 
tion to  the  direct  or  indirect  influence  of 
the  alcohol  habit. 

Felix  L.  Oswald. 

Illinois. — See  Index. 

Illiteracy. — In  1880,  according  to 
the  United  States  Census,  in  a  "total 
population  of  50,155,783  (31,040,421  of 
this  number  being  15  years  old  or  over), 
there  were  5,107,993  white  and  colored 
persons  aged   15  years  and  upward  who 


were  unable  to  write.  Of  these  5,107,- 
993  illiterates,  1,088,503  were  white  m^des, 
1,351,383  were  white  females,  1,269,619 
were  colored  males,  and  1,398,488  were 
colored  females.  The  States  of  Alabama, 
Arkansas,  Florida,  Georgia,  Kentucky, 
Louisiana,  Mississippi,  North  Carolina, 
South  Carolina,  Tennessee,  Texas  and 
Virginia,  and  the  Territory  of  New  Mex- 
ico, each  returned  25  per  cent,  or  more 
of  the  male  inhabitants  aged  15  years  and 
upward  as  unable  to  Avrite.  The  great 
prevalence  of  illiteracy  in  these  and  other 
Southern  States  is  a  legacy  from  the  pe- 
culiar social  system  of  former  years.  The 
close  relationship  existing  between  illiter- 
acy on  the  one  hand  and  extreme  poverty, 
improvidence,  intemperance,  etc.,  on  the 
other,  is  established  by  ordinary  observa- 
tion as  well  as  by  industrial  and  other 
statistics  for  all  the  States  above  named. 
However  striking  and  gratifying  may  be 
the  improvement  enjoyed  by  the  educated 
members  of  the  emancipated  race,  and 
whatever  may  be  said  as  to  the  responsi- 
bility for  the  illiteracy  of  the  majority,  it 
cannot  be  denied  that  the  condition  of 
the  colored  illiterates  is  lamentable  and 
threatening  from  every  point  of  view, 
and  especially  from  the  temperance  stand- 
point. These  illiterates  have  contributed 
by  far  the  greater  part  of  the  formidable 
anti-Prohibition  majorities  in  typical 
Southern  States  and  cities  where  contests 
have  been  held.  The  opposition  to  negro 
suffrage  that  has  been  manifested  by  cer- 
tain classes  of  whites  in  the  South  is  not 
shared  by  the  saloon  element  when  Pro- 
hibitory Amendment  or  Local  Option 
issues  are  to  be  decided.  It  has  always 
been  seen  that  the  presence  of  a  large 
element  of  ignorant  voters  enhances  the 
chances  of  perpetuating  the  liquor  traffic. 
In  the  contest  in  Atlanta  in  1887,  the  Pro- 
hibition cause  was  supported  wit^^Kacti- 
cal  unanimity  by  the  religious  aj^moral 
interests,  and  by  a  majority  of  the  intelli- 
gent and  thrifty  citizens,  both  colored 
and  white;  but  the  ignorant  vote  was 
cast  solidly  for  the  saloon,  chiefly  through 
the  instrumentality  of  a  vulgar  mounte- 
bank, "  Yellowstone  Kit,"  who  had  ob- 
tained great  influence  over  the  illiterate 
and  superstitious  negroes;  and  the  repeal 
of  the  Prohibition  policy  of  Atlanta  was 
the  work  of  this  man  and  his  ignorant 
followers.  Illiteracy  and  credulity  are 
interchangeable  words,  and  in  every  com- 


Illiteracy.] 


23' 


[Imports  and  Exports. 


munity  the  ignorant  vote  is  under  the 
control  of  unscrupulous  demagogues,  who 
are  ready  to  resort  to  any  pretences  or 
deceptions  that  will  be  effective.  In 
the  South  the  pretences  and  deceptions 
with  which  the  is^norant  negroes  are 
plied  are  of  the  most  scandalous  nature; 
these  people  are  systematically  taught 
that  Prohibition  laws  will  deprive  them 
of  their  liberty,  and  that  the  ultimate 
aim  of  the  Prohibitionists  is  to  restore 
slavery;  they  are  told  that  Abraham 
Lincoln  was  a  staunch  opponent  of  Pro- 
hibition. The  majorities  against  Prohi- 
bition in  typical  black  counties  ^  are 
almost  wholly  due  to  representations  such 
as  these. 

The  colored  illiterates,  however,  are  far 
more  susceptible  to  religious  and  similar 
influences  than  the  ignorant  whites,  and 
the  appeals  of  negro  clergymen  and  edu- 
cators in  behalf  of  temperance  and  Pro- 
hibition have  frequently  been  productive 
of  very  encouraging  results.  On  the  other 
hand,  in  localities  where  illiteracy  pre- 
vails among  the  whites,  the  situation  is 
desperate  indeed.  The  mountain  coun- 
ties of  Kentucky  are  believed  to  be 
among  the  most  benighted  regions  of  the 
United  States.  The  county  of  Perry  is 
a  specimen  one.  It  is  populated  almost 
exclusively  by  whites,  and  in  1890  there 
was  not  a  school  or  a  church  within  its 
borders.  In  20  years  500  murders  were 
committed  in  this  county,  3^et  only  one 
murderer  was  executed  witliin  that  period. 
The  whiskey  traffic  was  a  fruitful  cause 
of  this  illiteracy  and  these  crimes,  many 
illicit  stills  being  in  operation.-  In  every 
community  the  freest  and  most  danger- 
ous drinkers  are,  as  a  rule,  the  illiterate 
and  semi-illiterate  citizens,  who  also  con- 
stitute a  very  large  proportion  of  the 
anti-Prohibition  element — a  proportion 
so  1^41^  in  fact,  8,s  to  be  distinctively 
respoui^le  for  the  anti-Prohibition  idea 
and  following  as  a  whole,  in  the  same 
sense  that  the  religious  and  enlightened 
classes  are  distinctively  responsible  for 
Prohibition  sentiment  and  triumphs. 

In   the  States   where   the  Prohibition 
movement  has  been  most  successful,  the 


1  Those  desiring  details  may  compare  the  county  votes 
on  the  Prohibitory  Amendments  in  Texas  and  Tennessee 
with  the  county  population  returns  by  races  for  those 
States,  as  given  in  the  "Compendium  of  the  10th  Cen- 
sus," vol.  a,  pp.  370-4. 

2  See  the  New  Yorlt  Svn  for  Aug.  8,  1890,  and  the  New 
York  Evening  Post  for  Aug.  9,  1890. 


percentages  of  illiteracy  are  comparatively 
insignificant.  These  States  are  Iowa, 
Kansas,  Maine,  North  Dakota,  South 
Dakota  and  Vermont.  In  Iowa,  accord- 
ing to  the  Census  returns  for  1880,  only  4 
per  cent,  of  the  male  citizens  15  years 
and  over  were  unable  to  write;  in 
Kansas,  5  per  cent.;  in  Maine,  5  per 
cent. ;  in  the  Dakotas,  4  per  cent., 
and  in  Vermont,  7  per  cent. ;  while  in 
the  whole  country  the  percentage  was 
15.  A  small  percentage  of  illiteracy 
does  not  as  yet,  however,  necessarily 
imply  a  Prohibition  preponderance,  since 
the  plausible  arguments  against  Prohibi- 
tion and  for  the  vai'ious  compromise 
schemes  divide  public  sentiment  among 
the  educated.  Thus,  in  the  State  of 
Nebraska,  where  only  3  per  cent,  of  the 
males  15  years  of  age  and  upwards  were  un- 
able to  write  in  1880,  Prohibition  has  en- 
countered bitter  opposition,  and  the  High 
License  idea  has  prevailed.  It  is  also 
true  that  Prohibition  has  sometimes 
carried  in  communities  where  the  per- 
centage of  illiteracy  is  large,  as  in  many 
counties  of  Georgia  and  other  Southern 
States.  These  apparently  anomalous 
successes  are  attributed  in  nearly  all 
instances  to  the  determined  work  and 
superior  power  of  the  educated  citizens, 
whose  understanding  of  the  necessity  of 
Prohibition  laws  has  been  stimulated  by 
practical  object  lessons,  and  whose  will 
the  illiterate  masses,  without  leadership 
or  organization,  have  been  unable  to 
overcome.  But  it  has  invariably  been 
found  that  conditions  are  most  promising 
for  the  saloon  where  there  is  a  formidable 
ignorant  vote,  and  that  the  ability  of  the 
saloon  leaders  to  secure  the  united  sup- 
port of  this  vote  is  dependent  only  upon 
shrewdness,  unscrupulousness  and  organ- 
ization. 

Immigration. — See  Foreignees. 

Imports  and  Exports.— The  im- 
port and  export  trade  in  alcoholic  liquors 
seriously  complicates  the  Prohibitid 
problem  in  the  United  States,  Large 
amounts  of  capital  are  invested  in  it 
by  Americans  and  foreigners.  The  total 
value  of  imported  liquor  exceeds  $10,000,- 
000  annually,  to  which  must  be  added 
customs  duties  aggregating  nearly  |8,- 
000,000.  These  imports  include  nearly 
all  the  more  expensive  brands  of  wines, 


Imports  and  Exports.] 


238 


[Imports  and  Exports. 


beer  and  spirits  used  by  Americatis,  and 
to  cut  off  the  import  trade  means  to  de- 
prive the  rich  of  the  means  of  gratifying 
their  particular  tastes.  The  right  to  reg- 
ulate foreign  commerce  rests  exclusively 
with  Congress,  and  no  State  can  prohibit 
the  importation  of  liquors  without  the 
consent  of  Congress.  By  an  act  of  Con- 
gress passed  in  August,  1890,  Prohibition 
States  are  permitted  to  exclude  foreign 
as  well  as  domestic  liquors,  and  the  right 
to  attack  the  import  trade  is  therefore 
temporarily  conceded.  At  present,  how- 
ever, there  is  only  one  seaboard  State 
(Maine)  that  chooses  to  exercise  this 
privilege. 

IMPORTS. 

The  chief  centers  of  the  import  traffic 
in  liquors  are  the  ports  of  New  York, 
Boston  and  San  Francisco.  For  the  year 
ending  June  30,  1889,  the  total  value  of 
malt,  vinous  and  spirituous  liquors  im- 
ported at  New  York  was  $8,198,588;  at 
Boston,  $654,829,  and  at  San  Francisco, 
$640,207 ;  while  the  aggregate  value  for 
the  entire  country  was  $10,996,849 — so 
that  these  three  ports  did  nearly  nine- 
^tenths  of  the  import  business. 

The  following  table  sliows  in  detail  the 
imports  and  their  values,  and  the  duties 
collected,  for  the  year  ending  June  30, 
1889: 


It  is  of  interest  to  note  that  the  value 
of  brandy  and  champagne  was  nearly 
half  as  much  as  the  combined  value  of 
all  imported  liquors. 

In  the  following  table  are  given,  for 
a  series  of  years,  the  values  of  and 
duties  levied  on  malt,  spirituous  and 
vinous  liquors  witlidrawn  for  consiwqj- 
tion :  ^ 


Quan- 
tities. 

Values. 

Duty. 

Malt  Liquor^:: 
In  bottles  or  jugs... 
Not  in  bots.  or  jugs. 

Totals 

Galls. 
1,151,065 
1,373,616 

$956,243 
405,747 

$391,853.48 
271,483.60 

2,534,681 

Proof 
Galls. 
400,089 
1,127,458 

$1,361,990 

$1,076,265 
851,822 

$663,337.08 

$806,512.87 
2,136,735.21 

Spirits,  Distilled,  and 
Spi?i.tuous  com- 
pounds: 
Brandy 

All  others 

Totals 

1,527,547 

y  315,870 

3,078,554 
260,026 

$1,928,087 

$4,254,413 

2,126,548 
1,325,811 

$2,943,248.08 

$2,181,693.65 
|- 1,998,121.06 

Wines  : 

Champagne  and 

other  sparkling 

doz. 

Still  Wines: 

Incaskf  ...  galls. 

In  bottles doz. 

Totals 

$7,706,772 
10,990,849 

$4,179,814.71 
7,786,399.87" 

Grand  totals 

'  Duties  are  collected  at  the  time  of  the  withdrawal  of 
merchandise  from  the  warehouse.  The  duties  given 
in  this  table  are  the  duties  assessed  on  the  values  of  liquors 
so  withdrawn  from  the  warehouse  during  the  year  ($10,- 
938,789.88),  not  on  the  total  values  of  all  liquors  imported 
($10,996,849).  Consequently  there  remains  an  aggregate 
value  of  $58,059  ou  which  duty  was  not  collected  during 
the  year. 


,_l 

,_t 

^-^ 

l_. 

fc_. 

,_. 

\ 

'H    tri                1 

ll 

'p 

?° 

r' 

p 

.'"'' 

p 

> 

OS     '^ 

a 

>p    o 

t-l 

>-*■ 

i-t- 

^-t 

*-^ 

m 

-^ 

CO 

"to 

to 

05 

K 

g 

CI 

en 

o 

v-^ 

^ 

CO 

-^ 

p 

1-* 

p 

P 

[► 

fl> 

JO 

00 

00 

to 

>c^ 

w 

f 

OI 

CD 

c^ 

o 

H 

00 

o 

to 

-( 

-J 

"' 

t;* 

<o 

«# 

c3 

Oi 

ta 

en 

at 

fO 

b 

o 

00 

^ 

)U 

3* 

p 

P 

ryi 

CO 

C7i 

*-*■ 

o 

<< 

CO 

05 

00 

o 

CD 

-^ 

05 

-J 

^s 

CD 

o 

J_^ 

,-L 

J_^ 

v-t 

^ 

t2 

-r^ 

o 

"o 

00 

"oo 

-I 

£. 

-I 

iO 

-I 

O' 

X 

M 

C5 

CO 

H 

a> 

"to 

O 

o 

00 

o> 

(O 

£ 

° 

^ 

° 

o 

o> 

^ 

72 

M 

■jo 

,  JO 

00 

JO 

Kl 

W 

3 

00 

CO 

CO 

*^ 

c 

JD 

A-. 

CO 

«^ 

H 

fo 

-1 

O 

05 

-J 

vr 

w 

IS 

-5 

JO 

CD 

-J 

CO 

00 

ts 

CO 

C3 

CO 

<» 

-7 

-■1 

-1 

p 

p 

S" 

^ 

*J 

"co 

o 

-J 

05 

"o 

E. 

»-^ 

tn 

*^ 

>c^ 

CO 

o 

CO 

p 

o 

p 

">-l 

■Vj 

"ji. 

■*. 

"o 

^ 

CD 

CO 

^I 

t-1 

CO 

^9 

o 

-I 

K) 

Ot 

CO 

5 

^ 

*. 

*. 

M 

W 

M 

CO 

a 

*-^ 

o 

"^J 

"as 

"b 

-^ 

-1 

OS 

CD 

i° 

4^ 

jU 

S" 

.rT 

'.^ 

00 

h-i 

"co 

'-■i 

CD 

CO 

l«^ 

CD 

JO 

Ot 

'^ 

CO 

a> 

fO 

o 

V-L 

«» 

o 

p 

p 

p 

CO 

p 

■>', 

o 

03 

"^i 

"co 

"o 

(s 

t> 

CO 

00 

CD 

oo 

«0 

-! 

5" 

00 

p 

p 

p 

p 

p 

t' 

n 

C^ 

CO 

"So 

"^ 

"o 

en 

8 

o 

OS 

§8 

s 

2 

t;^ 

.o 

^ 

r: 
o 

-1 

-1 

~1 

-7 

-f 

P 

t) 

"Vi 

"o 

"ji. 

H-t 

c 

cc 

00 

o 

o 

CO 

en 

05 

03 

CO 

to 

>(^ 

o 

M 

'Z 

"*. 

s 

t-t 

Ol 

^ 

8 

>b. 

C5 

tn 

k& 

CO 

•1 

•0- 

CO 

The  only  countries  from  which  we  re- 
ceive considerable  quantities  of  malt  li- 
quors are  England,  Ireland,  Germany, 
Scotland,  Austria-Hungary  and  Canada, 
the  values  of  malt  liquors  imported  from 
these  countries  in  1889  having  been: 
England,  $772,311  ;  Ireland,  $384,083; 
C4ermany,  $125,022;  Scotland,  $40,125; 
Austria-Hungary,  $26,517;  Canada,  $12,- 
129.  The  other  countries  shipping  beer 
to   us  were:  Mexico,  $819;  Sweden   and 

•  See  note  to  preceding  table. 


Imports  and  Exports.] 


239 


[Imports  and  Exports. 


Norway,   $472;    France,   1211;    Nether-  for  general  beverage  use,  ^  are  allowed  to 

lands,  $162;  Denmark,   $108;    Belgium,  enter     the     United      States     free     of 

$10;    Cuba,  $8;    Hawaiian   Islands,   $?,  duty,  although   no  duty  is  charged    on 

and  Newfoundland  $6.  spirits  manufactured  by  United   States 

In  the  import  trade  in  spirits  and  spir-  distillers,    shipped   to    foreign   ports   to 

ituous  compounds,  nearly  every  country  delay  payment  of  the  Internal  Kevenue 

with  which  we  have  commercial  relations  taxes  and  then  brought  back,     hi  1888 

is  represented.     In  1889  the  total  imports  there    were    2,636,756    gallons   of   such 

of  brandy  were  valued  at  $1,076,265;  and  spirits  brought  back,  valued  at  $2,686,- 

from  France    alone  the  brandy  imported  414;  and  in  1889   there   were   1,933,712 

had   a   value   of  $977,318.     The  imports  gallons,  valued  at  $2,027,844.     The  duty 

of  brandy  from  England  were  valued  at  on  ale,  beer  and  porter  is  40  cents  peV 

$40,372,  from  Belgium  at  $17,873,  from  gallon  when  the  liquor   is   in   bottles   or 

Canada   at   $14,276,   from    Germany    at  jugs,   and    35  cents  per  gallon  when  in 

$10,734  and  from  the  Danish  West  In-  casks.     A  duty  of  $2.50  per  proof  gallon 

dies  at  $4,513.     The  following  table  gives  is  charged  on  alcohol,  on  brandy,  cordials, 

the  values -of  distilled  liquors  (including  liqueurs,  arrack,  absinthe,   kirsclnvasser, 

brandy)  for  the  countries  from  which  the  ratafia,    whiskey,    gin,    rum,     etc.      On 

importations  in  1889  exceeded  $5,000:  champagne  and  all  other  sparkling  wines 

France $1,101,050  ^^  ^^ttlcs   the    rate    of   duty   is   $2  per 

England 199.052  dozeu  halt-pint  Dottlcs,  $4  per  dozen  pint 

BrSwi'tindie8\ ;;;;;; •.■.•.■;;.■;.•.■.■.:■■.■. ■.■.;■.■.■.    mm  "^oUXqs  and  $8  per  dozen  quart  bottles. 

Germany ;g,812  Still   wiiics    (including    ginarer  wine   or 

Scotland 58,947  •                        t    \                             .tx             ^,^ 

Belgium 40,595  gmgcr  cordials  or  vermuth)  pay  50  cents 

Seiand  ■.;.;■■■;.■;!'!.■.;.■;.■  ■.■.■.".■.■.■.■."";;:.■:.■.■!!.'     Wml  per  gallon  when  in  casks  and  $1.60  per 

China...'.".'.'.'.".'.".".'." .'.'...' '. ".     32.743  dozeu  quart  bottles  when  in  bottles. 

Dantsh'west'i'ndiee.'.'.'.".'.'.".".". .■.":.".".■.'.'.':.■.'.'.'.'.'.'.':     uSi  Bcsides    Hquors,    the    United     States 

Italy ■■■■ is.^Ji  levies  customs  duties  on  various  materials 

Hong-Kong 8,95o  •      j    i,       t                              £      i.                   n 

AuBtria-Hungarv 7,-577  required  oy  liquor  manufacturers.    Bar- 

MlSrcounxries:;;;:::;:;;;::;::::::;;:::::::    13:797  ley  pays  30  cents  per  bushel;  barley  mait, 

45  cents  per  bushel;  chemicals,  different 
France  also  leads  in  the  import  trade  rates,  separately  fixed  for  different  ar- 
in  wines.  The  champagne  imported  from  tides;  casks,  30  per  cent.;  bottles  con- 
France  in  1889  was  valued  at  $3,991,358;  taining  sparkling  wines,  brandy  or  other 
while  the  champagne  imported  from  all  spirituous  liquors,  from  1  to  1^  cent  per 
other  countries  had  a  value  of  only  lb.;  glucose,  f  cent  per  lb.;  hops,  15 
$263,055,  of  which  that  imported  from  cents  per  lb. ;  rice  (flour,  meal  and  broken), 
Belgium  was  valued  at  $167,045,  that  \  cent  per  lb.;  prune  wine  and  other 
from  Germany  at  $45,698  and  that  from  fruit  juice  not  specially  enumerated, 
England  at  $41,725.  Even  in  still  wines  60  cents  per  gallon  if  containing  not 
France  takes  the  lead,  having  sent  us  more  than  18  per  cent,  of  alcohol,  and 
$1,074,520  worth  in  1889,  although  Ger-  $2.50  per  gallon  if  containing  a  larger 
many  was  a  close  competitor,  ship-  percentage.  Cider  pays  5  cents  per 
ping  still  wines  valued  at  $1,070,203.  gallon. ' 
The  following  table  includes  all  the  conn- 

tries  from  which  wines  valued  in  excess  x-.vrwivi.o. 

of  $5,000  were  imported  in  1889 :  The  liquor  export  trade  is   of   smaller 

France                                                   85  065  878  dimensions   than    the    import   business. 

Germany'.'.'.'.".'.'.!'.".'.*.'.'.'.".".*.!'.'."..'.".".'.'.".".".'.".".'.'.!".  ']',nV,9oi  The  followiug  table  shows  the  quantities 

Spain 682,427 

Belgium 196,887      — — 

-f^y  " 1.36'''37  1  Liquors  imported  by  foreign  ministers  to  the  United 

Austria-iiungar"y ! ! .' ." ! ! ! '. '. '. ' ."."."." .".".". ' '. '. ." !:!!!!"" ."      ]b5;2b5  states  for  thei r  own  use  are,  however  admitted  duty  free, 

Portugal                                                                           89  545  as  are  liquors  "  for  the  use  of  the  llnited  States." 

T^PthpriflTiriy ^^^i^\^\  "^  ^W  the  rates  of  customs  duty  given  above  are  those 

Cuba             30  127  charged  under  the  new  tariff  in  force  Oct.  6,  1890.    Under 

Azore," Made'ir^'aAd  Cape 'verde 'islands ." .' .'."!: ." ! .'       12;436  \^l  ^^lZ]^Zl^''l\lfl^'f^  ^^^""1  P^'-*^  '^  "^f "''  Wlf^^^ 

Canada                                                                             11  908  when  in  bottles,  and  20  cents  when  in  casks;  distilled 

<wU7pr\anA «"4fl1  liquors,  $2  per  gallon:  sparkling  wines  at  the  rate  of  $7, 

AuXercounirie's. •."..■.•.■.".■.".".■."."."..".•.".".•.'.'.'.:!!. ::        30;098  ^^'^,  ^""  Y^'f  i^'i?"  P"  *^",f T,,, ^"^^'  bottles:  barley  10 

,  cents  per  bushel  .  barley  malt,  20  cents  per  bushel;  casks, 

-xrr     I,        •        T                  J,           1'1-x        ij  25  per  cent.;  glucose,  20  per  cent.;  hops,  8  cents  per  lb.; 

No  foreign  liquors  of  any  kind,  intended  prune  wine,  etc.,  20  per  cent. ;  cider,  20  per  cent. 


Imports  and  Exports.] 


240 


[Imports  and  Exports. 


and  values  of  domestic  liquors  exported 
during  the  year  ending  June  30,  1889 : 


Quantities. 

Values. 

Malt  Ligxtrn's: 

375,059 
170,059 

$575,089 
50,307 

625,396 

$78,615 

115 
524,509 

1,081,-347 

362,688 
170,827 

Not  in  bottles,  galls 

Total              

Spirits  : 

Alcohol,  proof  galls 

Pure,  neutral   or   cologne, 
proof  galls 

■J^UjTfj           ^^              

276,726 

141 
445,589 

1,292,329 
383,805 
294,840 

Bourbon   Whiskey,    proof 

galls 

Bye  Whiskey,  proof  galls. . 
All  other,                  '^ 

Totals 

In  bottles,  doz 

Not  in  bottles,  galls 

Total           

2,693,430 

7,311 
372,350 

$2,218,101 

$33,000 
236,4aS 

$269,488 
3,112,985 

Grand  total 

Besides  domestic  liquors,  there  were 
exported  in  1889  foreign  liquors  of  these 
values:  Malt  liquors,  13,995;  spirits, 
$49,755 ;  wines,  $68,020. 

In  the  following  table,  the  quantities 
and  values  of  domestic  liquors  exported 
are  given  for  a  series  of  years  : 


— — 

^n — 

,_1 

»_l 

,_l 

K.. 

f 

00 

^ 

s^ 

00 

^        05 

H^            CO 

M        TO 

S    g 

>-      to 

'I        CO 

■-'         4- 

r^ 

Oi        Cn 

§     »s 

E 

059 
,050 

r?  fe 

i^        TO 

O        00 
>t^        CD 

►-1       »-t 

S     95 

P 
3 

a; 

a      *i 

le     »s 

l-A        00 

00        OS 

r+ 

doz. 
galls. 

n      Oi 

w     & 

TO      a 

TO      a. 

TO        C 

r^ 

m 

»      q 

p      o 

33 

p       o 

rn 

P      o 
7' 

«i 

■S 
o 

at 

-,  § 

UT        TO 

to 

^ 
tf 

en      o 

05        o 

OI         OS 

00 

^ 

f» 

089 
,307 

-1        '-' 

TO        TO 

O        TO 

00 

T 

TO        i^ 

■jO 

-1         C7f 

V        00 

I-* 

H^ 

M 

1 

or 

00 

1 

a, 

^ 

lo. 

■     f 

o 

w 

05 

O 

to 

TO 

0-. 

3 

«» 

-j 

H 

)o 

to 

UI 

.  TO 

Vj 

00 

or 

cn 

1 

■  5* 

CO 

cn 

to 

c;t 

OD 

o 

M 

O 

h-k 

-\ 

TO 

Ml 

^ 

t»* 

^        -T 

S        ^ 

O        OS 

to       OS 

2 

^ 

is        TO 
Or       *-^ 

Jif         "-^ 

■r;       *^ 

o     o 

-1      .^ 

00 

P 

TO         00 

o      ^5 

TO        00 

00 

O       ^ 

TO        OI 

~I       o 

doz 
gal 

3q        Cj 

<IQ        a 

TO        Oi 

TO      a. 

TO 

^" 

<i 

so        o 

»      o 

^     g 

p 

?^ 

P 

w 

w 

en 

oc 

m 

a* 

^ 

t-t 

M       CO 

O        TO 

CO         fO 

o      ts 

™     K 

40 

ja 

C5        TO 

t-i       CO 

TO        rf^ 

to      to 

Cr>        05 

o       *. 

»0       00 

""    r.? 

TO 

»      «o 

-1       cs 

to              >-L 

-1        JO 

&    s 

Ci'        00 

to      o 

-1        TO 

-1 

m 

CO 

►-* 

HA 

TO 

OS 

TO 

^ 

05 

or 

1.^ 

lb. 

^ 

i;> 

to 

-1 

t3 

en 

>C> 

ts 

h.^ 

O 

»-* 

CO 

^J3 

1 

o 

w 

CO 

OS 

(X) 

s 

^ 

OS 

-1 

TO 

s 

All  the  malt  and  vinous  liquors   ex- 


ported are  shipped  to  foreign  countries  for 
sale.  These  exports  are  increasing  mate- 
rially. The  largest  part  of  the  American 
beer  and  wine  product  goes  to  the  countries 
of  the  North  and  South  American  con- 
tinents. Central  America  and  the  neigh- 
boring islands.  Of  the  exports  of  beer  in 
1889,  valued  at  $025,490,  all  but  about 
$30,000  worth  was  taken  by  these  countries 
and  islands.  There  is  a  considerable  de- 
mand for  our  beer  in  the  black  Republics 
of  Hayti  and  San  Domingo,  and  for  our 
wine  in  the  Hawaiian  Islands. 

The  exports  of  distilled  spirits  are  not 
bona  fide  exports,  considered  as  a  whole. 
They  include  large  quantities  of  whiskey 
shipped    temporarily   to    foreign    ports, 
with  the  purpose  of  leaving  them  there 
for  a  time,  and  then  bringing  them  back, 
the  object  being  to  postpone  payment  of 
the  United  States  Internal  Revenue  taxes. 
The   seemingly  large  decline  in  the  ex- 
ports of  spirits  since  1880  is  due  partly  to 
a  decrease  in  the  quantity  of  whiskey  so 
shipped  and  partly  to  an  almost  complete 
disappearance  of  the  European  demand 
for   American  alcohol   and   raw   spirits, 
this   disappearance  being  occasioned  by 
the   cheapness   of  the  German  product. 
The  ports  to  which  most  of  the  American 
Avhiskey  is  sent  for  temporary  storage  are 
Hamburg,    Bremen,  Liverpool,  West  In- 
dian ports  and  Honolulu.     In    1889   the 
total  exports  of  bourbon  and  rye  whiskey 
amounted  to  1,070,134   proof  gallons,  of 
which  1,360,393  proof  gallons  were  sent 
to  Germany,  174,841  to  the  British  West 
Indies,  40,955  to  England,  32,900  to  the 
Danish    West  Indies  and  18,410  to  the 
Hawaiian   Islands — making    a    total    of 
1,033,505  proof  gallons,  or  97  per  cent, 
of  the  entire  exports  of  bourbon  and  rye 
whiskey,  and  more  than  00  per  cent,  of 
the  exports  of  spirits  of  all  kinds. 

Of  the  bona  fide  exports  of  American 
spirits,  a  very  large  percentage  goes  to 
heathen  lands  to  be  used  in  trade  with 
the  savages.  The  item  "  Rum,"  in  the 
statistical  tables  of  exports,  stands  almost 
exclusively  for  spirits  of  the  most  fiery 
and  vilest  nature.  Below  are  given  the 
quantities  and  values  of  rum  shipped 
from  the  United  States  in  1889  to  all 
countries :  ^ 

'  Even  the  export  trade  in  this  wretched  rum  shows  a 
marked  decline  on  account  of  German  competition.  The 
following  figures  show  the  total  exports  of  rum  to  British 
Africa  for  tlie  years  named:  1885,  794,311  gallons-  1S86 
737,6,50  gallons;  1887,  632,986  gallons;  18«8,  690,237 gallons; 
1889,  202,019  gallons. 


I.  O.  of  Good  Templars.] 


>41 


[I.  O.  of  Good  Templars. 


Destination. 


French  Possessions  in  Africa  and  ad- 
jacent islands 

Germany 

England 

»<cotland 

British  West  Indies 

Britisli  Possessions  in  Africa  and 
adjacent  islands 

Hayti 

Spanish  Possessions  in  Africa  and 
adjacent  islands 

All  other  islands  and  ports 


Totals 445,589 


Proof 
Galls. 


94,380 

401 

1.35,7'49 

5,1.50 

1,009 

202,010 
50 

5,580 
42 


VALtTES, 


$il;s,26i 
y7i 

1.57,999 

1,.545 

820 

244,405 
.50 

e,ooo 

58 


$524,509 


Of  these  445,589  gallons  of  rum,  302,- 
588  gallons  went  to  African  ports. 
This  entire  export  trade  in  rum  had  for 
its  sole  object  the  corruption  of  aborigines, 
for  not  a  gallon  of  the  quantity  sent  to 
Africa  has  been  returned. 

J.  C.  Fernald. 


Independent  Order  of  Good 
Templars. — This  is  the  most  wide- 
spread international  organization  based 
on  total  abstinence  and  Prohibition  prin- 
ciples. It  was  founded  in  central  New 
York  in  the  summer  of  1851,  and  soon 
spread  into  other  States  and  Canada.  In 
May,  1855,  representatives  of  the  Grand 
Lodges  of  New  York,  Pennsylvania,  Can- 
ada, Iowa,  Indiana,  Kentucky,  Michigan, 
Missouri,  Illinois  and  Ohio,  in  session  at 
Cleveland,  0.,  organized  the  Eight 
Worthy  Grand  Lodge  as  the  supreme 
governing  body  of  the  Order.  There  are 
now  branches  throughout  the  civilized 
world — in  every  State  and  Territory  of 
the  United  States,  in  every  Province  of 
Canada,  in  England,  Wales,  Ireland, 
Norway.  Sweden,  Denmark  and  other 
countries  of  Eiirope,  in  India,  China, 
Japan,  Africa,  Australia,  New  Zealand, 
Tasmania,  the  Sandwich  Islands  and  in 
numerous  islands  of  the  ocean. 

The  Right  Worthy  Grand  Lodge  has 
jurisdiction  over  the  whole  Order.  But 
during  the  period  from  1876  to  1887  the 
Order  was  divided.  At  the  annual  con- 
vention at  Louisville  in  187G,  there  were 
differences  of  opinion  on  the  negro  ques- 
tion, the  representatives  from  Great  Brit- 
ain and  Ireland  and  those  from  the 
United  States  taking  opposing  views. 
Two  distinct  Right  Worthy  Grand 
Lodges  were  accordingly  set  up,  and  the 
separation  continued  until  each  branch- 
exercised  authority  over  about  300,000 
members.  John  B.  Finch,  as  the  head 
of  the  American  branch,  set  for  himself 
tlie  task  of  reuniting  the  Order,  and  at 


Saratoga,  in  1887,  his  labors  were  crowned 
with  success.  Since  then  perfect  har- 
mony has  prevailed,  and  the  influence 
and  prosperity  of  the  Order  have  steadily 
increased. 

There  are  at  present  about  90  Grand 
Lodges  and  1-2,000  subordinate  Lodges, 
having  a  membership  (male  and  female, 
including  Juveniles)  of  more  than  GOO  000. 
Not  less  "than  400,000  drinking  men  have 
taken  the  pledge  under  the  auspices  of 
the  Good  Templars.  The  obligation  sub- 
scribed to  by  each  member  is  for  life,  and 
is  as  follows : 

"  No  member  shall  make,  buy,  sell,  use,  fur- 
nish, or  cause  to  be  furnished  to  others,  as  a 
beverage,  any  spirituous  or  malt  liquors,  wine 
or  cider  ;  ami  every  member  shall  discounte- 
nance the  manufacture,  sale  and  use  thereof, 
in  all  proper  ways." 

The  following  is  the  '  i^^^^form  of 
principles,"  adopted  in  1859 : 

"1.  Total  abstinence  from  all  intoxicating 
liquor  as  a  beverage. 

"  2.  No  license" in  any  form,  or  under  any 
circumstances,  for  the  sale  of  such  liquors  as  a 
beverage. 

"  3.  The  absolute  Prohibition  of  the  manufac- 
ture, importation  and  the  sale  of  intoxicating 
liquors  for  such  purposes,— prohibited  by  the 
will  of  the  people,  expressed  in  due  form  of 
law.  with  the  penalties  deserved  for  a  crime  of 
such  enormity. 

"  4.  The  creation  of  a  healthy  public  opinion 
upon  the  subject  by  the  active  dissemination  of 
truth  in  all  the  modes  known  to  aa  enlightened 
philanthropy. 

"  5.  The  election  of  good,  honest  men  to 
administer  the  laws. 

''6,  Persistence  in  efforts  to  save  individuals 
and  communities  from  so  direful  a  scourge, 
against  all  forms  of  opposition  and  difticully, 
until  our  success  is  complete  and  universal." 

The  present  chief  officers  (1890)  are: 
Right  AVorthy  Grand  Temjjlar,  William 
W.  Turnbull,  Glasgow,  Scotland;  Right 
Worthy  Grand  Counselor,  Dr.  Oron- 
hyatekha,  Toronto,  Can. ;  Right  Worthy 
Grand  Vice-Templar,  Mrs.  F.  E.  Finch, 
Evanston,  111.;  Right  Worthy  Grand 
Superintendent  of  Juvenile  Temples, 
Mrs.  A.  A.  Brookbank,  Jeffersonville, 
Ind. ;  Right  Worthy  Grand  Secretarv, 
B.  F.  Parker,  Milwaukee,  Wis.;  Right 
Worthy  Grand  Treasurer,  W.  Martin 
Jones,  Rochester,  N.  Y. 

The  following  are  the  names  of  those 
who  have  held  the  position  of  Right 
Worthy  Grand  Templar  since  the  begin- 
ning of  the  Order:  James  M.  Moore  of 
Kentucky,     1855-G;    S.    M.    Smith     of 


India.] 


242 


[India. 


Pennsylvania,  1856-7;  0.  W.  Strong  of 
Hlinois,  1857-8;  Simeon  B.  Chase  of 
Pennsylvania,  1858-63;  Samuel  D.  Hast- 
ings of  Wisconsin,  1863-8,  1873-4;  Jon- 
athan H.  Orneof  Massachusetts,  1868-71 ; 
John  Russell  of  Michigan,  1871-3;  John 
J.  Hickman  of  Kentucky,  1874-7,  1879- 
81;  Theodore  D.  Kanouse  of  Wisconsin, 
1877-9 ;  George  B.  Katzenstein  of  Cali- 
fornia, 1881-4;  John  B.  Finch  of  Illinois, 
1884-7;  W.  W.  Turnbull  of  Glasgow, 
Scotland,  1887.  B.  F.  Parker, 

R.  W.  G.  Secretary,  I.  0.  G.  T. 

India.  ^ — The  history — or  modern  his- 
tory— of  the  drink  curse  in  India  dates 
from  the  introduction  of  the  British  Ex- 
cise system  near  the  close  of  the  18th 
Century.  Previously  to  the  era  of  British 
dominion,  the  inhabitants  of  India  were 
among  the  most  abstemious  of  peoples. 
Though  the  ancient  use  of  intoxicants 
in  connection  with  religious  worship 
and  as  a  social  custom  is  mentioned 
in  the  Vedas,  Puranas,  Tantras  and  other 
sacred  books,  and  though  intemperance 
is  attributed  even  to  some  of  the  gods  of 
the  Hindus,  the  moralists  and  lawgivers 
sternly  and  steadfastly  condemned  indul- 
gence in  alcoholic  liquors.  In  the  Bud- 
dhist scriptures  and  also  in  the  Mohamme- 
d'an  Koran  strong  drink  is  prohibited. 
The  earliest  Europeans  visiting  India 
testified  to  the  freedom  of  the  people 
from  the  vice  of  intemperance.  The 
fermenting  process  was  undoubtedly 
known  in  very  distant  ages,  fermented 
liquors  being  made  from  the  juices  of  the 
soma  and  sura ;  but  it  was  reserved  for 
the  Christain  English  to  sanction  and 
foster  a  traffic  and  a  vice  that  had  been 
discountenanced  and  repressed  by  Hindu 
and  Mohammedan  rulers  alike. 

THE   BRITISH   EXCISE   POLICY. 

The  British  Government  in  India  in- 
augurated its  Excise  policy  in  1790,  but 
for  30  or  40  years  comparatively  little 
liquor  was  sold.  Until  Sept.  19,  1878, 
all  the  distilleries  were  owned  and 
operated  by  the  Government,  under  what 
was  known  as  the  Sudder  (or  District) 
Still  system.  The  sole  object  was  to  pro- 
duce revenues,  and  it  was  thought  the 
distilling  business  would  be  most  profit- 


'  The  editor  is  indebted  to  Wallace  J.  Gladwin,  Miles, 
la.;  Mrs.  Emma  Brainerd  IJyder,  Bombay,  India,  uiid 
Airs,  ilary  Clement  Leavitt. 


able  if  operated  by  the  Government 
itself.  Under  tliis  system  the  revenue 
finally  reached  considerable  proportions 
— in  excess  of  110,000,000  annually;  but 
the  autliorities  were  not  satisfied,  and  a 
new  scheme  was  devised. 

On  Sept.  19,  1878,  the  new  measure,  or 
Abkari  act  as  it  was  called,  was  published 
by  the  Government  of  Bombay.  At  first 
it  applied  only  to  the  Bombay  Presidency, 
but  it  is  now  in  force  over  all  India,  ex- 
cepting a  few  small  districts  under  native 
rule.  Its  distinctive  feature  is  the  "  Out 
Still "  system.  The  right  to  operate  dis- 
tilleries in  competition  with  tlie  Govern- 
ment is  sold  at  public  auctions  to  the 
highest  bidders.  The  successful  bidder 
in  each  locality  may  distill  as  much 
liquor  as  he  chooses,  and  of  any  kind  and 
quality,  free  from  Government  super- 
vision. But  the  revenue  from  private 
distillers,  though  the  chief  element  of 
the  Excises,  is  only  one  element.  All  the 
sap-bearing  palm  trees  of  India — trees 
yielding  juice  from  which  fermented 
liquor  is  made  and  spirits  are  distilled, — 
are  taxed  by  the  Government;  the  right 
to  draw  the  sap  is  farmed  out  to  the 
highest  bidder,  and  nobody — not  even 
the  owner  of  the  trees — can  extract  sap 
without  a  Government  license.  Licenses 
to  sell  liquor  at  retail  are  also  sold  to  the 
highest  bidder.  Thus  the  Excise  policy 
of  India  is  based  on  the  High  License 
principle  exclusively.  And  like  the  High 
License  legislation  of  the  United  States  it 
is  an  entire  success  as  a  revenue  measure. 

In  the  year  1873-4  (before  the  Abkari 
act  went  into  efl'ect),  the  drink  revenue 
in  the  whole  of  India  was  £2,300,000;  in 
1878-9  it  was  £2.600,000;  in  1883, 
£3,609,000;  in  1884,  £3,836,000;  in 
1885,  £4,012,000;  in  1886,  £4,152,000. 
and  in  1887,  £4,266,000.2  Details  of  the 
increase  in  revenue  in  particular  parts  of 
India  are  even  more  appalling.  Statistics 
given  by  A¥.  S.  Caine  and  Samuel  Smith 
in  the  British  House  of  Commons,  March 
13,  1888,  show  that  in  eight  years  the  in- 
crease was  135  per  cent,  in  Bengal;  in 
the  Central  Provinces  it  was  100  per 
cent,  in  10  years,  etc.  In  Ceylon  the 
revenue  from  drink  is  almost  14  per  cent, 
of  the  total  revenue.  "  The  Government 
are  driving  this  liquor  trade  as  hard  as 
they  can,"  said  Mr.  Caine.     "  Collectors> 


"  Intemperance  in  India,  by  Bishop  J.  F.  Hurst,   Ccit- 
tury  Magazine  for  July,  1889. 


India.] 


243 


[India. 


find  it  the  easiest  way  to  increase  their 
contribution  to  the  revenue,  and  for 
years  they  have  been  stimulating  the 
consumption  of  liquor  to  the  utmost. 
If  tlie  Government  continue  their  present 
policy  of  doubling  the  revenue  every  10 
years,  in  30  years  India  will  be  one  of  the 
most  drunken  and  degraded  countries  on 
the  face  of  the  earth,"  In  the  same  debate 
Sir  G.  Campbell  said  the  Excise  revenue 
was  "  the  only  progressive  revenue  of 
India,  and  had  been  going  up  by  leaps 
and  bounds." 

The  Government  of  India,  however, 
merits  commendation  for  making  none 
of  the  virtuous  pretensions  that  are  ad- 
vanced by  the  High  License  politicians  of 
the  United  States.  The  officials  frankly 
declare  that  they  are  interested  in  the 
reve-nue  solely,  and  not  in  the  promotion 
of  temperance.  In  1888  the  Finance 
Minister  for  India  used  the  following 
language  in  the  Legislative  Council :  *'  I 
look  hopefully  to  a  considerable  increase 
in  the  Excise  revenues,  and  believe  that 
a  great  deal  might  be  done  in  Northern 
India  by  the  introduction  of  the  methods 
which  in  Bombay  and  Madras  have  so 
powerfully  contributed  to  the  increase  of 
revenue  under  this  head." 

In  Bengal  the  Government  applauded 
16  collectors  who  had  largely  increased 
the  liquor  sales  in  their  districts.  In  the 
vicinity  of  Bombay  a  movement  was 
started  among  the  country  people  against 
the  use  and  sale  of  liquor,  whereupon  the 
magistrate  had  eight  of  the  leaders  im- 
prisoned. In  reporting  this  tyrannical  act 
to  the  Secretary  of  State  in  London,  the 
Government  of  Bombay  said :  "  The 
question  for  decision  is,  shall  we  sit  quiet 
and  allow  the  temperance  movement  in 
the  Colaba  District  to  continue  and  to 
spread,  and  thereby  forfeit  a  large 
amount  of  revenue,  or  are  measures  to  be 
adopted  which  will  bring  the  people  to 
their  senses  ? "  Such  facts  as  these 
moved  Mr.  Caine  to  say  in  Parliament, 
April  30,  1889 :  "  All  moral  considera- 
tions are  swamped  in  the  effort  to  obtain 
revenue,"  and  "  the  worst  and  rottenest 
Excise  system  in  the  civilized  world  is 
that  of  India." 

SHOCKING    RESULTS. 

This  conclusion  was  voiced  by  Parliar 
ment  itself,  in  more  cautious  but  highly 
significant     language.       The     following 


resolution,  though  warmly  opposed  by 
Salisbury's  Tory  Ministry,  was  passed  by 
the  House  of  Commons  on  the  same  day 
(April  30,  1889) : 

"  That,  in  the  opinion  of  this  House,  the  fiscal 
system  of  the  Government  of  India  leads  to  the 
establishment  of  spirit  distilleries,  liquor  and 
opium  shops  in  large  numbers  of  places  where 
till  recently  they  never  existed,  in  defiance  of 
native  opinion  and  the  protests  of  the  inhab- 
itants, and  that  such  increased  facilities  for 
drinking  produce  a  steadily  increasing  con- 
sumption, and  spread  misery  and  ruin  among 
the  industrial  classes  of  India,  calling  for  imme- 
diate action  on  the  part  of  the  Government  of 
India  with  a  view  to  their  abatement." 

With  so  striking  an  expression  of 
opinion  delivered  by  a  legislative  body 
under  the  control  of  a  powerful  Conservar 
five  majority,  it  goes  without  saying  that 
the  results  of  the  High  License  policy 
from  a  temperance  point  of  view  have 
been  shocking  in  the  extieme.  All 
authorities  are  agreed  in  tesi  ifying  that 
intemperance  has  made  great  strides  in 
India  under  the  Abkari  act.  Sap-gather- 
ers, distillers  and  retail  liquor-dealers 
alike  have  every  incentive  to  corrupt  the 
populace  and  sell  as  much  liquor  as 
possible:  each  licensee  pays  the  maxi- 
mum price  for  the  privilege  of  doing 
business,  with  the  express  understanding 
that  his  license  is  subject  to  revocation 
if,  at  its  expiration,  some  more  anxious 
competitor  outbids  him ;  therefore  he  has 
the  strongest  reasons  for  stimulating  the 
consumption  of  liquor  to  the  utmost 
limit. 

The  holy  city  of  Benares  (with  its  out- 
lying district),  according  to  the  Abkari, 
monthly  organ  of  the  Anglo-Indian 
Temperance  Association,  consumed  158,- 
356  gallons  of  spirits  in  1887.  The  pop- 
ulation of  Benares  city  and  districts  was 
892,684;  yet  the  district  of  Gorukpore, 
with  a  population  of  2,617,120,  consumed 
only  57,571  gallons  in  the  same  year. 
Tnese  figures  illustrate  how  the  people  of 
India,  even  in  the  regions  where  native 
customs  and  religion  are  apparently 
strongest,  are  being  corrupted  by  the 
English  drink  traffic. 

Under  vigorous  pressure  from  the 
public,  the  Government  appointed  a  com- 
mission to  inquire  into  the  effects  of  the 
Excise  system.  Although  many  of  the 
officials  attempted  to  minify  the  evil  con- 
sequences, the  reports  were  filled  with 
painful  details.     "  The  habit  of  drinking 


India.]                                                  244  [India. 

has  extended  to  all  classes,"  said  the  mended  by  the  highest  officers.  No  per- 
Commissioners  of  Patna.  "  Enormous  son  has  had  larger  opportunities  to  study- 
increase  of  drunkenness,"  stated  an  in-  the  question;  and  he  declares  that  British 
spector.  "'  The  quantity  of  liquor  drunk  licensed  liquor  "  will  be  a  curse  to  the 
on  holida3\s  is  immense,"  replied  another,  Empire  more  destructive  in  its  conse- 
and  similar  testimony  might  be  adduced  quences  than  the  heathen  customs  of  their 
almost  without  limit.  [the  natives']  forefathers,"  and  that  the 

The  missionaries  freely  make  such  Excise  regulations  and  drinking  habits 
statements  as  tlie  following:  Archbishop  are  "crimes  of  equal  magnitude  with 
Jeffries,  31  years  in  India:  "For  one  those  caused  by  sutteeism  [burning  alive 
really  converted  Christain  as  the  proof  of  widows],  infanticide  and  fanaticism." 
of  missionary  labor,  the  drinking  prac-  An  aggressive  and  well-edited  temperance 
tices  of  England  have  made  a  thousand  and  Prohibition  monthly,  called  the  Ban- 
drunkards ;  "  Eev.  Dr.  Phillips :  "  Our  ner  of  Asia,  is  published  at  Tardeo,  Bom- 
schools  for  the  poor  are  frequently  bay.  The  "United  Committee  for  the 
broken  up  by  the  rising  flood  of  intem-  Prevention  of  the  Demoralization  of 
perance.  Our  bazaar  congregations  are  Native  Races  by  the  Liquor  Traffic,"  is 
often  disturbed  by  drunken  fellows,  and  an  influential  English  organization  that 
the  work  of  preaching  the  gospel  is  much  devotes  much  attention  to  India,  head- 
hindered.  Our  teachers,  pupils,  preach-  quarters  being  at  127  Palace  Chambers, 
ers  and  others  are  by  no  means  proof  to  London  (Rev.  J.  Grant  Mills,  Secretary), 
the  dire  temptations  of  strong  drink ;  "  The  Anglo-Indian  Temperance  Associa- 
Dr.  Reichel :  "  A  cry  of  horror  rises  from  tion  works  exclusively  for  temperance 
all  mission  fields  at  the  ruin  wrought  by  reform  in  India;  the  President  is  Samuel 
intoxicating  liquor."  Smith,  M.  P.,  and  the    Secretary  W.  S. 

The    Government-licensed    rum    is  of  Caine,   M.    P.,   and    the    offices    are   at 

exceedingly  vile  quality.     Nearly  all  the  No.  2  Storey's  Gate,  S.  W.,  London. 

liquor  manufactured  is  called  "country  Dr.  Emma  Brainerd  Ryder  of  Bombay, 

spirits,"  "  a  drink  so  cheap  and  poison-  representing  the  World's  Woman's  Chris- 

ous,"  says  the  Z^fo^wer  o/\4.S'ra,  "that  over  tian  Temperance  Union,  is  now  (1890) 

every  licensed  house  for  the  sale  of  it  a  circulating  petitions  to  the  British  Gov- 

Government  notice  is  placed, 'No  Euro-  ernment  asking  that  the  Excise  system  be 

pean   soldier   allowed   here.'"i      In   the  abolished  and  that  all  persons  be  prohib- 

fiscal     year    1887-8,    the    total     Excise  ited    from  taking    sap    from   the   palm 

revenue  of  Bengal  was  6,456,144  rupees,  trees.     Pundita  Pamabai,  the  distinguish- 

of  which  5,205,122  rupees,  or  more  than  ed  Hindu  woman,  has  engaged  actively 

80  per  cent.,  came  from  the  tax  on  this  in  the  temperance  work  since  her  return 

terrible  "  country  spirits."     (A  rupee  is  from  America, 
worth  about  50  cents.) 

OPIUM   AND    HASHEESH. 
EEFORM   EFFORTS. 

Despite  all  discouragements  there  are  J.*  ™  ^"^i^^,  ^}^^  produced  the  opium 
many  earnest  temperance  laborers  in  which  England  forced  upon  Chma  at  the 
India,  and  their  efforts  are  bearing  fruit,  ^^^non  s  mouth.  See  China.)  But  the 
Missionaries,  merchants,  native  gentle-  British  authorities  have  not  until  recently 
men,  manufacturers  and  a  few  Govern-  encouraged  the  consumption  of  opium 
ment  officials  have  contributed  to  the  among  theirown  subjects.  I^ow  opium  lor 
cause.  A  recognized  leader  is  Rev.  J.  G  ""^^^^l^  }'^^  ^^  g^^wn,  manufactured  and 
Gregson,  whose  services  in  promoting  ^^^fle^  under  Government  sanction; 
total  abstinence  in  the  British  army  in  ^^^^.  ^^^^  same  is  true  of  the  equally 
India  for  25  years  were  aided  and  com-  "o^ious  preparations  familiarly  known 
by  the  general  name  of  hasheesh,  made 

=  The  liquor  sold  is  a  fiery,  stiflin?,  poisonous  spirit,  fi'om  the  Indian  hcmp.     The  consump- 

h?^\'fIn''.'7.Fn;.\th^i^ir'''''^''^  ^°,,*'7k''*'T'('-^  tion  of  these  drugs  is   increasing  at  a 

mj;;  It  to  an  English  soldier.     To  the  debauched  intellects  j.   •    n   ,  »    i        ,              -,   P-,                           j>        ^  ±^ 

of  the  persons  in  the  Indian  Government  responsible  for  irighttul  rate,  and  the  rCVenUC  irom  them 

these  iniquities,  the  life  of  the  English  soldier  is  valuable  ,•„    olrp.irlv  Iflro-P        Dnrino"   fhp    fiqpnl  vpar 

because  of  his  costliness  to  the  State,  whilst  that  of  the  ■'^   ailCdUy  large.       JJUriUg    llie   llbcai  yedl 

natiyecoolieis  valueless,  and  tiiere  are  no  scruples  to  Ob-  1887-8,     the     rCVeilUe      of      the      Bengal 

taming  revenue  from  his  death  through  these  licensed  m                        i.    j!                   •                       ,->  i  rvr~  /"oo 

poisons.— iJ«««e?o/ .4m, September,  1889.  Government  irom  opium  was  2,107,038 


India.] 


245 


[Indians  (North  American). 


rupees,  and  from  preparations  of  the 
Indian  liemj),  2,293,012  rujDees. 

P  "All  opium  in  India."  says  a  highly  intelli- 

gent Indiau  writer.  "  is  derived  from  two  sources, 
that  grown  in  the  Native  States,  and  that 
grown  by  the  license  of  the  Indian  Government, 
manufactured  in  the  Government  factories  and 
sold  by  Government  officials.  With  regard  to 
the  opium  grown  in  the  Native  States,  all,  or 
nearly  all,  of  this  is  produced  for  the  China 
market,  and  the  Indian  Government  levies  a 
very  heavy  transit  duty.  The  Native  States  are 
uniier  British  control  and  completely  sur- 
rounded by  British  territory.  At  every  railway 
station  on  the  borders  of  these  States,  an  In- 
dian Government  ofncial  is  kept  with  a  pair  of 
scales,  and  all  opium  coming  from  these  States 
on  the  way  to  Bombay,  etc.,  for  shipment  to 
China  is  weighed  and  the  duty  paid  to  him 
biifore  it  is  allowed  to  proceed  farther.  Any 
one  even  possessing  this  native  opium  in  India 
without  having  paid  the  duty  is  liable  to  1,000 
rupees  fine  and  one  year's  imprisonment,  under 
Section  9  of  the  Opium  act  of  18T8. 

"  With  regard  to  the  opium  produced  directly 
by  the  Indian  Government,  the  plan  pursued  is 
that  the  Indian  Goverment  licenses  certain  men 
to  grow  the  poppy.  It  then  advances  money  to 
these  men  in  order  to  enable  them  to  do  this, 
and  to  keep  them  entirely  in  its  power.  When 
the  poppy  rs  ripe  the  cultivator  makes  slits  in  the 
head  of  the  plant  from  which  a  white  juice  ex- 
udes. Tins  turns  to  a  black  hard  substance  by 
exposure  to  the  air  and  is  scraped  off  the  plant, 
and  carefully  collected,  and  sold  to  the  Indian 
Government  at  a  fixed  rate  (about  3  rupees  a 
pound).  If  the  ctdtivator  sells  a  drop  of  the 
juice  to  !Uiy  one  else  but  the  Governinent,  he  is 
liable  to  1000  rupees  fine  and  one  year's  im- 
prisonment, under  Section  9  of  Act  No.  1  of 
1878  (the  Opium  act  •.  The  Indian  Government 
having  bought  the  hardened  juice,  transports  it 
to  great  factories  at  Patna  and  elsewhere,  man- 
aged by  Government  officials  and  guarded  by 
Government  soldiers,  where  it  is  made  ready 
for  use.  Large  quantities  are  sent  to  China, 
into  which  country  it  was  at  first  smuggled  by 
great  East  Indiamen  (vessels  bristling  with  can- 
non like  men-of-war),  but  is  now  imported 
under  treaties  wrung  from  the  Chinese  by  several 
bloody  wars.  But  these  Government  factories 
are  also  now  sending  out  large  and  increasing 
quantities  for  use  in  India.  In  that  case  it  is 
sent  to  the  '  Collectors'  of  the  various  districts, 
who  are  also  magistrates.  These  Collectors  are 
the  wholesale  dealers  in  the  drug,  and  sell  it  to 
the  contractors.  The  contractors  are  forced 
under  a  heavy  fine  to  sell  a  certain  quantity  in 
their  district.  If  the  contractor  does  not  sell  as 
much  as  he  promised  to  do  when  he  took  the 
contract,  he  forfeits  a  heavy  sum,  and  if  another 
man  comes  and  says,  '  I  will  sell  more  than  this 
contractor,'  the  contract  is  given  to  him.  Thus 
the  trade  is  encouraged  and  pushed  by  the 
Government,  and  the  damnation  of  the  people 
.speeds  apace.     .     .     . 

"  On  the  3d  of  July  last  (1889),  I  went  to  the 
Null  Bazar,  Bombay,  a  great  native  market, 
where  food,  grain,  vegetables  and  meat  are 
sold.     I  saw  a  stall  licensed  by  Government, 


with  three  divisions,  a  man  seated  in  each,  all 
three  men  weighing  out  the  opium  in  its  raw 
state  as  fast  as  they  could .  to  a  continuous  stream 
of  customers— men,  women  and  children.  .  .  . 
There  are  eleven  .such  shops  in  Bomiiay.  .  .  . 
We  were  informed  that  the  opium  contractor 
in  Bombay  is  bound  down  to  forfeit  3,000  ru- 
pees if  he  fails  to  sell  the  quantity  contracted 
for.     .     .     . 

'  In  Ucensing ganja,  blmwi,  cJtaras  and  majum, 
the  four  noxious  preparations  of  the  Indian 
hemp,  the  Christian  Government  of  India  places 
itself  on  a  much  lower  moral  plane  than  the 
Mahommedan  Turkish  and  Egyptian  Govern- 
ments, which  mo.st  stringently  prohibit  them. 
The  use  of  these  drugs  centers  in  the  worship  of 
Mahadeva  or  Shiva,  the  vilest  and  most  licen- 
tious idol  of  the  Hindu  Pantheon.  In  precisely 
the  same  way  as  the  Christian  asks  the  blessing 
of  his  Heavenly  Father  on  his  wholesome  food, 
so  does  the  licentious  slave  of  the  products  of 
the  Indian  hemp  invoke  his  filthy  god,  before 
partaking  of  the  above  four  poisons,  licensed  by 
the  Indian  Government.  As  with  opium,  so 
with  the  preparations  of  the  Indian  hemp,  there 
are  houses  specially  licensed  by  the  Government 
for  the  sale  of  the  drug.  There  is  a  stall  in  the 
largest  food-market  of  Bombay,  the  Crawford 
Market,  at  which  there  is  sold  bhang,  cliaras  and 
ganja,  the  three  principal  products  of  the  Indian 
hemp,  and  nothing  else."  ' 

Indiana. — See  Index. 

Indians  (North  American). — The 

Government  of  the  United  States  pro- 
hibits absohitely  the  sale  to  Indians  on 
reservations  of  any  intoxicating  bever- 
ages. No  trader  is  allowed  to  traffic  in 
them,  and  any  person  who  surrei^titiotisly 
sells  or  gives  liquor  of  any  description  to 
Indians,  whether  it  is  done  on  or  off  a 
reservation,  is  liable  to  a  fine  of  $300  and 
two  years'  imprisonment.  The  Indian 
Bureau  uses  all  diligence  to  enforce  these 
laws,  but  in  spite  of  every  effort  the  evils 
of  intemperance  among  the  Indians  are 
very  great.  Nothing,  perhaps,  stands 
more  in  the  way  of  their  j)rogress  in 
civilization,  or  is  more  hurtful  to  them 
in  all  respects,  than  the  use  of  strong 
drink.  The  records  of  the  Indian  Office 
abound  in  facts  to  illustrate  this  general 
statement. 

Not  all  Indians,  by  any  means,  are 
addicted  to  the  habit  of  drinking.  Many 
of  them  are  total  abstainers,  some  from 
principle,  others  from  necessity;  but  the 
evils  of  drinking  are  greatly  intensified 
among  them  by  the  vile  character  of 
much  of  the  stuff  that  is  furnished  to 
them.     They  are  still  further  aggravated 

'  Banner  of  Asia,  September,  1889. 


Indians  (North  American).] 


246 


[Indians  (North  American). 


by  the  improvident  cliaracter  of  this 
people,  and  their  readiness  while  under 
the  influence  of  intoxicants  to  fling 
reason  and  self-control  to  the  winds,  and 
give  loose  rein  to  all  their  vile  passions. 
It  is  a  distressing  fact  that  while  great 
efforts  are  being  put  forth  to  induce  the 
Indians  to  lay  aside  their  savage  customs, 
become  civilized  and  adopt  the  "  white 
man's  ways,"  so  many  white  men  are 
ready  to  supply  them  with  that  which 
sinks  them  even  lower  in  the  scale  of 
being  than  savagery.  It  is  sadder  still 
that  army  officers,  Indian  agents,  physi- 
cians and  even  teachers,  sometimes  set 
the  Indians  examples  of  drunkenness.  » 

There  are  many  practical  difficulties  in 
the  way  of  the  effectual  enforcement  of 
the  Government  Prohibitory  laws  on 
Indian  reservations.  The  250,000  In- 
dians are  scattered  over  a  great  territory 
of  nearly  190,000  square  miles,  making  it 
well-nigh  impossible  to  police  such  a 
region  with  any  force.  The  police  force 
at  the  disposal  of  the  Indian  Office  is  in- 
adequate and  inefficient.  The  opportuni- 
ties for  evasion  are  many,  and  the  facili- 
ties for  detection  are  few.  It  should  be 
said,  however,  that  a  large  number  of  the 
agents  and  other  employees  of  the  Indian 
service  are  not  only  men  of  sobriety,  but 
are  zealous  in  co-operating  with  the  cen- 
tral office  in  preventing  just  as  far  as 
possible  the  liquor  traffic. 

As  the  Indians  are  fast  becoming  citi- 
zens, the  importance  of  the  proper  in- 
struction of  the  rising  generation  in  tem- 
perance principles  is  urgent  and  cannot 
be  over-estimated.  Every  Indian  school 
should  have  a  temperance  organization 
and  should  be  equipped  with  an  abun- 
dance of  appropriate  temperance  litera- 
ture. Every  teacher  and  every  other  em- 
ployee on  a  reservation  should  be  an  out- 
and-out  temperance  man  or  woman,  whose 
daily  life  will  be  an  object  lesson  of  the 
principles  inculcated.  Thus,  and  thus 
only,  can  the  Government  laws  be  of  any 
avail,  or  the  fearful  evils  of  intemperance 
^mong  these  people  be  lessened. . 

T.  J.  MoRGAisr. 

(United  States  Commissioner  of  Indian 
Affairs.) 

Historical  JVote.^ — Unlike  the  natives 
of  Mexico  and  South  America,  the  North 


American  Indians  never  made  alcoholic 
liquor  of  any  kind.  "  It  is  very  certain," 
says  Heckewelder,  "  that  the  processes  of 
distillation  and  fermentation  are  entirely 
unknown  to  the  Indians,  and  that  they 
have  among  them  no  intoxicating  liquors 
but  such  as  they  receive  from  us.  The 
Mexicans  have  their  pulque  and  other  in- 
digenous beverages  of  an  inebriating 
nature,  but  the  North  American  Indians, 
before  their  intercourse  with  us  com- 
menced, had  absolutely  nothing  of  the 
kind."^  Distilled  spirits  were  given  to 
the  Indians  by  nearly  all  the  European 
pioneers.  The  unknown  drink  was  at 
first  taken  with  hesitation  and  fear,  and 
then  was  eagerly  craved  and  constantly 
demanded.  One  of  the  best-supported 
of  Indian  traditions,  says  Heckewelder, 
relates  that  the  name  of  Manhattan  • 
Island  (New  York)  is  corrupted  from 
Manahachtanieiik,  meaning  in  the  Dela- 
ware language,  "  The  island  where  we  all 
became  intoxicated."^  The  fondness  of 
the  Indians  for  spirits  encouraged  unscru- 
pulous traders  to  use  rum  as  the  chief 
medium  of  exchange  in  their  dealings 
with  savages  having  furs  and  other  val- 
uable articles  to  disj)ose  of. 

In  some  instances  the  shocking  results 
appealed  to  philanthropic  feelings  and 
caused  persons  in  authority  to  prohibit 
the  giving  of  liquor  to  Indians.  The 
refusal  of  William  Penn  and  the  Friends 
to  take  advantage  of  the  appetites  of  the 
natives  is  one  of  the  most  memorable  of 
these  instances.  As  early  as  1685,  the 
Yearly  Meeting  of  Friends  for  Pennsyl- 
vania and  New  Jersey  adopted  the  follow- 
ing minute  : 

"This  meeting  doth  unanimously  agree  and 
give  as  their  judgment  that  it  is  not  consistent 
with  the  honor  of  truth,  for  any  that  make  pro- 
fession thereof,  to  sell  rum  or  any  strong 
liquors  to  the  Indians,  because  they  use  them 
not  to  moderation  but  to  excess  and  drunken- 
ness. " 

In  New  England  also  it  was  made  un- 
lawful to  provide  the  Indians  with  strong 
drink.  The  Massachusetts  Colony  in 
London  in  1629,  in  a  letter  of  instruc- 
tions to  Governor  Endicott,  said  : 

"  We  pray  you  endeavor,  though  there  be 
much  strong  water  for  sale,  yet  so  to  order  it 
as  that  the  savages  may  not,  for  our  lucre  sake, 


•  The  information  here  given  is  derived  chiefly  from 
"  Alcohol  in  History,"  by  Richard  Eddy,  D.  1).  (New 
York,  1887),  pp.  75,  177-80. 


»  History,  Manners  and  Customs  of  the  Indian  Nations, 
etc.,  by  Kov.  John  Heckewelder,  chap.  3(). 
3  Ibid.,  pp.  71-1,  2G3. 


Indians  (North  American).] 


247 


[Inebriate  Asylums. 


be  induced  to  the  excessive  use,  or  rather  abuse 
of  it;  aud  at  auy  time  take  care  our  people  give 
uo  ill  example;  and  if  any  shall  exceed  in  the 
inordinate  kind  of  drinking  as  to  become  drunk, 
we  hope  you  will  take  care  his  punishment  be 
made  exemplary  for  all  others." 

One  of  the  earliest  laws  of  the  colony, 
passed  in  1633,  directed  that  "  No  man 
shall  sell  or  (being  in  the  course  of  trade) 
give  any  strong  water  to  any  Indians."^ 
r>at  in  10-44  this  prohibition  was  modified, 
tiie  following  curious  order  being  pro- 
mulgated : 

"  The  Court,  apprehending  that  it  is  not  fit  to 
deprive  tlie  ludians  of  any  lawful  comforts 
which  God  alloweth  to  all  men  by  the  use  of 
wine,  orders  that  it  shall  be  lawful  for  all  who 
are  licensed  to  retail  wines  to  sell  also  to  In- 
dians." '■' 

This  discrimination  in  favor  of  wines 
did  not  work,  and  in  1G48  it  was  ordered 
that  '•  only  one  person  in  Boston  be 
allowed  to  sell  wine  to  the  Indians."* 
In  1657  a  return  was  made  to  the  origi- 
nal law,  it  being  decreed  that  "  All  per- 
sons are  wholly  prohibited  to  sell,  truck, 
barter  or  give  any  strong  liquors  to  any 
Indian,  directly  or  indirectly,  whether 
known  by  the  name  of  rum,  strong 
waters,  wine,  strong  beer,  brandy,  cider 
or  perry,  or  any  other  strong  liquors  go- 
ing under  any  other  name  whatsoever."* 

The  Prohibitory  regulations  of  Ogle- 
thorpe in  Georgia  (1733)  against  the  im- 
portation and  sale  of  distilled  spirits 
were  of  great  benefit  to  the  Indians  and 
promoted  friendly  relations  between  them 
and  the  whites.  But  the  neighboring 
colony  of  South  Carolina  sanctioned  the 
rum  traffic,  and  "  the  enforcement  of  the 
law  among  the  Indians  in  Georgia,"  says 
Prof.  Scomp,  '^  was  scarcely  thought  of."^ 
"  Of  all  other  causes,"  said  a  contempo- 
rary writer,  "  the  introduction  of  spirit- 
uous liquors  among  them  [the  Indians], 
for  which  they  discovered  an  amazing 
appetite,  has  proved  the  most  destruc- 
tive."'^ 

In  every  stage  of  the  sad  history  of  the 
Indians,  whiskey  has  been  probably  the 
chief  agent  in  the  work  of  corruption 
and   extermination.     There  is   no  other 


'  Massachusetts  Colony  Records,  vol.  1,  p.  16. 
■  Ibid,  vol.  2,  p.  85. 
3  Ibid,  vol.  2,  p.  2.58. 

*  Ibid,  vol.  S.  p.4i5. 

*  Kiiiii  Alcohol  in  the  Realm  of  King  Cotton,  by  II.  A. 
Scomp,>h.  D.,  p.  lis. 

*  A  Historical  Account  of  South  Carolina  and  Georgia 
tLondon,  1779),  vol.  2,  p.  27'J. 


trntli  better  established  than  this  in  the 
annals  of  the  North  American  continent. 

Indian  Territory. — See  Index. 

Inebriate  Asylums. — The  theory 
that  inebriety  is  a  disease  has  been  sup- 
ported for  centuries  by  physicians,  phil- 
osophers and  statesmen,  but  the  world 
has  not  been  ready  to  accept  it  until  very 
recently.  Near  the  beginning  of  the 
present  century  Dr.  Eush  of  Philadel- 
phia advocated  the  building  of  special 
asylums  for  inebriates;  and  Dr.  Wood- 
ward of  Worcester  afterwards  seconded 
this  suggestion.  The  Connecticut  State 
Medical  Society  in  1830  petitioned  the 
Legislature  to  erect  an  inebriate  asylum, 
and  the  English  Lunacy  Commission  in 
1844  recommended  that  inebriates  be  de- 
clared insane  and  that  separate  institu- 
tions be  constructed  for  them.  Eminent 
men  in  Europe  and  America  approved 
this  proposition,  but  nothing  was  done 
until  1846,  when  Dr.  J.  E.  Turner  of 
Bath,  Me.,  made  efforts  in  New  York  to 
bring  about  the  formation  of  a  company 
to  build  an  asylum  for  inebriates.  Six 
years  later  application  was  made  to  the 
New  York  Legislature  for  a  charter  for 
such  an  asylum.  Strong  and  bitter 
opposition  Avas  encountered,  and  it  was 
not  until  1854  that  the  charter  was 
granted.  Ten  years  later  an  inebriate 
asylum  was  opened  in  the  city  of  Bing- 
hamton,  N.  Y. — the  first  in  history.  It 
was  erected  with  money  raised  by  private 
subscription.  There  was  much  contro- 
versy concerning  it,  and  finally  it  fell 
into  the  hands  of  politicians  and  was  con- 
verted into  an  insane  asylum  in  1880. 
During  the  16  years  of  its  existence  over 
4,000  inebriates  were  treated,  and  from 
studies  made  in  2,000  cases  it  was  ascer- 
tained that  61  per  cent,  of  the  patients 
had  been  restored  to  health  and  sobriety. 

Other  institutions  were  founded  in  the 
United  States  and  various  foreign  coun- 
tries. Interest  in  the  study  of  inebriety 
has  steadily  increased  and  the  literature 
of  the  subject  has  received  numerous 
contributions  of  great  value.  The  United 
States,  which  took  the  lead,  has  shown 
greater  activity  in  the  founding  of  in- 
ebriate asylums  than  any  other  country. 

Of  asylums  for  the  treatment  of  the  in- 
temperate, there  are  three  distinct  classes: 
(1)  Asylums  or  hospitals  established  by 


Inebriate  Asylums.]  248  [Injunction  Law. 

State  aid,  corporations  or  private  enter-  The  future  looks  promising,  and  it  is  be- 
prise  (with  the  prestige  of   legislation),  lieved  that  the  public  will  support  inebri- 
where  the  inebriate  is  regarded  as  dis-  ate  asylums  with  increasing  generosity. 
eased   and    treated    on    broad   scientific  The  medical  profession  certainly  mani- 
principles.      The    Inebriates'    Home    at  fest  a  growing  interest  in  the  study  of 
Fort  Hamilton,  N.  Y.,  the  Washingtonian  inebriety.       Four     important     medical 
Home  at  Boston,  the  Inebriates*  Home  at  societies  are  discussing  the  subject  from 
San    Francisco    and    Walnut   Lodge   at  the  scientific  side  alone,  and  two  Journals 
Hartford  are   among  the  principal  asy-  are  exclusively  devoted  to  the  scientific 
lums  of  this  class.      (2)    Hospitals  and  aspects  of  inebriety.     To  all  who  have  wit- 
retreats    where    inebriates    are  admitted  nessed  the  good  work  wrought,  it  seems 
with  persons  suffering  from  other   forms  unexplainable  that  there   should  be   any 
of  mental  disease,  and  all  are  treated  in  opposition  to  so  reasonable  an  idea  as  that 
common.     In  many  of  these  institutions  for  quarantining  the  inebriate,  removing 
the  inebriate  is  looked  upon  as  half  dis-  him  from  all  exciting  influences,  and  ap- 
eased  and  half  vicious,  requiring  a  mixed  plying  to  his  case  the  remedies  most  like- 
treatment.  In  some  of  them  the  proportion  ly  to  effect  a  cure, 
of  inebriates  is  very  large,  and  inebriety  T.  D.  Crotheks. 
is  treated  under  the  name  of  "  nerve  ex- 
haustion "  or  "  debility."     Nearly  all  the        Injunction    La^w. — The  most  valu- 
private    retreats  for   victims    of   mental  able   instrument   for   expeditiously    and 
disorders  are  of  this  class.     (3)  Asylums  effectively    enforcing    Prohibitory   meas- 
in   which    all    questions   of   disease   are  ures.     Where  the  statutes   provide   that 
ignored,  excepting  in   cases   that  result  the  premises  of  liquor-manufacturers  or 
from  the  direct  use  of  spirits  and  that  sellers  may  be  closed  by  the  "  injunction  " 
are  quickly  relieved.     They  rely  distinct-  process,  it  is  not  necessary  to  grant  the 
ively  upon  moral  and  relisfious  agencies,  offender  a  trial  by  jury;  but  upon    sat- 
pledges,    prayers,    etc.       The    Franklin  isfactory  evidence  that  liquor  is  sold  or 
Home  of  Philadelphia  and  the  Christian  kept  in  violation  of  law,  his  place  may 
Home  of  New  York  are  well-known  types,  be  adjudged   a   nuisance  by  jiroceedings 
The  inebriate  asylums  in  Europe  are  in  equity,  it  may    be    summarily  closed 
small,  and  nearly  all  of  them  are  private  and  the  contraband  goods  may  be  seized, 
institutions    or    under    the    control    of         The  nnsatisfactoriness  of  trial  by  jury 
churches  or  temperance   societies.     The  in  liquor  cases,  even  where  the  testimony 
Dalrymple  Home,  near  London,  is  one  of  is  overwhelming,  has  always  been  notori- 
the  largest  and  best  equipped.  ous.     A  single   juror   may  prevent   con- 
All  these  institutions,  both  in  America  viction  ;  and  with  the  strong  prejudices 
and  abroad,  are  yet  in  their  infancy ;  not  prevailing  among   a   numerous  class   of 
one  of  them  is  able  to  do  the  work  that  citizens  against  Proliibitory  laws  and  tlie 
should  be  accomplished,  because  opposi-  readiness  of  multitudes,  especially  in  the 
tion  and  criticism  are  still  to  be  over-  cities,  to  recognize  no    moral  obligation 
come.       Some    impressive    truths    have  to  assist  in  punishing   violators   of  such 
been  established.     It  is  certain  that  the  laws,  it  is  not  strange    that    jury    trials 
treatment  given  in  inebriate  asylums  en-  of  saloon  malefactors  are  likely  to  jarove 
ables  an  encouragingly  large  number  of  farcical.      The  ordinary  proceedings  for 
victims  to  permanently  recover,  and  gives  practically  crushing  out  the  liquor-sellers 
all   a   better   chance   for   recovery   than  are   necessarily     brought    in    the    petty 
could  be  obtained  at  home.     The  joropor-  Courts,   where   the  machinery  of  justice 
tion  of  cases  actually  cured  varies  from  is  too  often  nnder  the  control  of  politi- 
20  to  50  per  cent.    Those  who  have  made  cians.     Partisan  influences,  selfish  inter- 
careful   studies    from    large    experience  ests  and  personal  sympathy  with  the  liq- 
seem  to  agree  that  among  inebriates  un-  nor  element  combine  to  secure  the  open 
der    treatment    for    from    four    to    six  or  secret  connivance  of  prosecuting  ofti- 
montlis,  at  least  33  per  cent,  are  cured,  cers;  and    where    the   demand    for    en- 
JDr.  Norman  Kerr  of  London,  President  forcement  is  regarded  with  official  hostil- 
of   the   Dalrymple   Home,  and    Dr.  Day  ity  or  indifference,  the  system  of  trial  by 
and   Dr.  Mason  of  this  country,  regard  jury  can  be  made  a  mere  cloak  for  un- 
this  estimate  as   approximately  correct,  scrupulous  manipulation  or  half-hearted 


Injunction  Law.] 


249 


[Injunction  Law. 


efforts.  On  the  other  hand,  where  offi- 
cials are  well-meaniug,  incorruptible  and 
even  distinctly  friendly  to  enforcement, 
the  repeated  refusals  of  juries  to  accept 
indisputable  evidence  are  naturally  dis- 
couraging to  honest  prosecutors  and  cause 
partial  or  entire  suspension  of  energetic 
work.  There  have  been  some  notable  ex- 
ceptions: in  the  rural  communities  juries 
"Bre  generally  obedient  to  aggressive  public 
sentiment,  and  in  some  large  cities  liquor 
cases  have  been  suitably  disposed  of  by 
jury  trials;  but  as  a  rule  juries  have 
been  derelict  in  proportion  to  the  magni- 
tude of  the  evil  and  the  clearness  of  evi- 
dence against  law  violators. 

The  denial  to  defiant  liquor-sellers,  in 
certain  States,  of  the  right  of  trial  by 
jury,  is  a  logical  outcome  of  the  theory 
of  Prohibitory  legislation.  Where  the 
people  enact  such  legislation  the  liquor 
business  becomes  a  criminal  occupation, 
and  in  the  judgment  of  a  majority  of  the 
people  every  establishment  used  for  car- 
rying on  the  unlawful  traffic  is  a  common 
nuisance.  Official  cognizance  of  the  ex- 
istence of  such  an  establishment  justifies, 
therefore,  immediate  and  arbitrary  action 
by  the  executive  and  judicial  departments 
of  government  ;  and  any  valid  form  of 
law  that  will  facilitate  suppression  of  the 
objectionable  traffic  may  properly  be  in- 
voked. 

The  power  to  enjoin  a  liquor  establish- 
ment conducted  and  known  as  a  nuisance, 
has  always  been  among  the  ordinary 
equity  powers  of  Courts  of  Chancery;  and 
before  any  real  extension  of  this  power 
was  made  by  the  Legislatures,  and  in 
very  old  statutes,  unlicensed  liquor  places 
were  declared  nuisances,  and  this  of  itself 
made  them  subject  to  abatement  under 
the  equity  power  of  injunction.  The  re- 
cent Prohibitory  statutes,  like  those  of 
Iowa  and  Kansas,  enacted  the  details  of 
procedure  to  procure  abatement  by  injunc- 
tion, and  thus  have  made  this  remedy 
practicable. 

The  amendatory  Prohibition  statute 
passed  in  Kansas  in  1885  contained  pro- 
visions for  nuisances  and  injunction  pro- 
ceedings more  radical  than  those  em- 
braced in  any  former  Prohibitory  law. 
This  Kansas  Injunction  act  has  been  re- 
viewed by  the  United  States  Supreme 
Court  and  pronounced  not  only  sound 
but  "  salutary ; "  and  it  has  been  accepted 
as  the  pattern  for  all  acts  of  like  nature. 


The  thirteenth  section  of  it  is  as  follows : 

"  All  places  where  intoxicating  liquors  are 
manufaclured,  sold,  bartered  or  given  away  iu 
violation  of  any  of  the  provisions  of  this  act,  or 
where  intoxicating  liciuors  are  kept  for  sale, 
barter  or  delivery  in  violation  of  this  act,  are 
hereby  declared  to  be  common  nuisances,  anil 
upon  the  judgment  of  any  Court  having  juris- 
diction finding  such  place  to  be  a  nuisance  un- 
der this  section,  the  Sheriff,  his  Deputy  or 
Under-Sheriff,  or  any  Constable  of  the  proper 
county,  or  Marshal  of  any  city  where  the  same 
is  located,  shall  be  directed  to  shut  up  and  abate 
such  place  by  taking  possession  thereof  and  de- 
stroying all  intoxicating  liquors  found  therein, 
together  with  all  signs,  screens,  bars,  bottles, 
glasses  and  other  property  used  in  keeping  and 
maintaining  said  nuisance;  and  the  owner  or 
keeper  thereof  shall,  upon  conviction,  be  ad- 
judged guilty  of  maintaining  a  common  nui- 
sance, and  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not  less 
than  §100,  nor  more  than  ifiSOO,  and  by  im- 
prisonment in  the  county  jail  not  less  than 
30  days  nor  more  than  90  days.  The  Attor- 
ney-General, County  Attorney,  or  any  cit- 
izen of  the  county  where  such  nuisance  exists 
or  is  kept  or  is  maintained,  may  maintain  an 
action  in  the  name  of  the  iState  to  abate  and 
perpetually  enjoin  the  same.  The  injunction 
shall  be  granted  at  the  commencement  of  the 
action,  and  no  bond  shall  be  required.  Any 
person  violating  tlie  terms  of  any  injunction 
granted  in  such  proceeding  shall  be  punished  as 
for  contempt  by  a  fine  of  not  less  than  $100  nor 
more  than  $500,  or  by  imprisonment  in  the 
county  jail  not  less  than  30  days  nor  more 
than  six  months,  or  by  both  such  fine  and  im- 
prisonment, in  the  discretion  of  the  Court." 

One  of  the  most  valuable  features  of  this 
measure  is  the  provision  that  "  the  Attor- 
ney-General, County  Attorney,  or  any  citi- 
zen of  the  county  where  such  nuisance  exists 
or  is  kept  oris  maintained  may  maintain  an 
action  in  the  name  of  the  State  to  abate 
and  perpetually  enjoin  the  same."  There- 
fore in  a  community  where  the  local  pros- 
ecuting officer  is  for  any  reason  neglect- 
ful of  his  duties  under  the  Prohibitory 
law,  the  State  Attorney-General  may  in- 
terfere and  compel  obedience  ;  and  if 
both  the  County  Attorney  and  the  Attor- 
ney-General fail  to  act,  any  citizen  may 
move  against  offenders  "  in  the  name  of 
the  State."  This  gives  the  friends  of 
the  law  authority  to  take  the  prosecuting 
machinery  into  their  own  hands  when- 
ever the  officials  do  not  perform  their 
work  satisfactorily;  but  in  thus  becom- 
ing responsible  for  prosecutions  they 
become  responsible  also  for  costs  in  case 
the  Judge  decides  that  the  places  com- 
plained against  are  not  in  fact  nuisances. 
Under  the  Kansas  Injunction  law  the 
Judges  have  arbitrary  authority,  and  if 


Injunction  La-w.] 


250 


[Injunction  Law. 


the  liquor  element  is  strong  enough  to 
control  the  Judges  even  this  powerful 
statute  may  be  made  temporarily  un- 
availing. But  other  clauses  of  the  Kan- 
sas law  prescribe  severe  penalties,  to  be 
visited  upon  all  officials  and  Judges  who 
are  derelict;  and  although  the  actual 
panishment  of  an  unscrupulous  Judge 
cannot  be  confidently  predicted,  the  pro- 
visions of  the  law  are  so  radical  that  no 
Judge  who  values  his  reputation  for  char- 
acter and  conscience  can  afford  to  stand 
in  the  way  of  enforcement.  Again,  in  in- 
junction proceedings  there  is  little  room 
for  differences  of  opinion  concerning  the 
merits  of  cases,  for  dilatory  quibbles,  per- 
jured testimony  or  sophistical  representa- 
tions; the  statute  declares  that  any  place 
where  liquor  is  unlawfully  sold  or  kept  is 
a  nuisance,  and  no  legal  argument  or  dis- 
criminating judgment  is  required  to  deter- 
mine whether  a  certain  place  falls  under 
the  statutory  definition ;  proof  of  unlawful 
sale  or  possession  alone  is  necessary,  and 
proof  satisfactory  to  a  responsible  Judge 
and  not  to  jurors  of  questionable  motives 
or  pro-saloon  tendencies. 

It  was  claimed  by  the  anti-Prohibition 
advocates  that  the  Kansas  Injunction  law 
was  repugnant  to  the  provision  made  in 
the  14th  Amendment  to  the  Federal  Con- 
stitution, that  no  State  shall  "  deprive 
any  person  of  life,  liberty  or  property 
without  due  process  of  law;"  but  their 
efforts  to  secure  judicial  sanction  for  their 
view  were  as  unsuccessful  as  in  the  case 
of  their  demand  for  compensation.* 
When  the  Kansas  Prohibition  cases  were 
argued  before  the  United  States  Supreme 
Court  the  counsel  for  the  brewers  made 
a  formidable  attack  upon  Section  13  of 
the  Kansas  law  of  1885.  In  the  famous 
decision  of  December,  1887,  the  Court 
devoted  considerable  space  to  the  ques- 
tion of  the  validity  of  that  section,  and 
seven  of  the  eight  Justices  then  on  the 
bench  voted  to  sustain  it  (Justice  Field 
dissenting).  The  Court  presented  the 
arguments  against  and  for  the  Injunction 
law  so  thoroughly  that  we  quote  all  that 
part  of  the  decision  bearing  upon  this 
subject  (123  U.  S,  623): 

"  It  is  contended  in  the  case  of  Kansas  v.  Zie- 
bold  &  Hageliu,  tliat  the  entire  scheme  of  this 
ai^'Ction  is  an  attempt  to  deprive  persons  Avho 
come  within  its  provisions  of  their  property  and 
of  their  liberty  without  due  process  of  law,  es- 

1  See  pp.  93-4. 


pecially  when  taken  in  connection  with  that 
clause  of  Section  14  (amendatory  of  Section  21 
of  the  act  of  1881)  which  provides  that  '  in  pro- 
secutions under  this  act,  by  indictment  or  other- 
wise. ...  it  shall  not  be  necessary  in  the  first 
instance  for  the  State  to  prove  that  the  party 
charged  did  not  have  a  permit  to  sell  intoxicat- 
ing liquors  for  the  excepted  pvirpo-es.' 

'  We  are  unable  to  perceive  anything  in  these 
regulations  inconsistent  with  the  Constitutional 
guarantees  of  liberty  and  property.  The  State 
having  authority  to  prohibit  t!;e  manufacture 
and  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  for  otlitr  than 
medical,  scientific  and  mechanical  purposes,  we 
do  not  doubt  her  power  to  declare  that  any 
place  kept  and  maintained  for  the  illegal  man- 
ufacture and  sale  of  such  liquors  shall  be 
deemed  a  common  nuisance  and  be  abated,  and 
at  the  same  time  to  provide  for  the  indictment 
and  trial  of  the  offender.  One  is  a  proceeding 
against  the  property  used  for  forbidden  pur- 
poses, while  the  other  is  for  the  punishment  of 
the  offender. 

"  It  is  said  that  by  the  13th  Section  of  the  act 
of  1885,  the  Legislature,  finding  a  brewery  with- 
in the  State  in  actual  operation,  without  notice, 
trial,  or  hearing,  by  the  mere  exerc'se  of  its  ar- 
bitrary caprice,  declari  s  it  to  be  a  common  nui- 
sance and  then  prescribes  the  consequences 
which  are  to  follow  inevitably  by  judicial  man- 
date required  by  the  statute,  and  involving  and 
permitting  the  exercise  of  no  judicial  discretion 
or  judgment ;  that  the  brewery  being  found  in 
operation  the  Court  is  not  to  determine  whether 
it  is  a  common  nuisance,  but  under  the  com- 
mand of  the  statute  is  to  find  it  to  be  one ;  that 
it  is  not  the  liquor  made,  or  the  making  of  it, 
which  is  thus  enacted  to  be  a  common  nuisance, 
but  the  place  itself,  including  all  the  property 
used  in  keeping  and  maintaining  the  common 
nuisance  ;  that  the  Judge,  having  thus  signed 
without  inquiry,  and  it  may  be  against  the  fact 
and  against  his  own  judgmf  nt,  the  edict  of  the 
Legisfature,  the  Court  is  commanded  by  its  offi- 
cers to  take  possession  of  the  place  and  .shut  it 
up  ;  nor  is  all  this  destruction  of  property,  by 
legislative  edict,  to  be  made  as  a  forfeiture  con- 
sequent upon  conviction  of  any  offence,  but 
merely  because  the  Legislature  so  commands  ; 
and  it  is  done  by  a  Court  of  Equity,  without 
any  previous  conviction  first  had,  or  any  trial 
known  to  the  law. 

"  This  certainly  is  a  formidable  arraignment  of 
the  legislation  of  Kansas,  and  if  it  were  founded 
upon  a  just  interpretation  of  her  statutes  the 
Court  would  have  no  difficulty  in  declaring 
that  they  could  not  be  enforced  without  in- 
fringing the  Constitutional  rights  of  the  citizen. 
But  these  .statutes  have  no  such  scope  and  are 
not  attended  with  any  such  results  as  the  de- 
fendants suppose.  The  Court  is  not  required  to 
give  effect  to  a  legislative  '  decree  '  or  '  edict,' 
unless  every  enactment  by  the  law-making 
power  of  a  State  is  to  be  so  characterized. 

"  It  is  not  declared  that  every  e-tablishment 
is  to  be  deemed  a  common  nutsance  because  it 
may  have  been  maintained  prior  to  the  passage 
of  the  .statute  as  a  place  for  manufacturing  in- 
toxicating liquors  The  statute  is  prospective 
in  its  operation  — tl;at  is.it  does  not  put  th? 
brand  of  a  common  nuisance  upon  any  place, 


Injunction  Iiaw.] 


251 


[Internal  Revenue. 


imless  after  its  passage  that  place  is  kept  and 
maintained  for  purpos'-s  declared  by  the  Leds 
lature  to  be  injurious  to  th  ■  coniuiunit_y.  Noi- 
ls the  Court  required  to  adjudge  any  place  to  be 
a  common  nuisance  simply  because  it  is  charged 
by  the  State  to  be  such.  It  must  first  find  it  to 
be  of  that  character — that  is  must  ascertain  in 
some  legnl  mode  whether  since  the  statute  was 
passe'l  the  place  in  questiou  has  been  or  is  being 
so  used  as  would  m;ike  it  a  common  nui>;ance. 

"  Equally  tenable  is  t'.i'j  proposition  that  pro- 
ceedings in  equity  for  the  purposes  indicated  in 
the  13th  Section  of  the  statute  are  inconsistent 
with  due  process  of  law.  'In  regard  to  public 
nuisances,'  Mr.  Justice  Story  says,  'the  jurisdic 
tion  of  Courts  of  Equity  seems  to  be  of  a  very  an- 
cient date,  and  has  been  distinctly  traced  back  to 
the  reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth.  The  jurisdiction 
is  applicable  not  only  to  public  nuisances  strictly 
so-called,  but  also  to  purprestures  upon  public 
rights  and  property.  In  case  of  public  nui- 
sances properly  so  called,  an  indictment  lies  to 
abate  them  and  to  punish  the  offenders.  But  an 
information  also  lies  in  equity  to  redress  the 
iirievance  by  way  of  injunction.'  (2  Story's 
Eq.,  sections  921,  '922.) 

'  The  ground  of  this  jurisdiction  in  cases  of 
purpresture,  as  well  as  of  public  nuisances,  is  the 
ability  of  Courts  of  Equity  to  give  a  more 
speedy,  effectual  and  permanent  remedy  than 
can  be  had  at  law.  They  can  not  only  prevent 
nuisances  that  are  threatened  and  before  irrepar- 
able mischief  ensues,  but  arrest  or  abate  those 
in  progress,  and  by  perpetual  injunction  protect 
the  public  against  them  in  the  future;  whereas 
Courts  of  law  can  only  reach  existing  nuisances, 
leaving  future  acts  to  be  the  subject  of  new 
prosecutions  or  proceedings.  This  is  a  salutary 
jurisdiction,  especially  where  a  nuisance  affeets 
the  health,  morals  or  safety  of  the  community. 
Though  not  frequently  exercised,  the  power 
undoubtedly  exists  in  Courts  of  Equity  thus  to 
protect  the  public  against  injury  :  District  At- 
torney v  Lynn  &  Boston  11.  R.  Co.,  16  Gray, 
245;  Att'y-Gen'l  v.  N.  J.  Riilroad,  3  Green's 
Ch.,  139;  Att'y-General  V.  Tudor  Ice  Co.,  104 
Mass.,  244  ;  Siale  v.  Mayor,  5  Porter  (Ala.), 
279,  294;  Hoole  v.  Att'y-General,  22  Ala.,  194  ; 
Att'y-General  v.  Hunter,  1  Dev.  Eq.  13;  Att'v- 
Genl  v.  Forbes,  2  Mylne  &  Craig,  123,  129,  133; 
Att'y  Gen'l  v.  Great  Northern  Railway  Co..  1 
Dr.  &  Sm.,  161;  Eden  on  Injunctions,  259; 
Kerr  ou  Injunctions  {2d  Ed.). 168. 

"  As  to  the  objection  that  the  statute  makes 
no  provision  for  a  jury  trial  in  eases  like  this 
one.  it  is  sufficient  to  say  that  such  a  mode  of 
trial  is  not  required  in  .suits  in  equity  brought 
to  enjoin  a  public  nuisance.  The  statutory  di- 
r<.'Ction  that  an  injunction  issue  at  the  com- 
mencement of  the  action  is  not  to  be  con.strued 
as  dispensing  with  such  preliminary  proof  as  is 
necessary  to  authorize  an  injunction  pending 
tiie  suit  The  Court  IS  not  to  issue  an  injunc- 
tion simply  because  one  is  asked,  or  because  the 
charge  is  made  that  a  common  nuisance  is  main- 
tained in  violation  of  law.  The  statute  leaves  the 
Court  at  liberty  to  give  effect  to  the  principle 
that  an  injunction  will  not  be  granted  to  restrain 
a  nuisance,  except  upon  clear  and  satisfactory 
evidence  that  one  exists.  Here  the  fact  to  be 
ascertained  was,  not  whether  a  place,  kept  and 


maintained  for  the  purposes  forbidden  by  the 
statute,  was,  jyer  sc.  a  nuisance  that  fact  being 
conclusively  determined  by  the  statute  itself, — 
but  whether  the  place  in  questiou  was  so  kept 
and  maintained.  If  the  proof  upon  that  point 
is  not  full  or  sufficient,  the  Court  can  refuse  an 
injunction,  or  postpone  action  until  the  State 
first  obtains  the  verdict  of  a  jury  in  her  favor." 

[For  injunction  provisions  in  the  statutes  of 
particular  States,  see  Legislation.] 

Internal  Revenue,  in  the  fiscal 
nomenclature  of  the  United  States,  em- 
braces all  the  revenues  of  the  Federal 
Government  from  taxesof  whatever  kind, 
collected  under  the  Bureau  of  Internal 
Revenue  created  by  the  law  of  July  1, 
1862,  and  connected  with  the  Treasury 
Department  at  Washington.  Used  in  its 
etymological  sense,  the  term  would  cover 
all  the  inland  receipts  of  the  Government, 
no  matter  from  what  source  derived ;  and 
thus  "Internal  Revenue"  and  "customs 
duties "  would  constitute  the  two  great 
divisions  of  the  Government's  income, 
the  one  being  the  complement  of  the 
other.  Technically,  however,  the  ex- 
pression is  limited  in  its  acceptation  as 
stated  above,  and  does  not  include  the  re- 
ceipts from  patent  fees  or  from  the  sale 
of  postage-stamps  or  of  the  public  lands. 

The  United  States  has,  as  a  rule,  and 
from  the  very  beginning,  preferred  to 
obtain  its  revenues  from  duties  laid  upon 
imported  goods,  and  has  resorted  to  ex- 
cises only  when  forced  by  over-mastering 
circumstances  to  do  so,  relinquishing  them 
when  the  means  necessary  to  defray  the 
expenditures  of  the  Government  could  be 
obtained  from  customs  receipts.  In  the 
early  history  of  the  Union,  the  antipathy 
of  the  people  to  the  laying  of  excises, 
or  inland  taxes,  was  deep-rooted  and  vio- 
lent. N(?r  did  they  always  wait  until 
such  taxes  were  actually  proposed  or  im- 
posed to  express  their  opposition  to  them. 
Thus,  it  was  twice  moved  in  the  New 
York  Convention  called  to  consider  the 
question  of  adopting  the  Constitution, 
that  the  power  of  laying  excises  should 
be  prohibited  to  Congress.  The  general 
sentiment  of  our  forefathers  on  the  sub- 
ject of  Excise  laws  may  be  inferred  from 
these  words  of  Alexander  Hamilton  in 
No.  12  of  the  Federalist :  "  The  genius 
of  our  people  will  ill  brook  the  inquisi- 
tive and  peremptory  spirit  of  Excise 
laws.  ...  It  has  been  already  inti- 
mated that  excises,  in  their  true  signifi- 
cation, are  too  little  in  unison  with  the 


Internal  Revenue.] 


[Internal  Revenue. 


feelings  of  the  people  to  admit  of  great 
use  being  made  of  that  mode  of  taxation." 
But  the  opposition  to  excises,  in  the  first 
decades  of  our  history,  was  not  due  en- 
tirely to  the  inherited  abhorrence  of  the 
inquisitorial  nature  of  their  collection;  it 
was  largely  determined  by  the  economic 
condition  of  the  country.  Impoverish- 
ed by  the  War  of  the  Eevolution,  there 
was  at  its  close,  and  for  years  after  it, 
little  in  the  country  on  which  internal 
taxes  could  have  been  imposed,  for 
neither  trade  nor  manufactures  had  as 
yet  been  developed  to  any  great  extent. 
It  is  not  a  matter  of  surprise,  therefore, 
that  tlie  first  measure  proposed  in  the 
United  States  for  the  laying  of  an  excise 
met  with  defeat. 

A  bill  providing  for  the  taxation  of  dis- 
tilled spirits  was  introduced  in  Congress 
in  1790.  The  representatives  of  Pennsyl- 
vania were  utterly  opposed  to  it,  and  in 
opposing  it  they  simjjly  executed  the  will 
of  the  people  of  that  State ;  for  they  had 
been  instructed  by  its  Legislature  to  vote 
against  the  passage  of  an  excise,  "  the 
horror  of  all  free  States."  In  a  petition 
sent  to  Congress  by  the  inhabitants  of 
Westmoreland,  Pa.,  it  was  claimed  that  to 
convert  grain  into  spirits  was  as  clearly  a 
natural  right  as  to  convert  grain  into 
flour.  The  main  cause  of  the  defeat  of 
this  first  measure  was,  doubtless,  the  op- 
position it  met  with  in  the  State  of  Penn- 
sylvania and  in  Congress  through  the  ef- 
forts of  the  Pennsylvania  representatives. 
It  would  be  a  mistake  to  ascribe  the  an- 
tagonism to  the  taxation  of  spirits,  at 
that  time,  to  what  is  called,  in  our  day, 
the  demand  for  free  whiskey.  It  pro- 
ceeded from  the  producers  more  than 
from  the  consumers  of  spirits;  and  from 
the  former  mainly  because  it  interfered 
with  the  utilization  of  their  grain  in  the 
only  way  profitable,  in  those  days,  in 
Western  Pennsylvania.  The  market  for 
that  commodity  was  so  remote  and  the 
difficulty  of  transporting  it  thither  so 
great,  because  of  its  bulk,  that  the  far- 
mers of  that  region  were  in  the  habit 
of  converting  it  into  whiskey,  in  which 
shape  it  could  be  more  easily  moved. 
Hence  a  still  was  to  be  found  on  almost 
every  farm. 

It  was  not  long,  however,  before  an  in- 
crease of  the  revenue  became  imperative, 
and  in  1791  Hamilton  advocated  both  an 
increase  of  customs  duties  and  a  tax  on 


distilled  spirits.  It  was  again  objected? 
by  the  people  of  Western  Pennsylvania, 
that  the  tax  on  spirits  would  fall  very  un- 
equally on  the  different  sections  of  the 
country,  and  most  heavily  on  them- 
selves; for  their  region  was  then  very 
sparsely  populated  and  had  scarcely  any 
money  ;  its  trade  was  by  barter,  spirits 
serving  as  a  medium  of  exchange.  The 
South  likewise  opposed  the  bill,  "grog" 
being  considered  there  one  of  the  neces- 
saries of  life.  The  Eastern  and  the 
Middle  States,  however,  favored  it,  and 
it  became  a  law,  having  received  39 
votes  against  19  in  the  House.  It  laid  a 
tax  of  11  cents  per  gallon  on  spirits 
distilled  from  foreign  materials  (molasses 
and  syrups),  and  9  cents  on  those  manu- 
factured from  domestic  material  (grain 
and  flour).  According  to  the  report  of 
the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  Alexander 
Hamilton,  the  annual  production  of  dis- 
tilled spirits  in  the  country,  at  this  time, 
was  about  6,500,000  proof  gallons,  of 
wiiich  it  was  estimated  3,500,000  gallons 
were  obtained  from  foreign  materials. 
The  tax  was  light  and  the  necessities  of 
the  Government  were  great  and  urgent, 
yet  its  imposition  met  with  the  greatest 
resistance,  and  in  1794  the  western  coun- 
ties of  Pennsylvania  rose  in  open  rebel- 
lion against  its  collection.  An  army 
composed  of  the  milita  of  the  neigh  cor- 
ing States  marched  into  the  disturbed 
districts,  seized  the  leaders  of  the  insur- 
gents and  restored  the  authority  of  the 
Federal  Government.  It  cost  the  Gov- 
ernment 11,500,000  to  quell  the  insurrec- 
tion, while  its  total  expenses,  during  the 
same  year,  for  all  ordinary  jjurposes 
were  only  84,362,000. 

After  Thomas  Jefferson  became  Presi- 
dent he  recommended  the  repeal  of  the 
whole  system  of  Internal  Revenue,  and 
his  recommendation  was  carried  into  ef- 
fect by  the  act  of  April  6,  1802.  From 
this  date  until  1813,  no  inland  taxes  on 
articles  grown  or  manufactured  in  the 
United  States  wei'e  imposed,  the  import 
duties  being  increased  whenever  a  larger 
revenue  was  needed.  Although,  during 
this  interval,  the  duties  on  imported 
goods  were  raised,  they  proved  altogether 
insutficient  to  meet  the  expenditures  oc- 
casioned by  the  War  of  1812.  To  secure 
funds  for  that  purpose,  recourse  was  first 
had  to  loans  and  the  issue  of  Ti-easury 
notes.     But  even  the  increased  revenue 


Internal  Revenue.] 


253 


[Internal  Revenue. 


from  these  sources  was  inadequate,  and 
in  the  early  part  of  1813  a  system  of  In- 
ternal Revenue  from  direct  tax  and  ex- 
cise was  established.  At  first  considered 
temporary  and  intended  to  cease  one  year 
after  the  war,  these  taxes,  with  few  ex- 
ceptions, were  afterwards  extended  and 
pledged  for  the  payment  of  the  principal 
of  the  public  debt,  and  it  was  provided 
that  they  should  be  continued  until 
other  equally  productive  ones  were  sub- 
stituted for  them.  A  license  tax  to  dis- 
tillers took  the  place  of  the  tax  per 
gallon. 

The  embarassment  of  the  Federal  Treas- 
ury, however,  grew  so  great  that  in  ISl-la 
special  session  of  Congress  had  to  be  called 
and  further  loans  authorized.  The  di- 
rect yearly  tax  was  doubled  and  extended 
to  the  District  of  Columbia.  It  became 
necessary,  too,  for  the  first  time  in  the 
(country's  history,  to  tax  domestic  manu- 
factures other  than  spirits,  snuff  and 
sugar.  Specific  taxes  were  imposed  on 
iron  and  candles,  and  ad  indoreni  taxes 
on  hats,  caps,  umbrellas,  leather  boots, 
2)late,  beer,  ale,  playing-cards,  harness, 
household  furniture  and  gold  and  silver 
watches. 

In  181G  the  direct  tax  was  reduced  one- 
half  and  in  the  following  year  all  internal 
taxes  were  repealed.  From  1818  to  1861 
no  internal  tax  of  any  kind  was  laid  in 
the  United  States.  In  the  latter  year 
"an  act  to  provide  increased  revenue 
from  imports,  to  pay  interest  on  the 
juiblic  debt,  and  for  other  purposes," 
was  framed  on  the  5th  of  August ;  but 
besides  providing  a  revenue  from  im- 
ports it  laid  a  direct  tax,  apportioned 
among  the  States,  of  120,000,000  to  be 
collected  annually,  and  also  a  tax  of  3 
per  cent,  on  all  incomes  in  excess  of 
1800.  The  fact  that  these  direct  and  in- 
come taxes  were  imposed  by  an  act  in 
whose  title  the  very  mention  of  them 
was  carefully  avoided,  shows  how  un- 
certain Congress  felt  as  to  how  public 
opinion  and  popular  feeling  would  re- 
ceive the  proposition  to  lay  them,  after 
the  peoj^le  had,  for  well-nigh  half  a  cen- 
tury, grown  unaccustomed  to  the  annoy- 
ance and  vexation  incident  to  their  col- 
lection. It  soon,  however,  became  appar- 
ent that  the  gigantic  struggle  in  which 
the  nation  was  engaged  could  not  be  suc- 
cessfully carried  on  without  resort  to  in- 
ternal taxation  on  a  much  more  extensive 


scale  than  ever  before.  Accordingly  the 
law  known  as  the  Internal  Eevenue  law 
was  passed,  and  approved  July  1,  18G2. 
This  law  created  the  Bureau  of  Internal 
Eevenue.  Under  its  operation,  scarcely 
anything  tangible  or  intangible,  from 
which  revenue  could  be  obtained,  es- 
caped taxation.  Besides  distilled  spirits, 
fermented  liquors  and  tobacco,  it  taxed 
trades  and  occupations,  gross  receipts  and 
sales,  dividends  and  incomes,  articles  not 
consumed  in  the  use,  manufactures,  leg- 
acies and  successions.  It  required  a  li- 
cense tax  from  bankers,  auctioneers, 
wholesale  and  retail  dealers  in  distilled 
spirits,  fermented  liquors  and  wines; 
from  pawnbrokers,  rectifiers,  distillers 
and  brewers;  from  hotel,  inn  and  tavern- 
keepers;  from  all  steamers  and  vessels 
upon  waters  of  the  United  States ;  from 
commercial,  land  Avarrant  and  other 
brokers;  from  tobacconists,  theatres,  cir- 
cuses and  jugglers;  from  carjjenters; 
from  horse-dealers,  livery  stable-keepers 
and  cattle  brokers;  from  tallow-chandlers 
and  soap-makers;  from  peddlers  and 
apothecaries,  manufacturers  and  photog- 
raphers, lawyers,  physicians,  surgeons  and 
dentists;  and  also  from  claim  and  patent 
agents.  It  taxed  mineral  coals,  candles, 
illuminating  gas,  coal  illuminating  oil, 
ground  coffee  and  S2:)ices,  refined  and 
brown  sugar,  confectionery,  saleratus, 
starch,  gunpowder,  white  lead,  clock 
movements,  umbrellas  and  parasols; 
railroad  iron  of  almost  every  descrip- 
tion ;  band,  hoop  and  sheet  iron ;  stoves 
and  hollowware;  paper,  soap,  salt, 
pickles,  glue  and  gelatine;  patent,  sole, 
harness,  band  and  offal  leather;  calf, 
goat,  horse  and  hog-skins;  varnish  and 
furs;  diamonds  and  cotton;  auction 
sales;  carriages,  yachts,  billiard-tables 
and  plate;  cattle,  hogs  and  sheep, 
slaughtered  or  for  sale;  railroads,  steam- 
boats and  ferry-boats;  railroad  bonds; 
banks,  trust  companies,  savings  institu- 
tions and  insurance  companies;  the 
salaries  and  pay  of  officers  and  persons  in 
the  service  of  the  United  States,  whether 
civil,  military,  naval  or  other;  passports, 
advertisements  and  all  incomes  in  excess 
of  1600.  Stamp  duties  were  laid  on 
agreements,  bank  checks,  inland  bills  of 
exchange,  foreign  bills  of  exchange  and 
letters  of  credit,  bills  of  lading,  express 
receipts  and  stamps,  surety  bonds,  certif- 
icates of  stock,  charter-parties,  contracts, 


Internal  Revenue.] 


'>f-> 


54 


[Internal  Bevenue. 


conveyances  and  telegraphic  despatches; 
life,  lire  and  marine  insurance  policies  or 
leases,  mortgages,  jiassage-tickets,  powers 
of  attorne}',  probates  of  wills,  protests, 
warehouse  receipts,  writs  or  other  orig- 
inal legal  process  in  all  Courts  of  record 
whether  law  or  equity ;  on  medicines  and 
preparations,  perfumery,  cosmetics  and 
playing-cards.  As  if  seized  with  desper- 
ation. Congress  seemed  determined  to  tax 
everybody  and  everything. 

The  internal  taxes  imposed  by  the  law 
of  July  1,  1862,  have  been  gradually  re- 
duced as  the  money  needs  of  the  Govern- 
ment have  diminished,  'i^lie  act  of  May 
31,  18()8,  relieved  the  manufactures  of  the 
country  except  those  of  distilled  spirits, 
fermented  liquors  and  tobacco,  of  all  tax- 
ation. The  act  of  July  14,  1870,  re- 
pealed the  tax  on  legacies  and  successions. 
The  act  of  June,  1872,  made  other  large 
reductions.  It  did  away  with  the  tax  on 
incomes  after  that  tax  had  yielded  a  total 
revenue  during  the  10  years  it  was  in 
force  of  $346,911,760.48;  abolished  all 
stamp  taxes  under  Schedule  B  (1864)  ex- 
cept that   of   2   cents   on  bank   checks, 


drafts  and  orders,  and  reduced  the  sources 
of  Internal  Revenue  to  about  what  they 
are  at  present,  with  the  exception  of  the 
tax  on  oleomargarine  which  was  laid  by 
the  act  of  Aug.  2,  1886. 

The  following  table  shows  the  receipts 
of  the  United  States  from  Internal  Rev- 
enue from  March  4,  1792,  to  the  end  of 
the  year  1820 : 

1792 $  208,943.81 

1793 337,705.70 

1794 274,089.62 

1795 3.37,7.55.36 

1796 475.289.60 

1797 57.5,491.45 

1798 644,.357.95 

1799 779,136.44 

1800  809,-396.55 

1801 1,048,033.43 

Since  the  establishment  of  the  Bureau 
of  Internal  Revenue  the  principal  sources 
of  Internal  Revenue  have  been  distilled 
spirits,  tobacco  and  fermented  liquors. 
In  the  first  three  columns  of  the  table 
given  below  will  be  found  the  receipts 
from  taxes  on  these  articles  respectively, 
and  in  the  fourth  the  Internal  Revenue 
receipts  from  all  sources  by  fiscal  years, 
that  is  from  Sept.  1,  1862,  to  June  30, 
1889:1 


1802 $  621,898.89 

1803 315,179.09 

1814 1,663,081.83 

1815 4,678,0.59.07 

1816 .5,134,708.31 

1817 2,678,100.77 

1818 955,270.80 

1819 229,.593.63 

1820 106,260.5:3 


Fiscal  Yeaks  Ended  June  30. 

Distilled 
Spibits. 

Fermented 
Liquors. 

Tobacco. 

From  all  Sources. 

Aggregate 

Kecbipts. 

1863        ...                 

$5,176,.530.50 
30,339,149.53 
18,731,423.45 
33,268,171.83 
33,542,951.72 
18,0.55,630.90 
45,071,230.86 
,55,606,094.15 
4'!,281, 848.10 
49,475,516.36 
52,0.19,371.78 
49,4+1,089.85 
■52,0'<1,991.12 
-56,426,-305.13 
-57,469,429.73 
.50,420,815.80 
.53,.570,284.69 
61,185,.508.79 
67,153,974.88 
69,873,408.18 
74,368,775.20 
76,905,385.26 
67,511,208.63 
69,092,266.00 
6.5,829,321.71 
69,:}06,1 66.41 
74,313,300.33 

$1,628,9-33.82 

2,390,009.14 

3,734,938.06 

5,320,552.72 

6,0.57,500.63 

5,9.55,868.92 

6,099,879.54 

6,319,126.90 

7,389,.501.82 

8.258,498.46 

9,334,937.84 

9,304,679.72 

9,144,(X)4.41 

9,571 .280.66 

9,480,789.17 

9,937,051.78 

10,739,-330.08 

12,829,802.84 

13,700,341.21 

16,153,930.43 

16,900,615.81 

18,084.9.54.11 

18,330,783.03 

19,676,731.39 

21,933,187.49 

23,334,218.48 

23,733.8*5.26 

$3,097,620.47 
8,-592,098-98 
11,401,373.10 
16,531, 007.a3 
19,765,148.41 
18,730,095.33 
23,430,707.57 
31,-3.50,707.88 
33,-578,907.18 
33,736,170.53 
34,386,-303.09 
33,343,875.63 
37,-303,461.88 
39,795,339.91 
41,106,546.93 
40,091,7-54.67 
40,135,003.65 
38,870,140.08 
43,8.54,991.31 
47,391,988.91 
43,104,349.79 
36,062,399.98 
26,407,088.48 
27,907,363.53 
30,108,067.13 
30,663,431 .53 
31,866,8(i0.43 

$41,003,192.93 

1864 

1865 

1866 

1867          

116,965,-578.26 
210,85.5,864.53 
310,130,448.13 

3(i5,064,9;i8.43 

1868 

18G9 

190,374,935  59 
159,134,136.86 

1870  

184,-303,838.;« 

1871 

1873 

1873 

1874 

143,198,333.10 
130,890,096.90 
113,-504,013.80 
103,191,016.98 

1875  

1876 

1877        

110.071,515.00 

116,768,096.32 
118,.549,330.25 

1878        .     .                  

110,654,163.37 

1879        

113,449,631.:i8 

IPSO 

IS^l 

1882 

123,981,916.10 
135,229,913.30 
140,.533,373.72 

1883 

144,5,53,344.86 

1884 

131,590,039.83 

1885 

112,421,131.07 

1886 

1887 

1888 

1889 

116,903,869.44 
118,8-37,301.06 
124,326,475.32 
130,894,434.20 

Totals 

$1,403,189,115.87 

$304,994,152.61 

$810,-510,702.15 

$3,812,348,665.97 

These  figures  represent  a  taxation  on 
an  aggregate  of  1,553,151,463  gallons  of 
distilled  spirits,  319,519,854  barrels  of 
beer,  65,871,265,481  cigars  and  cigarettes 
and  3,199,549,552  pounds  of  manufac- 
tured tobacco  and  snuff,  from  Sept.  1, 
1862,  to  June  30,  1889. 


There  are  many  points  of  view  from 
which  the  production  and  consumption  of 
spirits  may  be  examined  and  judged. 
There   are   the   fiscal,   the   technic,   the 


1  The  figures  also  include  receipts  from  special  taxes  on 
rectifiers, l)re\vers  and  wholesale  and  retail  liquor-dealers. 


Internal  Revenue.] 


Jdd 


[Internal  Revenue. 


medicinal  and  the  moral  points  of  view. 
The  minister  of  finance  sees  in  them  a  rich 
source  of  revenue  to  tlie  state  ;  the  phar- 
maceutist, a  solvent  of  medical  agents  ; 
the  manufacturer,  a  component  element 
in  many  useful  commodities  ;  the  moral- 
ist, frequently  and  with  good  reason,  only 
a  deadly  poison  that  ruins  the   health, 
dims  the  intellect  and  damns  the  soul. 
Everytliing  considered,  however,  he  can- 
not be  considered  a  wild  fanatic  who  de- 
sires the  disappearance  of  alcohol  from 
the  face  of  the  earth;  for  its  consump- 
tion, for  the  most  part,  is  not  reproductive 
of  wealth,  and  the  labor  and  capital  in- 
corporated in  the  finished  product  pei*- 
ishes  in  the  use;    while  had  they  been 
employed  in  the  building  of  houses  or  the 
purchase   of   farms   or   the  construction 
of  canals   or  railways,  they  would  have 
added,    since    1863,    over    fifteen    hun- 
dred   million    dollars  to   the   aggregate 
wealth  of   the  people,  and  afforded  the 
Treasury    an    enduring    instead    of    an 
evanescent  subject  of  taxation — a  subject 
which  besides  would  grow  in  value  and  in 
})roductiveness  to  the  national  revenues 
from  year  to  year.     The  manufacturer,  if 
alcohol  went  out  of  existence,  would  most 
likely  be  supplied  with  substitutes  for  it 
by  his  own  ingenuity  or  by  the  bountiful- 
ness  of  nature.     Thus  when  the  manufac- 
ture of  "burning  fluid"  entirely  ceased 
because  of  the  rise  of  alcohol  to  |4  per 
gallon,  the  public  experienced  no  great 
inconvenience;  for  it  happened  that  vast 
and  natural  supplies  of  petroleum  were 
discovered  in  Pennsylvania,  and  the  em- 
ployment of  its  distillates  for  illuminating 
purposes  is  almost  coincident  in  point  of 
time  with  the  compulsory  disuse  of  burn- 
ing fluid.     So,  also,  varnish-makers,  who, 
wlien  alcohol  could  be  purchased  at  about 
;")()  cents  per  gallon,  used  it  in  great  quan- 
tities, substituted,  when  the  price  reached 
eight  times  that  figure,  other  and  cheaper 
solvents  for  their  gums.     The  manufac- 
turers  of    quinine    likewise,   for  a   like 
reason,  replaced  it  as  a  solvent  for  the 
alkaloids  of  the  cinchona  bark  with  the 
distillates  of  jDctroleum  with  such  success 
that  it  is  doubtful  whether  the  old  pro- 
cesses   would    he    again    resorted   to   if 
alcohol  could  be  purchased  at  its  former 
prices.      In   medicines,   although   some- 
times  useful  and   of   extensive   employ- 
ment,  especially    as   the   solvent  of  the 
active  principles  of  many  substances,  it  is 


safe  to  say  that  the  relief  it  has  afforded 
in  disease  and  the  lives  it  has  saved  are 
an  insignificant  quantity  compared  with 
tli3  misery,  the  suffering,  the  pauperism, 
the  mortality  and  the  woes  unmeasured 
which  it  has  caused. 

The  man  who  goes  even  to  the  extreme 
of  demanding  that  it  shall  no  longer  be 
produced  for  any  purpose,  since  its  legiti- 
mate use  seems  to  be  the  rare  exception 
and  its  abuse  the  rule,  cannot  be  called  a 
wild  fanatic.  It  must  be  remembered 
that  the  direful  effects  of  alcoholic  in- 
toxication do  not  stop  at  the  individual, 
but  extend  to  his  progeny  and  to  the 
race.  Immorality,  depravation,  alcoholic 
excesses,  brutalization,  appear  in  the  first 
generation;  hereditary  drunkenness,  ma- 
niacal attacks  and  general  paralysis  in  the 
second ;  hypochondriacal  melancholia,  in- 
sanity and  homicidal  tendencies  in  the 
third ;  in  the  fourth,  degeneration  is 
complete— the  child  is  born  either  an 
imbecile  or  an  idiot,  or,  if  not,  soon  be- 
comes one.  No  wonder,  therefore,  that 
an  ever-increasing  number  of  men  of  all 
shades  of  religions  and  of  no  religious 
belief  are  convinced  that  civilization 
would  be  the  gainer  if  alcohol  had  never 
been  known,  and  if  the  art  of  manufac- 
turing it  were  forever  numbered  among 
the  arts  irretrievably  lost. 

J.  J.  Laloe. 

[For  details  of  the  Internal  Revenue  laws, 
see  United  States  Government  and  the 
Liquor  Traffic.  For  numbers  of  liquor-deal- 
ers, etc.,  see  Liquor  Traffic] 

Note  by  the  Editor. — The  imposition 
of  heavy  Federal  taxes  on  liquors,  when 
first  proposed,  was  bitterly  resisted  by 
many  representative  persons  engaged  in 
the  traffic.  At  that  time  liquor  produc- 
tion and  selling  were  carried  on  pro- 
miscuously, and  the  manufacturers  and 
dealers  had  no  powerful  trade  organiza- 
tions. The  first  effects  of  the  law  were 
to  compel  capitalization  of  the  distilling 
and  brewing  interests,  and  to  promote 
compact  and  intelligent  organization.  It 
was  no  longer  possible  to  profitably  oper- 
ate a  still  or  a  brewery  with  insignificant 
capital  and  careless  business  methods.  It 
also  became  necessary  to  establish  in- 
timate relations  with  Federal  officials 
and  influential  politicians.  Accordingly, 
the  national  whiskey  power  and  the 
national  beer  power  were  rapidly  de- 
veloped.    They  acquired  absolute  control 


Internal  Revenue.] 


256 


[Internal  Eevenue. 


over  Congress  and  the  Internal  Revenue 
Bureau.  There  have  been  many  offensive 
exhibitions  of  legishitive  and  official  sub- 
serviency; the  great  whiskey  frauds  per- 
petrated in  Grant's  administration,  the 
repeated  expressions  of  friendship  for  the 
liquor  interests  made  by  Commissioners 
of  Internal  Eevenue  and  the  practical 
remission  of  whiskey  taxes  by  Secretaries 
of  the  Treasury,  are  especially  memor- 
able.    (For  details,  see   United  States 

GrOVEEXMENT  AND  THE  LiQUOR  TRAF- 
FIC.) 

Under  the  Internal  Revenue  law  the 
beverage  consumption  of  liquor  has  in- 
creased enormously,  both  the  aggregate 
consumption  and  the  per  capita  consump- 
tion. (See  Consumption  of  Liquors.) 
All  the  facts,  indeed,  point  to  the  con- 
clusion that  this  system  of  Federal 
regulation  and  taxation  has  been  very 
disastrous  to  the  interests  of  the  temper- 
ance movement.  We  briefly  present  some 
of  the  most  important  testimony : 

1.  The  distillers  and  brewers,  prac- 
tically without  division,  sustain  the  In- 
ternal Revenue  law  as  it  now  exists,  and 
sturdily  oppose  efforts  to  modify  it.  The 
Republican  party,  which  formulated  the 
law  and  has  retained  it  on  the  statute- 
books,  certainly  cannot  be  charged  with 
a  disposition  to  unfairly  represent  any  of 
its  practical  results.  In  1888,  the  Re- 
publican National  Convention  incorpo- 
rated the  following  significant  words  in 
that  part  of  its  platform  which  proposed 
plans  for  reducing  the  surplus  revenues 
of  the  Federal  Government  :  "  If  there 
shall  still  remain  a  larger  revenue  than 
is  requisite  for  the  wants  of  the  Govern- 
ment, we  favor  the  entire  rej)eal  of  In- 
ternal taxes  rather  than  the  surrender  of 
any  part  of  our  Protective  system  at  the 
joint  behest  of  the  whiskey  trusts  and 
the  agents  of  foreign  manufacturers." 
This  was  an  implied  admission  that  the 
distillers  desired  the  abolition  of  customs 
duties  rather  than  of  the  liquor  taxes — 
in  fact,  that  they  were  so  earnest  in  fight- 
ing for  the  preservation  of  the  Internal 
Revenue  system  as  to  join  hands  with  the 
"agents  of  foreign  manufacturers"  in  an 
attack  upon  the  Protective  tariff. 

During  recent  sessions  of  Congress,  the 
distillers  have  had  powerful  lobbies  at 
Washingion  to  oppose  any  legislation 
looking  to  a  repeal  of  the  Internal  Rev- 
enue   taxes.      The    very     well-informed 


Washington  correspondent  of  the  New 
York  Tribune,  at  the  opening  of  Con^ 
gress  in  1887,  sent  this  statement  to  his 
paper  : 

•'The  big  whiskey  manufacturers  who  have 
been  striving  for  seven  or  eiglit  years  to  escape 
the  payment  of  the  taxes  on  whiskey  manufac- 
tured by  them,  and  yet  wlio  are  bitterly  opposed 
to  the  repeal  or  reduction  of  that  tax.  have 
their  representatives  already  on  the  ground  to 
prevent  any  legislation  in  that  direction.  They 
will  make  a  strong  tight  against  even  the 
proposition  to  relieve  from  Internal  taxation, 
under  proper  safeguards,  alcohol  used  in  manu- 
factures and  the  mechanical  arts.  They  will 
also  fight  the  proposition  to  repeal  the  tax  on 
spirits  distilled  from  fruits,  on  the  ground  that 
those  distillers,  if  relieved  from  Government 
inspection  and  supervision,  will  proceed  to 
grain  distillation." 

Leading  representatives  of  the  distilling 
interests,  in  interviews  in  the  Voice  for 
Dec.  22  and  29,  1887,  admitted  that 
their  policy  was  to  prevent  abolition  of 
the  liquor  taxes.  John  M.  Atherton, 
President  of  the  National  Protective  As- 
sociation of  distillers  and  liquor-dealers, 
in  stating  the  reasons  for  this  attitude, 
said  : 

"  Under  the  Government  supervision  there 
are  certain  marks,  stamps,  gauges,  etc.,  put  on 
every  barrel  of  whiskey,  which  serve  to  iden- 
tify it.  These  form  an  absolute  guaranty  from 
the  Government,  a  disinterested  party  of  the 
highest  authority,  to  the  genuineness  of  the 
goods.  There  is  such  a  tendency  to  adultera- 
tion that  this  guaranty  is  of  great  value. 
Next,  if  the  general  Government  laid  no  tax 
upon  whiskey  the  States  almost  certainly  would. 
As  they  are  under  no  compact  to  lay  the  same 
tax,  the  rate  would  almost  certainly  be  un- 
equal. For  instance,  with  a  tax  of  25  cents  a 
gallon  on  the  whiskey  produced  in  Kentucky 
the  State  would  have  an  abundant  revenue  for 
all  her  needs,  without  taxing  anything  else  at 
all.  But  it  might  happen  that  Ohio  and  In- 
diana would  lay  no  tax,  or  a  very  light  one, 
upon  whi-ikey.  In  that  case  Kentucky  dis- 
tillers would  be  compelled  to  n  anufacture  at  a 
very  great  disadvantage,  and  would,  in  fact,  be 
compelled  to  close  altogether.  A  tax  by  the 
National  Government  bears  ou  all  States  alike, 
and  affords  a  fair  field  for  competition."  ' 

The  United  States  Brewers'  Conven- 
tion for  1888,  held  at  St.  Paul,  May  30 
and  31,  made  an  elaborate  plea  in  favor 
of  retaining  the  taxes.  The  following  is 
an  extract : 

"The  old  objection  urged  against  excises 
could  not  at  present  be  revived,  seeing  that 
those  who  have  to  bear  the  tax  and  all  the  in- 
conveniences that  are  said  to  grow  out  of  its 
alleged  obnoxious  features,  are  perfectly  satis- 

1  The  Yoice,  Dec.  29,  1887. 


Internal  Revenue.] 


257 


[Ireland. 


lied  with  their  present  status,  so  that,  as  we 
have  stated  on  another  occasion,  whatever 
commiseration  may  be  felt  for  them  by  certain 
theorists  is  "just  so  much  sympathy  wastei. 
As  far  as  the  brewers  of  this  country  are 
concerned,  it  is  well  known  that,  .so  far  from 
opposing  an  excise,  they  materially  aided  the 
Government  during  the  incipient  stages  of  the 
system  in  making  the  tax  collectable  as  cheaply 
and  conveniently  as  possible.  Their  action  at 
that  time  was  not  only  prompted  by  the  inten- 
tion to  prevent  iujastic:^  being  done  them,  but 
also,  in  a  very  large  measure,  by  patriotic 
motives  ;  while  their  pre  ;ent  course  [of  non- 
interference with  the  Federal  tax]  is  dictated 
not  only  by  industrial  considerations,  but  also 
by  the  conviction,  sustained  by  the  experience 
of  our  own  people  and  the  people  of  many  other 
civilized  countries,  that  the  present  system, 
while  perfectly  justifiable  when  viewed  from 
the  standpoint  of  political  economy,  promotes 
temperance  more  effectually  than  any  other 
measure  yet  propo-ed  or  executed  for  that 
purpose.  ...  To  judge  from  present  in- 
dications, there  is  no  danger  of  a  reduction  of 
Internal  Revenue,  other  than  that  derived  from 
articles  which  do  not  concern  us  industrially." 


o 


The  temperance  peojile  condemn 
the  whole  system  and  declare  that  it 
hinders  successftil  work.  Some  of  their 
organizatiotis  are  not  outspoken,  but  it  is 
well  tmderstood  that  the  advanced  tem- 
perance societies  are  practically  unani- 
mous in  desiring  unconditional  repeal. 
"  We  advocate  the  abolition  of  the  Inter- 
nal Eevenue  on  alcoholic  liquors  and  to- 
bacco," said  the  National  Woman's 
Christian  Temperance  Union  in  1887, 
"  for  the  reason  that  it  operates  to  render 
more  difficult  the  securing  and  enforce- 
ment of  Prohibitory  laws,  and  so  post- 
pones the  day  of  national  deliverance." 

3.  The  object  of  the  law  is  "  revenue 
only."  It  was  not  enacted  as  a  temper- 
ance meastire,  and  to  promote  temper- 
ance is  no  part  of  the  duties  of  its  ad- 
ministrators. So  long  as  it  exists,  the 
liquor  policy  of  the  United  States  Gov- 
ernment, theoretically  and  practically,  is 
wholly  antagonistic  to  Prohibition.  By 
the  provisions  of  this  act  the  Prohibitory 
policy  of  various  States,  counties  and 
towns  is  ignored  by  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment. Federal  officials  connected  with 
the  Internal  Revenue  service  in  the  Pro- 
hibition States  and  localities  possess 
abundant  evidence  of  violations  of  State 
and  local  Prohibitory  regulations  ;  yet 
these  officials  refuse  to  co-operate  with 
State  and  local  authorities.'  Moreover, 
they  constantly  interfere  with  the  work 
of  enforcement,  and  become  responsible 


for  many  misleading  rej)resentat'ons  that 
are  eagerly  repeated  by  the  enemies  of 
Prohibition.  The  payment  of  special 
liquor  taxes  to  the  Federal  Collectors  by 
individuals  in  the  Prohibitory  States 
provides  statistics  that  are  deemed  es- 
jjeeially  serviceable  by  unscrtipulous  anti- 
Prohibition  advocates.  It  is  assumed 
that  all  who  pay  these  taxes  are  liquor- 
dealers  within  the  ordinary  meaning  of 
the  term  ;  and  where  the  Federal  records 
show  a  large  number  of  such  payments  it 
is  declared  that  State  Prohibitorv  laws  are 
ineffective  and  farcical.  These  Federal 
records,  however,  are  absolutely  worthless 
as  records  of  the  number  of  persons  ac- 
tually engaged  in  the  liqtior  traffic  in  a 
given  State.  (See  Prohibition,  Beiste- 
EiTS  OF.)  But  this  fact  is  not  given  due 
weight  by  the  ordinary  public  ;  and  the 
Federal  returns  for  the  States  where  Pro- 
hibition is  the  law  are  therefore  used  to 
persuade  the  people  that  "  Prohibition 
doesn't  prohibit." 

Inter-State     Commerce. — See 

UxiTED  States  Goverxmext  and  the. 
Liquor  Traffic. 

Intoxicants. — See  Malt  Liquor.s, 
Vinous  Liquors  and  Spirituous  Liq- 
uors. 

Iowa.  -  See  Index. 

Ireland. — The  war  against  drink- 
in  Ireland  began  about  1826  with  the 
formation  of  a  total  abstinence  society 
in  Skibbereen,  County  Wexford,  by  Jef- 
fery  Sed wards,  a  nailor.  In  1829  the 
Ulster  Temperance  Society  (against  dis- 
tilled liquors  only)  was  founded  at  Bel- 
fast by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Edgar  and  other- 
pioneers.  From  this  time  until  1838  a 
large  number  of  similar  societies  were  es- 
tablished in  different  parts  of  the  country 
and  numerous  adherents  were  enrolled. 
In  1838  Father  Mathew's  memorable- 
temperance  crusade  began.  During  its 
progress  more  than  5,000,000  people,  in  a 
total  population  of  a  little  more  than 
8,000,000,  took  the  teetotal  pledge.  By 
1843  the  drink  traffic  had  been  terribly 
crippled :  many  distilleries  and  breweries 
had  been  forced  to  close,  public-houses 
were  deserted  or  put  to  better  uses, 
drunkenness  disappeared  in  many  parts 
of  Ireland,  and  the  criminal  calendars  at 
assizes  -vvere  almost  blank.     The  annual 


Ireland.] 


258 


[Ireland. 


consumption  of  spirits  dropped  from 
11,595,536  gallons  in  1837  to  6,485,443 
gallons  in  1841.  But  this  triumph  was 
short-lived.  From  want  of  a  Prohibitory 
law  the  liquor  traffic  gradually  recovered 
its  strength.  Drink  is  again  the  great 
curse  of  Ireland. 

The  "  Report  of  the  Commissioners  of 
Her  Majesty's  Inland  Revenue "  for  the 
year  ending  March  31,  1889,  shows  that 
the  population  of  Ireland  at  that  time 
was  4,790,614.^  During  the  year,  29  dis- 
tilleries were  at  work,  producing  11,357,- 
183  gallons  of  spirits;  146,404  quarters 
■of  malt,  178,435  quarters  of  unmalted 
grain,  36.795  cwt.  of  molasses,  13,130  cwt. 
of  rice  and  6,694  cwt.  of  sugar  were  de- 
stroyed in  distillation;  there  were  6,8 13,- 
048  gallons  of  spirits  on  which  duty  was 
charged;  there  were  25,256,788  gallons  of 
spirits  remaining  in  bonded  warehouses, 
and  the  Excise  duties  on  spirits  amount- 
ed to  £3,390,528.  In  the  same  year  there 
were  2,346,682  barrels  of  beer  charged 
with  duty;  2,320,217  barrels  were  re- 
tained for  consumption,  and  the  Excise 
duties  charged  on  beer  amounted  to  £721,- 
344.  The  total  number  of  licenses  of  all 
kinds  was  24,574,  of  which  16,924  were 
to  retailers  of  spirits  (publicans)  and 
5,252  were  "occasional  licenses  for  sale 
of  spirits;"  while  607  were  to  whole- 
sale dealers  in  spirits,  384  to  wholesale 
dealers  in  beer,  409  to  retailers  of 
beer  and  wine  for  consumption  off  the 
premises,  127  to  retailers  of  beer  and 
cider  for  consumption  on  the  premises,  28 
to  retailers  of  beer  and  wine  for  con- 
sumption on  the  premises,  274  to  spirit 
grocers,  and  the  remainder  to  various 
other  dealers.  Of  the  16,924  publi- 
cans, 13,186  had  ordinary  seven-day 
licenses;  2,653  were  licensed  to  sell  on  six 
days  only;  128 were  licensed  on  condition 
that  they  would  close  one  hour  before  the 
statute  time,  and  958  had  licenses  con- 
ditioned on  both  Sunday  closing  and  early 
closing. 

>  The  population  of  Ireland  on  April  3,  1881,  was  5,174,- 
8.36.  Unlike  any  other  portion  of  the  British  dominions,  it 
is  on  the  decrease.  .  .  .  The  highest  point  was  reached 
in  1815,  when  the  entire  population  was  estimated  at 
8,175,124.  The  potato  crop,  upon  which  all  the  agricultural 
and  many  of  the  mamifacturing  poor  depended  for  their 
eubsisteiice,  havin|T  failed  for  two  successive  years,  pro- 
duced famine  and  disease,  which  carried  off  large  nuuibers 
and  ga\e  a  great  impulse  to  emigration,  so  that  from  1845 
the  population  rapidly  decreased.  In  1851  there  were 
6,552,38.5  persons  in  the  country;  in  1801,  5,798,5lj4;  in  1871, 
6,412,377,  and  in  1881,  5,174,830.  Since  1845  the  decrease 
has  been  3,120,225,  equal  to  37.0  per  cent.— Whitaker's 
Almanac  for  IS'JO,  p.  317. 


In  Belfast,  Dublin,  Cork,  Limerick  and 
Waterford,  the  public  houses  sell  on  week- 
days from  7  A.  M.  to  11  P.  M.,  on  Sundays 
from  2  P.  M.  to  7  P.  M.,  and  on  Christmas 
day  and  Good  Friday  from  2  p.  m.  to  9 
P.  M.  In  all  other  places  over  5,000  pop- 
ulation the  hours  for  sale  are  the  same, 
excepting  that  no  sales  at  all  can  be  made 
on  Sundays.  In  places  of  less  than  5,000 
population  the  hours  on  week-days  are  7 
A.  M.  to  10  p.  M.,  no  sales  are  permitted 
on  Sundays,  and  on  Christmas  and  G©od 
Friday  2  p.  m.  to  7  p.  m.  All  licenses  are 
for  one  year  only.  Applications  for  license 
may  be  refused  on  the  score  of  the  bad 
character,  misconduct  or  unfitness  of  the 
applicant,  of  the  objectionable  nature  of 
the  place  or  of  the  presence  of  a  sufficient- 
ly large  number  of  previously  licensed 
houses  in  the  neighborhood.  Practically, 
the  people  have  little  or  no  power  to  pre- 
vent the  licensing  of  drink-shoj^s.  Besides 
the  ordinary  alcoholic  beverages,  con- 
siderable quantities  of  sulphuric  ether 
were  sold  without  license  and  consumed 
in  some  parts  of  Ulster,  especially  in 
Counties  Tyrone  and  Londonderry.  This 
ether  has  very  injurious  effects. 

The  Registrar-General's  "  Report  on 
the  Criminal  and  Judicial  Statistics  of 
Ireland "  for  1888  shows  that  87,582 
cases  of  drunkenness  were  disposed  of 
summarily  in  the  police  and  petty 
sessions  Courts — an  increase  of  10.2  per 
cent,  over  1887.  According  to  these 
records,  there  is  annually  one  conviction 
for  every  54  of  the  population  of  Ireland. 
There  were  2,855  cases  of  ''■  habitual 
drunkenness  "—persons  convicted  three 
or  more  times  for  being  drunk, —  or  266 
more  than  in  1887. 

Even  these  figures  only  partially  indi- 
cate the  woes  brought  upon  Ireland  by 
whiskey.  If  drink  impairs  the  prosperity 
and  energies  of  the  richest  nations,  its 
effects  must  be  unspeakable  in  such  a 
country  as  Ireland, — a  country  of  famines, 
with  a  decreasing  population,  poverty- 
stricken  and  wretched.  The  following  is 
a  most  instructive  statement  of  conditions, 
from  a  very  high  statistical  authority : 

'■  Ireland's  place  in  the  national  economy  [of 
the  United  Kingdoml  is  not  very  higli,  its 
contribution  to  the  Imperial  exchequer  for 
stamps  and  taxes  being  but  £1,003  GG7.  against 
£1,921,640  Scotland,  £24,716,323  England  and 
Wales,  and  £27,673,012  for  the  Unified  King- 
dom.   The  duty  on  whiskey,  however,  comes  to 


Italy.] 


259 


[Jamaica. 


the  rescue,  and  brings  no  less  than  £3,364.875 
into  the  national  exchequer.  The  deficiency 
on  the  other  ltem,s  of  national  revenue  is  largely 
accounted  for  by  the  poverty  of  the  great  mass 
of  the  people,  of  whoai  no  fewer  than  523,000 
vpere  last  year  [1889]  in  a  state  of  actual  pauper- 
ism. There  must  be  something  radically  wrong 
in  this,  for  if  the  country  could,  as  it  did  in 
1845,  support  more  than  eight  millions  of  people, 
there  sliould  not  be  any  great  dithculty  in  pro- 
viding for  the  live  millions  remaining  in  1889."' 

The  Irish  Temperance  League  is  the 
chief  anti-liqttor  organization,  with  head- 
quarters in  Belfast  (John  Grubb  Kichard- 
son  of  Bessbrook,  President).  Its  object 
is  "  the  suppression  of  drunkenness  by 
moral  suasion,  legislative  Prohibition  and 
all  other  lawftil  means."  It  publishes 
the  national  Irish  temperance  news- 
paper, tlie  Irish  Temperance  League 
Journal  (Belfast,  monthly),  sends  out 
lecturers,  operates  17  street  coffee-stands 
in  Belfast,  conducts  one  of  the  most  ele- 
gant and  successful  temperance  cafes  in 
the  United  Kingdom,  and  has  charge  of 
the  legislative  movements  for  entire  Sun- 
day-closing and  the  "  Direct  Veto." 
The  various  churches,  especially  the  Epis- 
copalian, Presbyterian  and  Methodist, 
perform  important  temperance  work,  and 
the  utterances  made  by  their  representa- 
tive gatherings  are  becoming  more  ag- 
gressive. The  Good  Templars  and  Kech- 
abites  are  growing  in  numbers  and  in- 
fluence. Encouragement  is  given  to  the 
cause  by  some  of  the  leading  Roman 
Catholic  dioceses,  notably  by  Archbishop 
Walsh  of  Dublin.  Definite  political  pro- 
gress is  interfered  with  by  the  com- 
manding nature  of  the  Home  Rule  agi- 
tation. A.  H.  H.   McMURTKY. 

Italy. 2 — This  country  ranks  after 
France  among  wine-producing  nations, 
the  annual  vintage  ranging  from  600,- 
000,000  to  800,000,000  gallons.  In  all 
ages  since  the  beginning  of  civilization, 
the  growing  of  the  grape  and  making  of 
wine  have  been  among  the  chief  indus- 
tries. At  present  the  Italian  wines, 
though  abundant,  are  not  "  pushed  "  in 
the  market  so  assiduoudy  as  the  French 
and  those  of  some  other  European  coun- 
tries. Italian  tisages  and  tastes  are  to  a 
greater  degree  domestic  and  homely. 
The  processes  of  manufacture  are  in 
many  places  of  the  most  primitive  kinds. 

1  Whitaker's  Almanac  for  1890,  p.  318. 

2  Tlie  editor  is  indebted  to  Rev.  Leroy  M.  Vernon,  D.  D., 
of  Syracuse,  N.  Y.,  and  Axel  Gustafaon. 


It  is  not  to  be  assumed,  however,  that  the 
Italian  brands  of  commerce,  though  pos- 
sibly simpler,  are  necessarily  purer. 
While  this  maybe  true  of  the  wines  made 
and  consumed  by  the  people  in  many 
parts  of  Italy,  the  liquor  merchants  who 
handle  them  in  the  various  stages  of 
commercial  exchange  take  full  advantage 
of  the  resources  of  adulteration. 

It  may  be  said,  in  general,  that  all 
Italians  use  wine.  The  common  wine  of 
the  locality  satisfies  nearly  all  the  people. 
Even  the  lees  or  dregs  are  utilized,  though 
only  among  the  poor;  the  Italian  laborer, 
if  unable  to  procure  wine,  will  not  drink 
water  pure,  but  prefers  to  adulterate  it 
Avith  wine-lees.  The  practice  of  "  treat- 
ing "  does  not  prevail  to  any  great  extent 
in  Italy. 

Among  the  better  classes  of  the  Italians, 
so-called  moderation  is  probably  the  rule: 
to  the  cultivated  people  drunkenness  is  as 
repugnant  as  to  the  enlightened  citizens 
of  most  countries.  But  drink  is  none 
the  less  the  besetting  foe  of  the  poor,  and 
crime,  vice  and  poverty  are  harvested 
abundantly.  Drunkenness  is  steadily  on 
the  advance,  as  shown  by  the  constantly 
increasing  quantities  of  distilled  liquors 
manufactured,  imported  and  consumed. 

The  number  of  places  where  alcoholic 
beverages  are  sold  is  enormous.  AH  pro- 
prietors of  liquor  establishments  must  ob- 
tain licenses,  which  are  good  for  one  year 
only.  Thus  objectionable  places  can  be 
closed  by  the  authorities  in  a  very  short 
time,  by  refusing  renewals  of  licenses; 
and  a  license  can  be  revoked  at  any  time 
on  the  ground  of  public  safety  or  morality. 
Every  permit  involves  individual  respon- 
sibility, and  any  licensee  who  allows 
another  person  to  carry  on  his  business 
becomes  liable  to  prosecution  for  illicit 
traffic.  Each  municipality  fixes  the  hours 
for  closing.  In  the  event  of  any  great  dis- 
turbance or  of  the  use  of  a  drink-shop 
as  a  rendezvous  for  suspected  persons,  the 
Chief  of  Police  may  close  the  establish- 
ment for  as  long  a  period  as  one  year. 

The  temperance  movement  as  under- 
stood in  English-speaking  countries  has 
not  yet  had  birth  in  Italy.  There  is  a 
temperance  society  with  headquarters  at 
Milan,  but  it  is  not  based  on  teetotal  prin- 
ciples and  no  results  of  its  work  are  mani- 
fest. 

Jamaica. — This  important  West  In- 
dia island  is  famed  for  its  rum,  distilled 


Jamaica] 


260 


[Japan- 


from  the  juice  of  the  sugar-cane.  It  is  an 
English  colony,  and  the  British  Govern- 
ment has  uniformly  encouraged  rum  pro- 
duction, though  raising  a  considerable 
revenue  under  a  characteristic  English 
system  of  excise.  The  relative  magni- 
tude of  the  rum  "industry^'  will  be 
seen  from  the  following  list  of  values  of 
chief  exjiorts  for  the  year  1888:  Dye- 
woods,  £300,750;  tropical  fruits,  £337,- 
052;  coffee,  £321,440;  sugar,  £288,402; 
rum,  £202,420;  pimento,  £44,728.  The 
following  table  shows  the  number  of 
puncheons  of  rum  (of  90  gallons  each) 
exported,  and  their  values,  for  a  period  of 
10  vears: 


Years. 

Puncheons. 

Values. 

1879 

18,791 

£197,320 

1880 

18,584 

209,091 

1581 

13,95-2 

174,406 

1882 

22,742 

295,645 

1883 

20,349 

2-25,963 

1884 

20,364 

220,613 

1885 

21,991 

234,0.53 

1886 

14,764 

184,.545 

188!' 

24,126 

301, .574 

1888 

18,684 

202,420 

Although  45  per  cent,  of  Jamaica's 
trade  is  with  the  United  States,  we  re- 
ceive comparatively  little  of  her  rum. 
Only  238  puncheons,  valued  at  £2,586, 
were  shipped  to  the  United  States  in 
1888.  Yet  so-called  Jamaica  rum  is  one 
of  the  commonest  drinks  sold  in  Ameri- 
can barrooms. 

An  export  duty  of  25  Gd  is  levied  by 
the    Government     on     each    puncheon. 
'J''here  are  but  very  slight  restrictions  on 
the   manufacture,   the   tax   on  each  still 
being   only   £5   per   annum.      A   yearly 
license  to   sell  spirits  by  wholesale  costs 
£10  in  Kingston  and  £5  in  each  other 
parish;  license  to  retail,  £25  in  Kingston, 
£20  in  various  other  towns  and  £10  in 
each  remaining  locality;  tavern  license, 
£20    in    Kingston    and    £10    in    other 
parishes;  hotel  license,  £10  in  Kingston, 
£5  elsewhere.     Import  duties  of  10,s  per 
gallon   are    charged    on   spirits,    Gd  per 
gallon  on  beer  and  2s  6d  per  gallon  on 
■  wine.     The   revenue   receipts  from  rum 
duties  average  about  £80,000  per  year; 
for  the  first  eight  months  of  the   fiscal 
year  1888-9,  they  amounted  to  £02,073, 
while   the  receipts   from  licenses  in  the 
same  months  reached  £10,472.     During 
the  year  1888-9  there  were  issued  1,382 
retailers',  32  Avholesalers',  42  tavern  and 
4  hotel  licenses. 


Japan. — "When  Commodore  M.  C. 
Perry  in  1854  made  the  treaty  with 
Japan  by  which  the  long  secluded  nation 
re-opened  intercourse  with  Christendom, 
he  was  regaled  with  a  banquet  at  which 
the  native  sake,  or  rice  spirit,  was  freely 
served.  Tasting  it  and  inquiring  the 
price  of  the  various  brands,  which  seemed 
to  him  to  be  remarkably  low  as  com- 
pared with  the  cost  of  food  and  clothing, 
he  fell  into  profound  thought.  The 
Japanese  officers,  thinking  he  might  be 
offended,  asked  him,  through  the  inter- 
preter, of  what  he  was  thinking-  He 
replied  that  he  considered  it  a  great 
calamity  to  a  nation  to  have  intoxicatingi 
liquor  so  plentiful  and  so  cheap.  Thisj 
gave  his  entertainers  food  for  thought, ' 
and  the  words  of  the  American  Com 
modore  (who,  by  the  way,  had  already 
advocated  the  abolition  of  the  grog  ra- 
tion in  the  navy,  and  whose  fleet  was  the 
first  governed  without  flogging  or  the 
use  of  the  lash)  were  duly  reported  in 
Yedo.i 

The  national  drink  of  the  Japanese  is 
brewed   or   distilled   from  rice,  and  the 
sake  thus  obtained  is  of  varying  strength, 
ranging  from  weakest  beer  to  strongest 
brandy.     Other  intoxicating  liquors  are 
produced  from  sweet  potatoes,  molasses, 
grain,  grapes,  etc.,  but  these  are  articles 
of  local  manufacture  and  are  not  in  gen- 
eral use.     The  sake   varies  in  alcoholic 
strength  from  4  to  50,  averaging  about 
15  per  cent. ;  though  the  unexpelled  fusel 
oil,  which    is   abundant  in  the  clieaper 
grades,    has  a   maddening  effect  on  the 
drinker  and  is  in  itself  a  specific  as  well 
as  prolific  source  of  crime.     The  word 
sake  is  probably  a  corruption  of  masa-ke 
or  pure  spirit,  and  is  pictorially  repre- 
sented  by   the    Chinese    characters    for 
'•  fluid  "  and  "  Jar."     The  brewing  indus- 
try  was   brought   from    Corea,   and  the 
drink  has  been  known  and  made  since 
the  Christian  era,  but  on  a  large  scale 
only  since   the    16th  Century.     The  old 
legends  and  mythology,  as  well  as   the 
ancient   Shinto   liturgies,  make   copious 
reference    to    it    as    the    intoxicant    of 
dragons    and  the  offering  acceptable  to 
the  gods.     Itami  and  Ikeda,  two  places 
near  Osaka,  are  famed  as  having  the  old- 
est   breweries,    from   which  millions    of 
casks  of  liquor  have  gone,  and  to  which 

1  Life  of  Matthew  C.  Perry,  p.  341. 


Japan.] 


261 


[Japan. 


thousands  of  liorse-loads  of  silver  have 
returned  to  enrich  the  brewers.  "  If  you 
see  one  large,  high,  well-built  house,  stand- 
ing in  enclosed  grounds,  with  a  look  of 
wealth  about  it,  it  is  always  that  of  the 
sake  brewer,"  says  Miss  Bird.  Though 
the  Japanese  of  both  sexes  and  of  all 
classes  drink  sake,  the  universal  consump- 
tion of  tea  has  been  a  great  safeguard  to 
the  nation,  and  the  industry  of  sake,  brew- 
ing is  relatively  of  less  importance  than 
the  manufacture  of  beer  in  England. 

Until  1878,  the  Government  tax  was 
but  10  per  cent.;  but  in  1879  this  was 
increased  to  one  yen  (73.4  cents)  per  kokib 
(39.7  gallons).  In  1880  this  tax  was 
doubled,  and  in  1883  doubled  again,  the 
tax  being  now  about  7-^  cents  on  a  gal- 
lon. The  effect  of  the  tax  has  been  to 
reduce  the  number  of  liquor-manufac- 
tories :  in  1883  there  were  25,814  brew- 
eries and  distilleries;  in  1884,  21,824;  in 
1885,  18,387  ;  in  1886,  16,425,  and  in 
1887,  15,025.  The  product  in  1883  was: 
common  sake,  averaging  about  12  per 
cent,  of  alcohol,  19,583,592  gallons  ;  dis- 
tilled spirits,  308,148  gallons;  other  kinds 
of  sake,  361,084  gallons.  Formerly  the 
liquor  manufactured  in  private  vats  or 
stills  for  family  use,  and  prohibited  from 
sale  but  not  taxed,  was  unlimited  in  quan- 
tity, and  no  note  of  it  was  taken  by  Gov- 
ernment. Since  1884  this  private  pro- 
duction has  been  put  under  the  Excise 
laws,  which  limit  the  production  to  39.4 
gallons  to  one  household,  with  a  tax  of 
58  cents  on  the  same.  Taxation  does  not 
in  this  case  seem  to  have  diminished,  but 
rather  to  have  increased  production. 
While  in  1883,  495,758  koku,  or  in 
round  numbers,  19,830,320  gallons  of 
sake  were  made,  the  figures  for  the  years 
1884,  1885  and  1886,  respectively,  were 
21,330,280,  22,919,800,  and  25,291,480 
gallons.  The  number  of  private  brewers 
in  1883  was  670,361,  and  in  1886,  734,- 
778.  The  Government  is  probably  un- 
willing to  impose  a  heavier  tax  on  the 
sake  industi'y,  lest  the  country  be  flooded 
by  the  import  of  the  Chinese  article. 

The  consumption  of  foreign  liquors  is 
increasing,  as  the  figures  of  the  Bureau 
of  Statistics  in  Tokio  conclusively  show. 
In  1883,  the  value  of  the  various  alcoholic 
liquors  imported  (chiefly  from  Europe) 
was  $220,716,  and  in  the  following  years 
until  1887,  1224,782,  1262,018,  1358,598 
and  1615,063  respectively.     The  demand 


for  beer  is  steadily  increasing.  Several 
native  companies  and  one  foreign  com- 
pany have  been  organized  to  manufacture 
beer,  and  the  development  of  this  new 
"industry"  is  likely  to  be  rapid.  The 
growth  of  beer-consumption  is  shown  by 
the  increase  in  the  number  of  beer-shops 
in  the  city  of  Osaka  from  13  in  1886  to 
490  in  1888.1  The  British  Consuls  have 
advised  the  English  brewers  to  pay 
especial  attention  to  the  Japan  market. 
Foreign  influence  has  not  yet,  however, 
inflicted  the  opium  curse  upon  Japan. 
The  poppy  is  grown  to  a  limited  extent, 
and  some  opium  is  imported,  but  the 
sale  is  subject  to  the  strictest  regulations 
and  the  opium  habit  does  not  prevail  to 
any  marked  extent. 

The  estimated  revenue  from  home- 
brewed sake  for  1889-'90  is  $10,642,019, 
or  18  per  cent,  of  the  total  revenue  of 
the  Government.  It  is  evident,  however, 
that  much  more  than  the  amount  Avhich 
comes  under  Government  cognizance  is 
produced,  especially  in  the  rural  districts. 
"Taking  into  consideration,"  says  Pro- 
fessor Atkinson,  in  his  "  Chemistry  of 
Sake  Brewing,"  "only  the  amount  of 
ordinary  sake  used  (in  1881),  sav  5,000,- 
000  h,ku,  or  198,000,000  gallons,  the 
consumption  corresponds  to  six  gal- 
lons per  head  per  annum,  reckoning  the 
population  at  33,000,000.  If  it  were 
diluted  twice  so  as  to  be  about  the  same 
strength  as  beer,  the  consumption  would 
be  doubled  -  that  is,  12  gallons  a  head, 
while  the  consumption  of  beer  in  Eng- 
land averages  34  gallons  per  head,  nearly 
three  times  as  much  as  in  Japan."  We 
may  add  that  the  population  of  Japan  by 
census  completed  Dec.  31,  1887,  was 
39,000,000,  which  number  being  divided 
into  144,887,600,  the  total  present  pro- 
duct of  sake  (40  gallons  per  kokii),  gives 
not  quite  four  gallons  per  head.  Com- 
bining the  total  consumption  of  foreign 
and  native  liquor,  the  average  would  be 
much  higher,  and  j^robably  nearly  as  high 
as  in  the  days  before  the  Perry  era. 

In  addition  to  the  tax  on  production, 
the  Government  requires  retail  dealers  to 
pay  about  $5  for  a  license,  which  is  for 
revenue  only,  and  is  not  intended  to  re- 
strict the  sale.  While  taxation  has  re- 
duced the  number  of  breweries  and  dis- 
tilleries, we   are   not   to  argue  that  the 

'  On  the  authority  of  Rev.  H.  J.  Khoades,  American 
missionary  in  Tokio. 


Japan.] 


263 


[Jewett,  Charles. 


Jaj^anese  have  become  more  temperate, 
and  the  situation  morally  is  probably 
made  worse  since  the  introduction  of 
European  drinks.  In  their  drinking 
habits,  the  Japanese  consume  in  simple 
drinking  but  a  trifling  amount  "  on  the 
premises"  where  bought,  most  of  the 
tapsters  (whose  sign,  by  the  way,  is  a  bush 
of  jnne)  supplying  families  or  inns  ("  tea- 
houses ")  in  wooden  casks  or  measures  of 
three  different  sizes  -the  go  (1.27  gill), 
did  (1.58  quart)  and  to  (3.97  gallons). 
The  liquid  is  usually  drank  hot,  having 
been  heated  in  decanters  set  in  vessels  of 
boiling  water.  The  cups  used  are  of  the 
tiny  sort,  holding  a  half  or  quarter  of  a 
gill.  Hence  the  sight  of  foreigners  drink- 
ing out  of  tumblers  and  glasses,  when 
first  seen  by  a  Japanese,  suggests  gluttony 
and  drunkenness,  or  calls  to  mind  the 
mythical  slio-jiA  These  red-haired  be- 
ings are  represented  with  long  scarlet 
hair  and  long-handled  dippers  carousing 
around  a  huge  Jar  of  intoxicating  liquor 
set  near  the  sea-shore. 

The  major  part  of  home-made  liquor  is 
used  by  the  Japanese  at  meals,  in  cook- 
ing, at  hotels,  feasting,  picnics  and  on 
social  occasions,  and  the  proportions  and 
strength  of  the  various  kinds  of  alcoholic 
liquids  is  shown  in  the  figures  of  produc- 
tion in  1880  :  ordinary  sake,  200,603,3(50 
gallons;    turbid  sake,  2,519,760  gallons  ; 
white  sales,  60,000  gallons  ;  sweet  sake, 
for   cooking,   1,542,760  gallons;  liqueur, 
144,600  gallons ;  spirits,  3,348,320  gallons. 
The   average   Japanese,   then,   drinks    a 
compound  containing  about  10  or  12  per 
cent,  of  alcohol,  and  the  toper  indulges  in 
distilled  sake,  or  whiskey.     Whether  the 
Japanese  are  a  temperate  or  intemperate 
people   is   a  question    of    relativity.      A 
reader  of  books  like  those  of  Alcock,  and 
others  who  wrote  in  the  days  when  tipsy 
ronin  and    two-sworded    swash-bucklers 
roamed   freely   around,   maddened  with 
drink  and  ready  to  slice  up  dogs  and  for- 
eigners alike,  will  get  the  idea  that  half 
the   Japanese  are  nightly  drunk.     As  a 
matter  of  undisputed  fact,  the  curse  of 
Japan,  next  to  licentiousness,  is  drunken- 
ness, and  the  typical  rich  man  is  the  sake 
merchant.    Seven  per  cent,  of  the  entire 
rice  crop  (which  is  the  principal  crop) 
was,  until  lately,  turned  into  sake.     The 
drink  habit  is  in  Japan  the  fruitful  cause 


of  quarrels,  murders,  alienation  of  friends, 
ruin  of  families  and  manifold  crimes  ; 
and  its  associations  are  those  of  gluttony, 
excess,  prostitution  and  waste.  The  Gov- 
ernment statistics,  it  is  hoped,  will  soon 
be  applied  to  exploiting  this  whole  sub- 
ject. In  the  work  of  reform  the  outlook 
is  hopeful.  The  Christian  churches  are 
on  the  side  of  temperance,  and  most  of 
them  favor  total  abstinence  or  Prohibi- 
tion, and  through  the  labors  of  earnest 
men  and  women,  mostly  American,  tem- 
perance societies  and  literature  have  been 
introduced.  Many  high-minded  natives 
give  their  co-operation  in  the  warfare 
against  drink,  and  the  interests  of  the 
cause  derive  advantage  from  the  precepts 
laid  down  in  the  sacred  Buddhist  books 
and  the  traditions  against  the  use  of  al- 
coholic liquors  that  appeal  to  those  ad- 
hering to  the  religion  of  their  fathers. 
In  some  Buddhist  sects  total  abstinence 
is  rigidly  practiced,  but  laxity  is  the  rule 
and  the  priests  are  not  generally  disposed 
to  insist  on  strict  observance.  But  as 
compared  with  the  situation  in  1854,  and 
despite  the  added  curse  of  foreign  im- 
portation, the  outlook  in  1890 — the  year 
of  Japan's  new  Constitution  and  repre- 
sentative Government — is  one  of  promise. 
William  Elliot  Gkiffis.^ 


Jewett,  Charles. — Died  April  3, 
1879.  In  1826  he  issued  for  private  cir- 
culation an  address  in  verse  to  the  town 
authorities  of  Lisbon,  Conn.,  his  place  of 
residence,  setting  forth  the  iniquity  of 
granting  liquor  licenses.  A  little  later  he 
attended  a  course  of  medical  lectures  at 
Pittsfield,  Mass.,  and  in  1829  began  the 
practice  of  medicine  in  East  Greenwich, 
R.  I.  In  1832  he  was  married  and  the 
same  year  prepared  an  address  on  intem- 
perance which  was  printed  and  widely 
circulated,  and  secured  for  him  many  ap- 
pointments to  speak.  In  1835  he  began 
the  practice  of  his  profession  in  Centre- 
ville,  R.  I.  In  1837,  through  the  instru- 
mentality, largely,  of  Rev.  Thomas  P. 
Hunt,  he  gave  up  the  practice  of  medicine 
to  become  agent  for  the  Rhode  Island 
state  Temperance  Society.  His  lectures 
were  especially  valuable  and  forcible  at 
that  time,  since  his  medical  training  en- 
abled him  to  treat  the  drink  question  in 


'  Japanese  Fairy  World,  p.  102. 


2  The  editor  is  also  indebted  to  Rev.  George  G.  Uud- 
soii,  \\'akayama,  Japan,  and  Mary  Clement  Leavitt. 


Jews.] 


263 


[Joy,  Benjamin. 


I 


its  scientific  and  physiological  aspects. 
lie  was  a  delegate  from  Ehode  Island  to 
a  notable  temperance  convention,  held  in 
Boston  in  1839.  In  1840  he  accepted  the 
position  of  Agent  of  the  Massachusetts 
Temperance  Union.  In  184G  his  con- 
tributions to  the  Temperance  Journal, 
organ  of  the  American  Temperance 
Union,  attracted  notice.  In  1849  friends 
presented  him  with  a  purse  of  $1,000, 
which  enabled  him  to  purchase  a  farm 
near  Milbury,  Mass.,  where  he  lived  until 
1854,  when  he  removed  to  Faribault, 
Minn.  AVhile  he  was  residing  there  he 
was  beset  with  pecuniary  embarrassments. 
These  were  relieved  by  his  warm  friends 
in  the  temperance  work,  John  B.  Gough 
and  Lucius  M.  Sargent,  each  presenting 
him  with  a  check  for  $500.  Returning 
in  1855  to  Massachusetts,  he  became 
Lecturer  for  the  Temperance  Alliance  of 
that  State,  lie  published  a  book,  "  Forty 
Years'  Fight  with  the  Drink  Demon," 
and  throughout  his  life  was  a  very  pro- 
lific contributor  to  popular  temperance 
literature. 

J'dws. — No  action  on  total  abstinence 
or  Prohibition  has  been  taken  by  any 
representative  body  of  the  Jewish  Church 
in  America.  Experience  has  shown  that 
the  general  attitude  of  the  Hebrews  is 
opposed  to  radical  measures.  This  state- 
ment is  confirmed  by  Joseph  Davis,  ed- 
itor of  the  Hebrew  Journal,  who  writes  : 
"Intemperance  has  not  been  a  crying 
evil  among  the  Jews,  and  has  thus  neces- 
sitated neither  conference  nor  legislation. 
Individually  the  Jews  are  interested  in 
the  question  only  as  American  citizens. 
The  general  drift  of  opinion  among  our 
people  is  antagonistic  to  legislative  Pro- 
hibition, but  in  favor  of  such  regulation 
of  the  traffic  as  will  alford  least  tempta- 
tion to  driuking  outside  the  house." 

[See  also  Bible  Wines  and  Passover 
Wines.  ] 

Joy,  Beojamin. — Born  June  23, 
1800,  and  died  Feb.  18,  1869.  He  was 
one  of  the  most  active  and  indomitable 
pioneers  of  the  temperance  reform.  He 
spent  the  largest  portion  of  his  life  in 
Ludlowville,  Tompkins  County,  N.  Y. 
Being  a  merchant  and  manufacturer,  his 
business  interests  caused  him  to  travel 
extensively  through  the  central  and  west- 
ern parts  of  his  State.  In  1837,  while 
visiting  the  neighboring  town  of  Hector, 


he  learned  from  Dr.  Jewell  that  a  society 
had  been  formed  there  on  the  pledge  of 
total  abstineace  from  wine,  cider  and  all 
intoxicants.  He  returned  home  and  or- 
ganized a  society  on  the  same  basis  at 
Ludlowville,  Dec.  31  of  the  same  year. 
This  was  one  of  the  earliest  teetotal 
societies  in  the  world.  In  his  frequent 
trips  through  all  that  region,  driving  from 
schoolhouse  to  schoolhouse  and  church  to 
church,  he  denounced  the  drinking 
usages  and  formed  societies  for  the  pro- 
motion of  abstinence.  His  labors  of  love 
were  without  any  "pay" — except  the  perse- 
cutions of  the  rumsellers,  whocutthe  har- 
ness from  his  horse  and  endeavored  to 
break  up  his  meetings.  Once  they  broke 
a  whiskey-bottle  near  his  liead  and  the 
old  hero  shouted  with  great  glee :  "  Good ! 
my  boys,  good !  served  him  right !  one 
more  devil  cast  out !  I  came  here  to  help 
smash  rum-bottles."  Benjamin  Joy  was 
a  most  zealous  Christian,  and  it  was  at  a 
religious  service  held  at  his  house,  in  Feb- 
ruary, 1843,  that  the  author  of  this  sketch 
decided  to  enter  the  Christian  ministry. 
In  1865  he  took  a  prominent  part  in  the 
National  Temperance  Convention  at  Sar- 
atoga and  stood  with  Mr.  Delavan  and 
Gerrit  Smith  in  the  leadership  of  the 
cause  in  the  State  of  New  York. 
The  closing  years  of  his  noble  life  of 
philanthropy  were  spent  in  Penn  Yan. 
His  last  evening  on  earth  was  in  a  meet- 
ing of  Good  Templars,  where  he  spoke 
with  great  power.  Before  morning  he 
died.  His  honored  friend.  Dr.  John 
Bas'com,  adds  the  following  testimony: 

"  Benjamia  Joy  was  a  very  bright  man,  full 
of  humor  and  an  admirable  story  teller.  He  had 
a  pliant,  expressive  face  that  gave  a  running 
commentary  on  what  he  said,  and  a  pictorial  en- 
forcement of  it  He  shared  the  interest  of  his 
topic  with  his  audience,  and  it  was  evidently  a 
pleasure  for  him  to  speak.  He  was  also  a 
very  devout  man.  The  strenuous  way  in  which 
he  enforced  social  truth,  both  on  the  question 
of  slavery  and  of  temperance  and  his  personal 
resources  in  gathering  pleasant  and  aidfal  ma- 
terial in  support  of.  his  theme,  constituted  one  of 
the  strongest  and  most  beneficent  impressions  of 
my  childhood  and  youth." 

Eev.  Dr.  David  Magee  writes : 

' '  No  one  can  forget  the  addresses  of  Mr.  Joy. 
How  his  eye  kindled  and  the  tones  of  his  voice 
deepened  as  he  became  more  and  more  engaged, 
his  address  overflowing  with  wit  and  humor, 
then  melting  into  pathos,  rising  at  times  into  the 
keenest  sarcasm  and  occasionally  into  terrible 
invective  For  45  years  he  gave,  without  re- 
muneration, his  time  and  strength  and  talents 


Kansas] 


264 


[Labor  and  Liquor. 


to  this  work.  In  1853  lie  was  elected  to  the  Legis- 
lature on  the  teniperaiice  issue,  and  of  him  a 
journalist  of  that  day  (T.  W.  Brown)  wrote  : 
'  No  man  at  the  capital,  as  a  man,  a  temperance 
advocate  or  a  legislator,  wields  more  moral 
l)owei-  than  he.  As  a  debater  he  is  clear-headed, 
cool,  self-poised  and  ready,  and  never  surprised 
in  any  of  the  strategy  which  marks  the  stirring 
conflicts  of  the  session.  His  enemies  love  him 
while  they  fear  him.  As  a  speaker,  no  man 
holds  in  more  complete  subjection  the  turbulent 
elements  of  the  House.'  Mr.  Joy  was  especially 
instrumental  in  framing  the  Piohibitory  law 
which  was  finally  passed,  only  to  be  vetoed  by 
Governor  Horatio  tSeymour.  Only  three  weeks 
before  his  death  he  delivered  his  annual  address 
to  the  people  of  Tompkins  County,  in  which  he 
said:  '  By  every  throb  of  affection,  by  every 
memory  of  the  kindness  of  the  people  of  Tomp- 
kins to  myself,  I  long  and  pray  for  their  de- 
liverance and  the  deliverance  of  their  children 
from  the  scourge  and  curse  of  strong  drink. 
And  now,  after  a  world  of  experience  and  ob- 
servation, chastened  by  many  trials,  far  along  in 
the  autumn  of  life,  with"  the  headlands  of 
another  world  plainly  visible,  I  solemnly  de- 
clare that  the  importance  of  the  subject  of 
temperance  grows  in  my  esteem  with  advancing 
years,  and  I  thoroughly  justify  every  endeavor, 
every  labor,  every  "  forced  march "  and  ex- 
posure, every  .sacrilice  I  have  ever  made  for  the 
cause,  and  have  only  to  regret  that  I  could  not 
have  done  more.'" 

Theodore  L.  Cuyler. 

Kansas,— See  Index. 

Kentucky.— See  Index. 

Knights  of  Temperance. — A  juve- 
nile temperance  society,  organized  in  1885, 
under  the  auspices  of  the  Church  Tem- 
perance Society  (Protestant  Episcopal) 
and  designed  for  boys  and  young  men 
from  14  to  21  years  of  age.  There  is  no 
element  of  secrecy,  though  none  hut 
members  are  expected  to  attend  the 
regular  meetings.  Every  Company  has  a 
Captain  and  nine  other  officers.  The  fol- 
lowing i^ledge  is  taken  by  each  member : 

"  I  promise  with  the  help  of  Grod  to  abstain 
wholly  from  strong  drink  as  long  as  I  continue 
a  member  of  this  Order.  Moreover,  I  ac- 
knowledge it  always  to  be  my  duty  to  avoid 
whatever  words  and  deeds  are  indecent  or  pro- 
fane. I  distinctly  understand  that  to  break  this 
promise  which  I  have  just  made,  or  to  be  guilty 
of  any  word  or  act  indecent  or  profane,  will 
make  me  liable  to  suspension  or  dismissal  from 
this  Order." 

Koran.— See  Mohammedans. 

Labor  and  Liquor.  ^ — The  eco- 
nomic arguments  against  the  liquor  traffic 

I  The  editor  is  indebted  to  Frank  J,  Sibley  of  Demorest, 
<Ja.,  Killph  J.  Beaumont  of  Addison,  N.  Y,,  and  A.  M. 
Dewey,  formerly  editor  of  the  'oumal  of  United  Labo?: 


have  always  found  their  strongest  sup- 
port in  the  unhesitating  recognition  that, 
whatever  may  be  said  of  the  effort  to  stop 
drinking,  it  is  wholly  beneficent  and 
righteous  when  considered  from  the 
standpoint  of  the  laboring  man's  interests. 
To  establish  the  unmitigated  evil  and 
folly  of  drink  indulgence  among  the  poor, 
it  was  indeed  never  necessary  that  a  dis- 
tinctive temperance  movement  should  be 
created.  Ordinary  observation  and  in- 
telligence were  sufficient.  Long  before 
teetotal  or  even  "moderation"  societies  were 
founded,  Benjamin  Franklin  wrote  this 
interesting  reminiscence  of  his  apprentice- 
ship in  Watt's  printing-house  in  London 
in  1725: 

'•I  drank  only  water;  the  other  workmen, 
nearly  fifty  in  number,  were  great  drinkers  of 
beer.  On  occasion  I  carried  up  and  down  stairs 
a  large  form  of  types  in  each  hand,  when  others 
carried  but  one  in  both  hands.  They  wondered 
to  see,  from  this  and  several  instances,  that  the 
Water- American,  as  they  called  me,  was  stronger 
than  themselves,  who  drank  strong  beer.  We 
had  an  ale-house  boy,  who  attended  always  in 
the  house  to  supply  the  workmen.  My  com- 
panion at  the  press  drank  every  day  a  pint  be- 
fore breakfast,  a  pint  at  breakfast  with  his  bread 
and  cheese,  a  pint  between  breakfast  and  din- 
ner a  pint  at  dinner,  a  pint  in  the  afternoon 
about  6  o'clock,  and  another  when  he  had  done 
his  day's  work.  I  thought  it  a  detestable  custom, 
but  it  was  necessary,  he  supposed,  to  drink 
strong  beer  that  he  might  be  strong  to  labor.  I 
endeavored  to  convince  him  that  the  bodily 
strength  afforded  by  beer  could  only  be  in  pro- 
portion to  the  grain  or  flour  of  the  barley  dis- 
solved in  the  water  of  which  it  was  made;  that 
there  was  more  flour  in  a  pennyworth  of  bread, 
and  therefore  if  he  could  eat  tliat  with  a  pint  of 
water  it  would  give  him  more  strength  than  a 
quart  of  beer.  He  drank  on,  however,  and  had 
four  or  five  shillings  to  pay  out  of  his  wages 
every  Saturday  night  for  tliat  vile  liquor;  an 
expense  I  was  free  from.  And  thus  these  poor 
devils  keep  themselves  always  under. "  ^ 

When  practical  organized  work  for 
temperance  was  begun  in  the  United 
States,  one  of  the  first  steps  taken  was 
the  discountenancing  of  the  practice  of 
serving  liquor  to  farm-hands.  The  espe- 
cial object  of  Father  Mathew's  great 
crusade  was  to  reform  the  drinking  habits 
of  the  poor  peoi^le.  Moral  suasion  under- 
takings have  always  been  prosecuted 
peculiarly  for  the  elevation  of  the  masses. 
The  whole  drink  problem  has  its  root  in 
the  frightful  excesses,  suffering  and  pov- 
erty inflicted  on  the  multitude  by  alcohol; 
and  the  continuance  of  the  temperance 

2  Franklin's  Autobiography  ("  Works,"  edited  by  Jared 
Sparks,  Boston,  1840),  vol.  1,  p.  59. 


Labor  and  Liquor] 


265 


[Labor  and  Liquor. 


reform  as  a  necessarily  permanent  factor 
of  modern  propagandism  is  justified  and 
made  certain  by  nothing  so  much  as  by 
the  universal  conviction  that  drink  is 
one  of  the  worst  obstacles  to  the  moral 
and  material  betterment  of  the  working 
classes,  now  so  earnestly  striven  for  by 
vast  organizations  and  regarded  by  most 
good  peojile  as  a  chief  aim  of  humane  en- 
deavor. 

But  not  until  recently  has  the  formal 
co-operation  of  influential  Labor  forces 
and  representative  Labor  leaders  in  the 
radical  temjDerance  agitation  been  vouch- 
safed to  any  important  extent.  Upon 
the  formation  of  the  widespread  Amer- 
ican Order  of  Knights  of  Labor  in  1878, 
a  clause  was  inserted  in  the  constitution 
providing  that  no  saloon-keej^er,  bar- 
tender or  any  jierson  in  any  way  con- 
nected with  the  liquor  trafl&c,  should  be 
eligible  to  membership.  The  reasons 
governing  this  action  were  thus  expressed 
by  John  B.  Chisholm,  a  Pennsylvania 
miner,  who  was  the  author  of  the  clause : 
"  I  want  to  save  this  Order  from  the  evil 
which  has  been  the  curse  of  every  organ- 
ization of  miners  in  the  history  of  the 
Labor  movement.  I  want  the  Knights 
of  Labor  to  succeed,  and  this  they  can 
never  do  if  in  any  way  contaminated  with 
that  which  does  only  harm  to  the  human 
family.  The  saloon  has  no  real  sympathy 
for  labor,  and  only  robs  the  worker  of 
the  hard-earned  money  which  ouglit  to 
go  for  the  comforts  of  wife  and  little 
ones  at  home."  The  Knights  of  Labor 
have  adhered  to  the  policy  originally 
adopted,  and  in  1887  their  attitude  was 
emphasized  by  the  addition  of  the  follow- 
ing amendment  to  their  constitution  by 
the  consent  of  more  than  two-thirds  of 
the  Assemblies: 

"  No  Local  or  other  Assembly  member  shall 
directly  or  indirectly  give,  sell  or  have  any 
.lie,  beer  or  intoxicating  liquors  of  any  kind  at 
any  meetiug,  party,  sociable,  ball,  picnic  or  en- 
tertainment pertaining  to  the  Order.  Any 
member  found  guilty  of  violating  this  law  shall 
be  suspended  not  less  than  six  months,  or  ex- 
pelled. No  fine  shall  be  imposed  for  this  offense. 
Any  Local  or  other  Assembly  so  offending  shall 
be  suspended  during  the  pleasure  of  tlie  General 
Executive  Board,  or  shall  have  its  charter  re- 
voked by  said  Board." 

Necessarily  the  position  taken  by  so 
powerful  an  organization  as  thu  Knights 
of  Labor,  with  a  membershiiD  in  excess  of 
200,000,  was  a  great  advantage  to  the 


temperance  cause.  In  various  practical 
ways  the  most  radical  anti-liquor  prin- 
ciples have  been  promoted  by  the  Knights. 
Mr.  T.  V.  Powderly,  the  head  of  the 
Order,  and  the  other  general  officers,  have 
publicly  taken  pledges  to  abstain  entirely 
from  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  dur- 
ing their  terms  of  office.  In  impassioned 
addresses  and  writings  that  have  been 
conspicuously  published,  the  foremost 
leaders  have  repeatedly  arraigned  drink 
as  the  worst  enemy  of  the  general  inter- 
ests of  organized  Labor  as  well  as  of  in- 
dividual workingmen.i     They  have  also 

1  The  following  is  from  a  letter  published  by  Mr.  Pow- 
derly in  the  Journal  of  United  Labor  for  July  2,  1887: 

"I  know  that  in  the  organization  of  which  I  am  the 
head  there  are  many  good  men  w  ho  drink,  but  they  would 
be  better  men  if  they  did  not  drink.  I  know  that  there 
are  thousands  in  our  Order  who  will  not  agree  with  me  on 
the  question  of  temperance,  but  that  is  their  misfortune, 
for  tney  are  wrong,  radically  wrong.  Ten  years  ago  I  was 
hissed  because  I  advised  men  to  let  strong  drink  alone 
They  threatened  to  rotten-egg  me.  I  have  continued  to 
ad\ise  men  to  be  temperate,  and  though  I  have  had  no  ex- 
perience that  would  qualify  me  to  render  an  opinion  on 
the  efficacy  of  a  rotten  egg  as  an  ally  of  the  rum-drinker, 
yet  I  would  prefer  to  have  my  exterior  decorated  from 
summit  to  base  with  the  rankest  kind  of  rotten  eggs  rather 
than  allow  one  drop  of  liquid  villainy  to  pass  my  lips  or 
have  the  end  of  my  nose  illuminated  bv  the  blossom  that 
follows  a  planting'  of  the  seeds  of  hatred,  envy,  malice 
and  damnation,  all  of  which  are  represented  in  a  solitary 
glass  of  gin.    ... 

"He  Lthe  drunkard]  robs  parents,  wife  and  children. 
He  robs  his  aged  father  and  mother  through  love  of  drink 
He  gives  for  rum  what  should  go  for  their  support.  When 
they  murmur  he  turns  them  from  his  door,  and  points  his 
contaminated  drunken  tinger  toward  the  poorhoase.  He 
next  turns  toward  his  wife  and  robs  her  of  what  should  be 
devoted  to  the  keeping  of  her  home  in  comfort  and  plenty 
He  robs  her  of  her  wedding-ring  and  pawns  it  for  drink. 
He  turns  his  daughter  from  his  door  in  a  fit  of  drunken 
anger  and  drives  her  to  the  house  of  prostitution,  and  then 
accepts  from  her  hand  the  proceeds  of  her  shame  To 
satisfy  his  love  of  drink  he  takes  the  price  of  his  ciiild'a 
virtue  and  innocence  from  her  sin-stained,  lust-bejewelled 
flngeivs  and  with  it  totters  to  the  bar  to  pay  it  to  the  man 
who  does  not  deny  the  justice  of  my  position.'  I  do  not 
arraign  the  man  who  drinks  because  he  is  poor  but  be- 
cause through  being  a  slave  to  drink  he  has  made  himself 
and  tamily  poor.  I  do  not  hate  the  man  who  drinks,  for  I 
have  carried  drunken  men  to  their  homes  on  my  back 
rather  than  allow  them  to  remain  exposed  to  inclement 
w-eather.  I  do  not  hate  the  drunkard— he  is  what  drink 
effected;  and  while  I  do  not  hate  the  effect,  I  abhor  and 
loathe  the  cause.    .    .    ' 

"  In  the  city  of  New  York  alone  it  is  estimated  that  not 
less  than  $2.50,000  a  day  are  spent  for  drink,  S1,500,00(J  in 
one  week,  $75,000,000  in  one  year.  Who  will  dispute  it 
when  I  say  that  one-half  of  the  policemen  of  New  York 
*"^aaa''^,.?'"P1V.^u''''^  to  watch  the  beings  who  squander 
$<.D,000,00O.''  Who  will  dispute  it  when  I  say  that  the 
money  spent  in  paying  the  salaries  and  expenses  of  one- 
halt  of  the  police  of  New  York  could  be  saved  to  the  tax- 
payers It  $75,000,000  were  not  devoted  to  making  drunk- 
ards, thieves,  prostitutes  and  other  suljjects  for  the 
policemen's  net  to  gather  in  ?  If  $250,000  go  over  the 
counters  of  the  rumseller  in  one  day  in  New  York  City 
alone,  who  will  dare  to  assert  that  workingmen  do  notnav 
one-titth,  or  $50,000,  of  that  sum?  If  workingmen  in 
New  \ork  City  spend  $50,000  a  day  for  drink,  they  spend 
$300,000  a  week,  leaving  Sunday  out.  In  four  weeks  they 
spend  $1,200,000— over  twice  as  much  money  as  was  paid 
nito  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Knights  of  Labor  in 
nine  years.  In  six  weeks  they  spend  $1,800,000— nearly 
three  times  as  much  money  as  that  army  of  organized 
w-^orkers,  the  Knights  of  Labor,  have  spent  from  the  day 
the  General  Assembly  was  first  called  to  order  up  to  the 
present  day;  and  in  one  year  the  workingmen  of  New 
York  City  alone  will  have  spent  for  beer  ancf  rum  $15,600,- 
000,  or  enough  to  purchase  and  equip  a  first-class  telegraph 
line  of  their  own:— $15,600,000,  enough  money  to  invest 


Labor  and  Liquor  J 


266 


[Law  and  Order  Leagues. 


shown  their  opposition  to  the  license 
system  by  advising  their  followers  to  sup- 
port Prohibitory  Amendments  to  State 
Constitutions.  In  the  Pennsylvania 
Amendment  campaign,  the  Journal  of 
United  Labor,  official  organ  of  the  Order, 
emphatically  endorsed  Prohibition  in 
preference  to  High  License.  * 

In  the  article  on  Farmers  it  is  shown 
that  the  agricultural  organizations  of  the 
United  States,  forming  a  highly  import- 
ant branch  of  the  Labor  movement,  are 
outspoken  and  aggressive  foes  of  the 
saloon.  The  Catholic  Total  Abstinence 
Societies,  whose  membership  is  made  up 
chiefly  from  the  ranks  of  the  laboring 
people,  are  constantly  spreading  the  prin- 
ciples of  personal  temperance  among  the 
wage-workers.  The  influence  of  an  in- 
creasing number  of  very  eminent  and 
earnest  Catholic  divines,  like  Bishops  Ire- 
land and  Spalding,  and  of  humbler 
tliough  none  the  less  energetic  members 
of  the  clergy  like  Father  Martin  Ma- 
honey  of  Minnesota,  is  no  doubt  respon- 
sible for  much  of  the  sturdy  sentiment 
that  is  being  developed.  In  other  coun- 
tries there  is  a  growing  recognition  by 
Labor  advocates  of  the  necessity  of  com- 


in  such  co-operative  enterprises  as  would  forever  end  the 
strike  and  lockout  as  a  means  of  settling  disputes  in  labor 
circles. 

"A  single  county  in  Pennsylvania,  so  lam  informed, 
spent  in  one  year  $17,000,000  for  drink.  That  county  con- 
tains the  largest  industrial  population,  comparatively,  of 
any  in  the  State:— $11,000,000  of  the  $17,000,000  comes 
from  the  pockets  of  workinguien.  New  York  City  in  one 
year  contributes  $1.5,000,000 "to  keep  men  and  women  in 
poverty,  hunger  and  cold,  while  one  county  in  Pennsyl- 
vania adds  $11,000,000,  making  a  total  of  $2(5,600,000." 

1  The  Journal  said,  April  11,  1889  : 

"  Pennsylvania,  Massachusetts  and  Nebraska  are  just 
now  discussing  Prohibitory  Amendments  to  their  re- 
spective Constitutions.  Thousands  of  our  members  will 
be  called  upon  to  choose  between  the  saloon,  with  its  at- 
tendant miseries  and  vices,  and  the  home  with  its  mani- 
fold blessings.  Let  us  hope  that  the  choice  will  be  wisely 
made.  Remember  that  no  Assemby  was  ever  conducted 
better  because  its  otlicers  or  members  were  privileged  to 
visit  the  saloon,  either  before  or  after  the  meeting.  No 
strike  by  a  labor  organization  was  ever  made  successful 
through  the  use  of  ihto.xicating  liquors.  No  man  ever  be- 
came a  better  Knight  or  any  Knight  a  better  man  by  put- 
ting into  his  stomach  the  stuff  which  fires  the  brain  and 
drives  the  manhood  from  the  man.  The  reverse  of  all 
this  has  ever  been  the  case,  as  all  history  of  Labor  will  go 
to  prove. 

"  This  question  is  not  a  political  one  in  any  sense.  It 
is  a  question  of  morality.  The  present  industrial  system 
encourages  drunkenness  and  vice.  They  are  the  legitimate 
outcome  of  long  hours  of  hard  labor  and  low  wages.  In 
their  demoralized  and  well-nigh  helpless  condition  the 
wage-workers  are  scarcely  able  to  help  themselves,  and  we 
would  have  this  one  great  curse  to  the  industrial  masses, 
this  strong  temptation  to  spend  their  meagre  earnings  at 
the  expense  even  of  their  manhood,  removed  as  far  as  pos- 
sible from  them.  If  the  appetite  can  be  controlled  in  no 
other  way  we  would  make  it  impossible  for  them  to  get 
the  stuff  with  which  to  satisfy  it. 

"  When  the  time  comes  for  the  hosts  of  Labor  to  speak 
on  this  important  question,  we  trust  that  all  will  remember 
that  the  work  of  Labor  reform  can  be  accomplished  quicker 
and  better  with  clear  bri>ins  and  pure  water  than  with 
muddled  brains  and  poor  whiskey." 


bating  drink.  In  one  of  the  greatest 
strikes  ever  inaugurated  and  won  in  Eng- 
land, that  of  the  London  dock-laborers 
in  the  winter  of  1889-90,  the  leader, 
John  Burns,  was  a  total  abstainer,  and 
his  success  was  attributed  to  his  efforts  in 
behalf  of  sobriety  among  the  men,  as 
much  as  to  any  instrumentality.  Michael 
Davitt,  one  of  the  most  beloved  of  the 
Irish  popular  leaders,  wrote  in  a  letter  to 
the  Convention  of  the  League  of  the 
Cross  at  Thurles,  Ireland,  July  23,  1889: 
"  The  fact  that,  poor  as  our  country  is, 
we  waste  over  £11,000,000  a  year  on  in- 
toxicating drinks  is  a  most  deplorable 
one  to  dwell  upon.  Half  that  sum,  need- 
lessly wasted  as  it  is  now,  would  set  every 
woolen  mill  in  Ireland  running  to-mor- 
row, and  be  thereby  the  means  of  keep- 
ing our  young  people  from  running  out 
of  the  country  for  want  of  employment." 
But  while  temperance  radicalism,  is  no 
longer  exceptional  among  those  best 
qualified  to  speak  for  Labor,  it  is  not  to 
be  denied  that  much  work  must  be  done 
before  the  hostility  or  indifference  of  the 
masses  can  be  overcome.  This  is  so  well 
attested  by  the  multiplication  of  dram- 
shops in  the  poorer  parts  of  every  city 
that  it  is  unnecessary  to  call  attention  to 
details. 

[For  information  concerning  labor  employed 
by  the  liquor  traffic,  etc.,  see  Liquor  Traffic. 
For  testimony  as  to  the  advantages  derived  by 
wage-workers  from  Prohibitory  systems,  see 
Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 

Law  and   Order  Leagues. — In  a 

very  large  number  of  American  cities  the 
liquor  regulations  instituted  by  State  au- 
thorities are  distasteful  to  a  considerable 
element  of  citizens,  whose  thorough  or- 
ganization and  political  activity  enables 
them  to  control  nominations  and  elec- 
tions. Accordingly  the  officials  who  have 
to  do  with  enforcement  are  frequently 
mere  tools  of  the  liquor-saloons;  and  in 
an  equally  large  number  of  cases  well- 
meaning  officials  are  influenced  by  party 
considerations,  or  find  it  impossible  to 
command  effective  co-operation  from  the 
persons  associated  with  them  in  the  ex- 
ecution of  law.  To  counteract  such  con- 
ditions, the  supporters  of  Prohibitory  or 
restrictive  measures  have  been  led  to  or- 
ganize Law  and  Order  Leagues,  pledged 
to  prosecute  the  work  of  enforcement  by 
the  use  of  all  available  means.  Public 
meetings  are  held,  moral  encouragement 


I 


Law  and  Order  Leagues.]             367  [Law  and  Order  Leagues. 

is  volunteered,  money   is   subscribed  by  Sioux  City  (la.).  It  was  iu  tlie  last-named 

sympathizers,    detectives    are   employed,  city  that  Dr.  Haddock  was  assassinated 

much   evidence   of   violation  is   secured,  for   venturing    to    bring  to  justice   the 

pressure  is  exercised  on  the  authorities,  liquor-dealing  criminals  whom  the  police 

cases  are  brought  to  trial,  and  results  are  authorities   had   left   undistvirbed.     (See 

more  or  less  satisfactory  according  to  the  Haddock,  George  C.)    Indeed,  Law  and 

ability,    zeal    and    perseverance    of   the  Order  undertakings  have  always  involved 

leaders  and   the   disposition  of  officials,  danger  of  life  and  limb  to  those  engaged 

Courts  and  juries,  the  press  and  the  public  in  them. 

generally.     Law  and  Order  methods  were  While    a  few  Leagues  have   operated 
tried,  to  some  extent,  in  the  early  days  of  successfully  for  years,  nearly  all  have  ex- 
the  Prohibition  movement.     (See  p.  67.)  pired,   or  become    inactive,    after   brief 
But  they  did  not  become  widely  popular  careers.      Even   the   most   faithful   and 
among  the  temperance  people  until  the  vigorous  workers  are  discouraged  by  the 
Chicago    Citizens'  League  had  made  its  unbroken  successes  of  the  saloon  element 
successful    attacks     on    lawless    saloon-  at  the  polls,  and  the  apparent  hopelessness 
keepers.     This   League   was   founded  in  of  waging  a  costly  fight  for  enforcement 
1877.     Its  object  was  to  prevent  the  sale  against  hostile  officials.     They   are   also 
of  liquor  to  boys,  and   ''  Save  the   Boys  "  disposed  to  question  the  value  of  achieve- 
was  adopted  as  its  motto.     The  number  ments  which,  while  leading  to  conviction 
of  arrests  of  minors  had  reached  appalling  and  punishment  in  individual  cases,  are 
proportions  in  Chicago.    Through  the  en-  at  best  only  partial  and  temporary,  and 
ergetic  work  of  the  chief  officer  of  the  do  not  seem  to  really  cripple  the  traffic  or 
League,  Andrew  Paxton,  there  was  an  im-  to  compel  the  liquor-dealers,  as  a  class,  to 
mediate  improvement:    the    number   of  abide  by  the  law.     The  good  that  is   ac- 
minors  apprehended  was  diminished,  in  five  complished  under  the  impulses  of  enthu- 
years,  by  several  thousands ;  many  liquor-  siasm,  andof  thesuddennessandnoveltyof 
dealers   were   j)i"osecuted  and  convicted;  the  movement,  cannot  withstand  for  any 
public  sentiment   warmly   approved   the  considerable  period  of  time  the  reaction- 
crusade,  and   more  advanced  legislation  ary  effects  of  unfavorable  legislation  and 
was  enacted  at  the  instance  of  the  League,  of  antagonistic    governmental    manage- 
Mr.  Paxton  devoted  the  remainder  of  his  ment.     Even  in  Chicago,  where  circum- 
life  to  this  cause,  continuing  his  labors  in  stances  promoted  the  single  aim  of  the 
Chicago   and   helj)iug  to   found   similar  League — to   keep    the   boys   out   of   the 
societies  in  other  cities.     He  was  bitterly  saloons, — the  arrests  of  minors  increased 
hated  by  the  rumsellers,  and  was   mur-  from  6,550   in   1885   to   8,933   in   1888. 
derously  assaulted  a  number  of  times.  Radical  persons   prefer   to  devote   their 
Innumerable  Law  and  Order  Leagues  best   energies   to   the   fight   against   the 
have   sprung   into  existence  since  1877.  drink  habit  and  the  license  system,  and 
In  nearly  every  city  and  town  where  the  thereby  to  strike  at  the  root  of  the  evil, 
conduct  of  the  officials  has  been  objection-  rather  than  to  spend  them  in  temporary 
able,  there  has  been  some  attempt  to  ap-  conflicts  for  slight  advantages, 
ply  the  Chicago  remedy.    In  Philadelphia  Nevertheless,  Law  and  Order  Leagues 
a  very  useful  Law  and  Order  Society  has  have  undoubtedly  been  of  much  service 
been  at  work  for  several  years,  under  the  locally.     They  have  expelled  the  defiant 
direction   of   Lewis   D.    Vail   and  other  rum  traffic  from  numerous   Prohibition 
prominent  men;  and  when  the  licensing  towns  and    have    been    instrumental  in 
authority  was  transferred  to  the  Judges  stimulating  public  sentiment  and  putting 
under  the  Brooks  law  of  Pennsylvania,  an  end  to  the  pretense  that  Prohibition 
it    was    the    detailed    evidence    against  cannot   be  enforced.     The   uniform  op- 
saloon-keepers,  provided  by  this  Society,  position  Avhich  they  encounter  from  all 
which    caused   the    Court  to   make   the  liquor-sellers    testifies    to     their     value, 
sweeping  reduction    in    the   number   of  While  the  limitations  under  which  they 
licenses.  Especially  deserving  of  mention,  oj^erate  are  clearly  recognized,  they  are 
also,  are  the  efforts  in  behalf  of  enforce-  regarded  as  allies  by  all  the  Prohibition 
ment  made  from  time  to  time  by  organi-  an^  other  temperance  organizations, 
zations  of  private  citizens   in   Brookl}^,  Since  the  main  purpose   of   Law  and 
Pittsburgh,  Cincinnati,  Bangor  (Me.)  and  Order  work  is  to  procure  evidence  of  un- 


Liawlessncss.] 


268 


La^vlessness. 


doubted  violations — evidence  that  will  be 
acceptable  to  the  Courts, — the  employment 
of  detectives  is  indispensable.  The  liquor- 
dealers,  who  have  no  scruples  against 
assassinating,  maiming,  "slugging"  and 
mobbing  their  opponents,  and  who  are 
constantly  violating  every  restrictive  pro- 
vision of  liquor  and  other  laws,  profess  a 
virtuous  detestation  for  the  temperance 
'"  spies."  Henry  H.  Faxon,  who  has  had 
wide  experience  in  all  departments  of 
temperance  effort,  and  whose  labors  in 
Quincy,  Mass.  (frequently  as  a  volunteer 
constable!  have  exterminated  the  dram- 
shops in  that  city,  makes  the  following 
comment  on  the  moral  bearings  of  detec- 
tive service : 

''I  trust  there  is  not  a  person  here  who  is  so 
simple  as  to  believe  that  licensed  liquor-sellers 
will  aid  in  enforcing  the  law  against  unlicensed 
dealers.  They  well  know  that  such  action  would 
jeopardize  their  own  interests,  for  the  reason 
that  they  themselves  violate  the  provisions  of 
their  licenses  times  without  number.  A  man 
who  pays  §1,000  for  a  license  to  sell  whiskey  in 
this  enlightened  age  realizes  that  in  order  to 
succeed  financially  he  must  evade  many  strin- 
gent features  of  the  existing  law. 

"  I  desire  to  impress  upon  my  hearers  the  fact 
that  it  is  impossible  to  enfoi-ce  the  law  without 
the  aid  of  detectives.  They  are  a  terror  to  law- 
breakers, whether  of  the  rumselling  or  any  other 
fraternity.  Liquor- dealers  are  untiring  in  their 
efforts  to  impress  upon  the  Courts  and  the  peo- 
ple in  general  the  unreliability  of  '  spotter  evi- 
dence,' as  they  are  pleased  to  term  it.  How 
truly  angelic  these  men  have  appeared  when 
they  were  condenming  me  for  employing  parties 
to  purchase  liquors,  even  by  the  bottle,  for  the 
purpose  of  obtaining  evidence  whereby  I  might 
convict  them!  No  doubt  there  are  dishonest 
detectives;  but,  so  far  as  my  own  experience 
goes,  the  greatest  rascal  among  them  is  more 
truthful  than  any  rumseller.  Criminal  lawyers 
who  defend  liquor-dealers  for  a  business,  will 
tell  a  dozen  lies  where  a  detective  will  tell  one, 
and  will  use  their  slanderous  tongues  in  insulting 
every  witness  who,  for  the  sake  of  promoting 
Law  and  Order,  has  the  courage  to  take  the  stand 
against  their  clients." ' 

The  various  societies  are  represented 
nationally  by  the  Citizens'  Law  and 
Order  League  of  the  United  States 
(Charles  C."  Bonney  of  Chicago,  Presi- 
dent, and  L.  Edwin  Dudley  of  Boston, 
Secretary),  which  holds  its  meetings  on 
Washington's  Birthday  of  each  year. 

Lawlessness. — The  liquor  traffic  is 
emphatically  a  law-defying  traffic.  Its 
advocates  constantly  tell  us  in  regard  to 

1  From  a  speech  at  a  meeting  of  the  Citizens'  Law  and 
Order  League  of  Massachusetts,  May  1,  1889. 


any  law  which  opposes  its  interests, 
"  You  cannot  enforce  it."  Li  other 
words,  the  liquor  traffic  will  violate  and 
defy  any  law  which  it  does  not  like  to 
obey.  This  is  the  claim  of  the  dealers 
and  their  friends.  It  is  also  their  con- 
stant practice,  as  it  has  been  since  the 
foundation  of  our  Government.  As  early 
as  1794,  the  western  counties  of  Pennsyl- 
vania, with  some  adherents  from  Ohio 
and  Virginia,  rose  in  arms  to  resist  the 
Excise  tax  on  whiskey  of  9  to  25  cents 
a  gallon  according  to  the  strength  of 
the  liquor.  The  insurgents  burned  the 
house  of  the  Inspector,  John  Neville,  and 
forced  him  and  the  United  States  Marshal 
to  flee  for  their  lives  down  the  Ohio  Kiv- 
er  in  an  open  boat.  They  then  assembled 
about  16,000  men  in  arms,  and  compelled 
President  Washington  to  call  out  the 
militia  to  the  number  of  15,000  against 
them.  It  is  noteworthy  that  the  very  first 
armed  resistance  to  the  authority  of  the 
United  States  was  in  behalf  of  whiskey, 
and  that  George  Washington  had  to  force 
the  liquor  traffic  to  obey  the  law  at  the 
point  of  the  bayonet.  It  is  noticeable, 
too,  that  the  traffic  displayed  this  spirit 
before  there  was  any  thought  of  Prohibi- 
bition — almost  a  century  ago. 

The  prevalent  lawless  attitude  of  the 
rum  power  can  be  most  instruc- 
tively considered  from  a  few  striking  in- 
stances. 

In  the  city  of  Cincinnati  for  about 
20  years  the  sale  of  liquor  on  Sunday 
was  practically  unmolested,  State  laws 
to  the  contrary  notwithstanding.  The 
Scott  law  and  afterwards  (in  1885)  the 
Dow  law  made  concessions  to  the  Cincin- 
nati rumsellers  by  authorizing  City  Coun- 
cils to  permit  liquor-selling  on  Sunday. 
The  City  Council  of  Cincinnati  promptly 
passed  a  permissive  ordinance.  But  so 
great  was  the  clamor  of  temperance  men 
that  in  1888  the  Owen  Sunday  law  was 
enacted,  completely  prohibiting  Sunday- 
selling  and  making  it  a  criminal  offense 
even  to  keep  open  "  the  place "  where 
liquors  were  sold  on  other  days.  Rev. 
John  Pearson,  in  Our  Day  for  September, 
1889,  graphically  tells  what  followed. 
He  says : 

"  With  a  great  show  of  virtue  Mr.  Amor 
Smith,  then  Mayor,  ordered  all  arrested  who 
were  found  violating  the  law.  The  Saloon- 
Keepers'  Asso;iation  decreed  that  all  should 
keep  open,  and  that  all  expenses  of  prosecution 


Liawlessness.] 


269 


[Lavrlessuess. 


should  be  paid  out  of  their  common  treasury^ 
la  each  case  a  juiy  was  demanded.  The  Police 
Court  Jury  provides  that  each  of  the  60  Council- 
men  shall  select  50  names  to  be  put  into  a  wheel, 
and  from  it  the  venire  of  jurors  shall  be  drawn. 
Half  a  dozen  of  the  cleanest  men  in  Council  did 
not  furnish  their  quotas  of  names,  but  every 
saloon-keeper  and  his  helper  has  supplied  his, 
consequently  as  high  as  48  per  cent,  of  the 
names  on  those  lists  have  been  found  to  be 
saloon-keepers  or  barroom  dependents  !  The 
remainder  are  generally  those  who  it  is  certain 
will  not  convict.  Consequently  it  is  next  to  im- 
possible to  secure  a  conviction.  Once  lastj'ear, 
when  the  evidence  for  the  State  was  as  clear  as 
the  noon,  and  the  defense  offered  none,  the  jury 
returned  a  verdict  of  '  Not  Guilty '  without 
leaving  their  seats!  When  the  Mayor  had  piled 
up  nearly  2  000  cases  in  the  Police  Court  he  an- 
nounced that  he  would  make  no  further  attempt 
to  enforce  the  law,  as  he  was  '  satisfied  the  peo- 
ple do  not  want  it  enforced.'  The  city  was 
under  the  heel  of  the  saloon.  The  worst  of  all 
was  that  a  veritable  pusillanimousness  had  taken 
possessionof  that  part  of  the  people  that  really 
wanted  the  law  enforced.  They  would  assure 
you  in  a  hopeless  way  that  they  fully  agreed 
the  j^aloons  should  be  closed  up,  '  but  you  can- 
not do  anything,  and  what  is  the  use  of  trying 
it  ?  You  will  either  show  your  weakness  or 
make  the  rumsellers  mad  You  had  better  let 
things  alone.'  This  was  so  nearly  universal  as 
to  threaten  paralysis  of  any  effort  to  throw  off 
the  yoke." 

Then  the  Evangelical  Ministers'  Meet- 
ing took  up  the  question,  A  committee 
of  500  was  formed,  which  presented  at 
the  municipal  election  of  April,  1889,  a 
mixed  ticket  made  up  of  candidates  of  all 
political  parties  on  tlie  simple  issue  of 
Sunday-closing,  and  elected  their  whole 
ticket  except  the  Mayor.  As  the  tide  of 
jmblic  sentiment  rose,  the  police  officers 
were  ordered  to  arrest  all  violators.  The 
saloon-keepers  then  resolved  to  make  "the 
muckers  take  their  own  medicine,"  and 
insisted  that  the  Mayor  should  enforce 
the  Sunday  law  against  "  common  labor." 
Accordingly  he  "  promptly  issued  his 
proclamation  ordering  all  confectioneries, 
cigar  and  tobacco-stores,  drug-stores  ex- 
cept for  medicine,  barber-shops,  groceries, 
meat-stores,  etc.,  closed.  This  fearful 
stroke  of  retaliation  proved  to  be  in  the 
main  exceedingly  popular.  The  barbers, 
the  drug-store  proprietors  and  nearly  all 
the  others  were  well  pleased.  For  two 
weeks  the  city  had  real  Sabbaths,  show- 
ing above  everything  else  that  what  nearly 
all  pronounced  impossible  can  be  done — 
viz.,  the  law  can  be  enforced." 

In  tliis  is  strikingly  noticeable  the 
difference  between  the  liquor  traffic  and 
all     other     businesses.       The     saloon- 


keepers themselves  procured  an  object- 
lesson  to  show  they  had  stood  alone  in 
defiance  of  a  law  to  wliich  all  other 
tradesmen  quietly  yielded.  Threatening 
letters  with  skull  and  cross-bones  were 
sent  to  persons  prominent  in  promoting 
enforcement. 

"  On  Sunday.  July  20,  1889,  was  reached  the 
period  of  bloodshed.  A  member  of  the  Law 
and  Order  League  was  set  upon  and  brutally 
beaten— rescued  only  at  the  muzzle  of  a  police- 
man's revolver,  while  that  policeman  himself 
was  stunned  with  a  blow  from  a  loaded  cane. 
At  another  time  in  the  same  beer-hall  a  quiet 
citizen,  because  he  called  for  lemonade,  was 
seized  and  beaten  on  suspicion  that  he  was  a 
Law  and  Order  .spy  Later  in  the  evening,  in 
the  same  den,  after  its  proprietor  had  been  ar- 
rested and  released  on  a  810,000  bond, 
another  policeman  going  to  arrest  a  bartender 
was  also  brutally  assaulted,  while  the  most 
villainous  outcries  rent  the  air.  A  meeting  of 
saloon-keepers  was  held  in  Turner  Hall  on  the 
ensuing  Thursday  afternoon,  attended  by  five  or 
six  hundred,  who  adopted  the  following  resolu- 
tions 

" '  Whereas,  The  well-known  Owen  law,  through  which 
corruption  and  hypocrisy  can  sneak  in  everywhere,  threat- 
ens to  become  established  in  Cincinnati;  and, 

"  •  ^y/le7•eas,  No  concerted  action  has  been  taken  to  re- 
sent the  said  law,  which  is  an  insult  to  common  sense; 
therefore,  be  it 

"  'Resolved,  That  we,the  saloon  keepers  here  assembled, 
openly  oppose  this  law,  which  is  unpopular  and  damaging 
to  our  business;  and  therefore  we  have  decided  to  keep 
our  places  of  business  quietly  open  on  next  Sunday,  and  on 
all  succeeding  Sundays,  conducting  our  business  as  on  any 
other  day,  and  avoiding  all  disturbances. 

"  '  Resolved,  That  we  condemn  the  side  and  back-door 
business  as  cornipting  in  it ;  tendency,  and  we  will  make  it 
our  special  duty  to  oppose  it  by  all  legal  means. 

'■'Resolved,  That  each  saloon-keeper  who  signs  the 
resolutions  of  this  meeting  shall  have  our  solid  protection 
in  every  case  of  prosecution,  and  the  expenses  thereof 
shall  be  defrayed  by  our  own  means.'  " 

About  300  saloon-keepers  pledged  them- 
selves in  writing  to  keep  open  on  the 
following  Sunday.  It  is  safe  to  say  that 
no  such  compact  was  ever  formed  by  the 
devotees  of  any  other  business  in  the 
United  States.  The  result  of  that  con- 
spiracy of  defiance  is  told  as  follows : 

"  We  are  glad  to  report  that  Mayor  Mosby 
took  his  .stand  for  law  and  order,  and  Col 
Deitsch  manifested  his  ability  to  handle  the 
lawless  element,  and  it  is  due  to  the  police  force 
of  this  city  to  say  that  they  did  their  duty  fear 
lessly  and  promptly,  with  one  exception,  who 
was  suspended  on  the  spot  by  Lieutenant  Scahill. 
Several  officers  were  injured  in  making  arrests, 
but  ever}'  man  was  landed  in  the  station-house, 
although  many  fights  occurred  and  two  incipi- 
ent riots  were  quelled  by  the  timely  arrival  of 
help.  After  one  of  these,  an  immense  crowd, 
who  did  not  appreciate  the  manner  in  which 
they  had  been  handled  by  the  police,  assembled 
at  the  Bremen  Station,  the  ringleaders  urging 
the  crowd  to  assault  the  station-house.  Suddenly 
the  doors  flew  open  and  a  large  body  of  police, 
under  Captain  Hadley  and  Lieutenants  Rakel 
and  Langdon,  filed  out  and  quickly  formed  and 


La-wlessness.] 


270 


•"Lawlessness. 


drove  the  mob  from  the  street.     At  the  Oliver 

Street  Station  the  officers  found  it  necessary  to 
play  upon  the  crowd  with  the  fire-hose  to  clear 
the  street.  Tlie  Police  Board  has  stood  nobly 
by  the  law.  When  on  the  late  occasion  of  the 
Turnfest  the  Chief  of  Police  issued,  by  com- 
mand of  the  Mayor,  an  order  noi  to  arrest 
violators  of  the  law,  the  Police  Commissioners, 
on  complaint  of  a  Law  and  Order  man,  tried  the 
Cliief  for  malfeasance  and  misfeasance  in  office 
and  found  him  guilty.  Last  week  they  revoked 
the  appointment  of  the  private  policeman  in  the 
notorious  beer-garden  alluded  to  above,  and 
ordered  the  most  determined  prosecution  of  the 
assailants." 

Many  have  supposed  that  the  persistent 
violation  of  law  by  the  liquor  traffic  is  due 
to  the  excessive  severity  of  Prohibition, 
which,  they  affirm,  "public  sentiment 
does  not  sustain."  These  persons  declare 
that  High  License  is  better  than  Pro- 
hibition "  because  it  can  be  enforced, 
while  Prohibition  cannot."  But  the  fact 
is  that  the  restrictive  provisions  of  High 
License  laws  are  not  enforced.  The  fol- 
lowing statements  were  given  by  the 
Agent  of  the  Law  and  Order  League  of 
Pittsburgh  in  the  Voice  oi  Jan.  16,  1890: 

"  There  are  just  93  licensed  saloons  in  Pitts- 
burgli,  paying  the  §500  fee  under  the  Brooks 
High  License  law,  but  it  is  not  an  easy  matter 
to  give  the  exact  number  of  '  speak-easies '  or 
unlicensed  saloons  in  operation.  The  police 
authorities  of  the  city  claim  that  they  have  a 
list  of  over  700  '  speak  easies  '  with  the  locations 
and  testimony  to  convict,  but,  dog-in-the-manger 
like,  they  will  neither  prosecute  themselves  nor 
furnish  the  information  to  any  one  who  will. 
These  'speakeasies  '  flourish  under  the  guise  of 
'boarding.'  'rooms  to  let,'  grocery  stores, and  in 
cellars,  garrets  and  stables,  and  are  run  very 
secretly.  We  are  in  a  most  deplorable  state. 
Our  county  detective  announces  annually  or 
oftener  that  he  is  just  getting  ready  to  wipe  out 
the  '  speak-easies,'  but  we  never  hear  of  any 
results.  Our  police  are  the  creatures  of  a  ring 
whose  political  power  is  perpetuated  by  the 
liquor  element,  and,  as  a  consequence,  when  it 
does  strike  a  blow  at  the  unlicensed  liquor- 
dealer  it  is  generally  directed  against  a  man  who 
has  no  political  pull,  or  a  poor  woman." 

The  Pawtucket  (P.  L)  Gazette  and 
Cflironicle,  a  strong  Kepublican  daily 
paper,  for  Oct.  18,  1889,  said: 

"  The  citizens  of  Rhode  Island  cannot  have 
forgotten  the  rather  profuse  assurances  that 
were  given  them  only  a  few  months  ago,  that 
when  the  demon  of  Prohibition  should  have 
been  exorcised  from  the  body  politic,  once  more 
would  the  State  of  Rhode  island  rejoice  in  a 
government  by  law.  Nor  will  they  readily  for- 
get with  what  unction  the  advocates  of  a  repeal 
of  Prohibition  deplored  the  demoralizing  influ 
enoes  of  a  law  that  was  at  variance  with  public 
opinion    and,  therefore,  incapable  of  enforce- 


ment, thereby  destroying  popular  respect  for  all 
law.  If  we  mistake  not,  the  proposed  conditions 
of  righteousness  have  been  fulfilled,  and  law  has 
been  made  in  entire  harmony  witli  that  class  of 
public  opinion  represented  in  the  demand  for 
repeal  of  Prohibition.  Who  says  that  law  is 
either  enforced  or  respected  to-day  in  either 
Pawtucket  or  Providence  ?  Is  liquor  being  sold 
only  according  to  law  in  either  city?  How 
many  law-breaking  liquor-sellers  have  been  ar- 
rested ?  There  are  laws  and  ordinances  against 
drunkenness,  and  it  is  the  sworn  duty  of  officials 
to  enforce  these  laws  and  ordinance.-'.  Is  one 
drunken  man  arrested  out  of  every  ten  that  reel 
by  our  policemen  ?  Will  somebody  tell  us  the 
conditions  under  which  law  may  be  permitted 
to  be  enforced  ?   Or  is  it  best  to  annul  all  law  ?" 

Similar  testimonies  come  from  Chicago, 
St  Louis,  Kansas  City  and  Omaha.  No- 
where are  the  restrictive  provisions  of 
High  License  laws  obeyed.  We  have  laws 
against  selling  liquor  on  Sunday,  yet 
there  is  no  day  in  the  week  when  there 
are  so  many  men  intoxicated ;  laws  against 
selling  to  minors,  yet  boys  are  continually 
made  drunk,  and  many  before  they  are 
21  become  confirmed  drunkards;  laws 
against  selling  to  men  in  the  habit  of  get- 
ting intoxicated,  vet  the  habitual  drunk- 
ard  is  constantly  made  drunk  again ;  laws 
against  selling  within  the  neighborhood  of 
an  agricultural  fair,  yet  the  saloons  do  a 
most  profitable  business  in  fair  time.  The 
saloon-keepers,  as  a  class,  are  known  to 
be  law-breaking  and  law-defying.  Nor  is 
this  statement  to  be  limited  to  the  retail 
dealers.  In  1874-6  the  rich  distillers 
of  this  country  proved  themselves  de- 
frauders  of  the  revenue  on  a  gigantic 
scale;  and  to-day  the  Uniteil  States  Gov- 
ernment keeps  its  agents  in  every  brew- 
ery and  distillery  to  watch  the  whole  pro- 
cess of  production  as  a  cat  watches  a 
mouse.  Criminality  sticks  to  every  step 
of  the  inhuman  traffic.  The  effect  of  the 
business  upon  the  general  administration 
of  criminal  law  has  been  most  perniciotts. 
The  shifts  and  evasions  adopted  to  clear 
the  saloon-keeper  have  been  found  ample 
to  clear  other  criminals.  Whenever  we 
take  pains  to  inquire  whence  his  crimes 
originated,  we  trace  the  Anarchist  straight 
back  to  the  saloon.  The  Cleveland  Leader 
says: 

"  The  saloon  ployed  a  very  disreputable  role  in 
the  Chicago  riots.  Reports  say  that '  the  men  who 
had  money  spent  it  in  getting  drinks  for  them- 
selves and  friends,  and  soon  they  were  fighting 
drunk.'  The  Anarchists  went  forth  from 
saloons  to  make  their  incendiary  harangues  and 
they  slunk  away  into    saloons  when  charged 


Lawlessness.] 


271 


[Lawlessness. 


on  by  the  police.  August  Spies  and  Michael 
Schwab  were  arrested  in  a  room  over  a  saloon 
where  they  print  their  Anarchist  paper,  and  in 
the  same  room  were  found  the  forms  of  type 
from  which  incendiary  hand-bills  were  printed. 
■'  The  Milwaukee  riots  were  also  fomented  by 
Anarchists,  who  were  aided  in  no  slight  degree 
by  the  saloons.  Large  numbers  of  the  rioters 
were  striiiing  employees  of  breweries ;  and  the 
objective  point  of  the  mob  at  each  of  its  wild 
demonstrations  was  either  a  brewery  or  one  of 
the  immense  beer-gardens  of  the  city" 

It  is  the  same  in  New  York.  The  chief 
Anarchist,  Herr  Most,  was  arrested  in  a 
saloon,  and  the  moment  he  obtained  bail 
was  "  dodging  in  and  out  of  saloons  all 
day,"  meeting  and  attempting  to  re- 
organize his  followers. 

The  early  advocates  of  High  License 
supposed — and  the  supposition  seemed  a 
reasonable  one — that  the  licensed  saloon- 
keepers would  be  practically  a  police  force 
to  carry  out  the  law  agai?ist  any  dealers 
who  might  sell  without  license.  But  that 
hope  utterly  failed.  The  explanation  is, 
that  the  licensed  saloon-keepers,  by  Sun- 
day-selling, selling  to  minors  and  inebri- 
ates, etc.,  are  themselves  violators  of  law, 
and  dare  not  invoke  the  law  against  un- 
licensed dealers,  on  the  principle  that 
"those  who  live  in  glass  houses  should 
not  throw  stones." 

These  are  remarkable  facts.  From  the 
foundation  of  the  Government  to  the 
present  time  the  liquor  traffic  stands  out 
as  the  great  law-defying  "industry,"  not 
against  Prohibition,  but  against  any  laws 
which  restrict  its  profits  or  privileges. 
The  first  and  most  natural  resort  of  the 
liquor  traffic  is  deliberate  violation  of  law 
carried  to  any  extent  of  defiance  or  vi- 
olence. If  there  were  no  other  reason  for 
Prohibition  this  would  be  enough,  that  it 
is  not  safe  to  tolerate  within  our  civili- 
zation a  business  which  holds  itself  so 
haughtily,  composed  of  500,000  men 
closely  organized,  wielding  untold  mil- 
lions of  capital,  manipulating  all  the 
vilest  elements  of  the  populace,  setting 
aside  at  its  pleasure  the  laws  of  State  or 
nation,  and  exhibiting  to  all  the  danger- 
ous classes  of  the  community  one  great 
example  of  defiant,  triumjihant  and  pros- 
perous lawlessness.  To  allow  this  is  to 
legalize  anarchv. 

The  law-defying  traffic  can  be  sup- 
pressed. While  the  liquor  traffic  differs 
from  all  other  lines  of  business  in  a  set- 
tled.disposition  to   evade   and  defy  the 


law,  it  does  not  differ  from  others  in  the 
necessity  of  submission  to  law  in  the 
hands  of  resolute  officials.  This  has  been 
found  true  from  Washington's  day  to 
our  own.  The  Whiskey  Insurrection  was 
suppressed,  the  distillers  conceding  the 
Government's  right  of  taxation,  which 
they  have  never  since  challenged,  al- 
though the  Government  tax  is  now  more 
than  four  times  the  original  cost  of  the 
product. 

The  attempt  was  at  one  time  made  to 
resist  by  force  the  execution  of  tlie  Maine 
law.  Gen,  Neal  Dow,  then  Mayor  of 
Portland,  tells  the  story  as  follows : 

*'  The  rum  press  had  for  many  days  been  fir- 
ing up  the  brains  of  the  advocates  of  •  personal 
liberty '  by  ferocious  denunciations  of  the 
Maine  law,  which  undertook  to  prescribe 
'  what  men  should  or  should  not  eat  and  drink.' 
The  wrath  of  these  people  culminated  whn 
the  Board  of  Aldermen,  in  preparation  for  an 
'  Agency  '  for  the  sale  of  liquors  according  to 
law,  for  medicinal  and  mechanical  purposes 
and  the  arts,  ordered  a  quantity  of  them  from 
New  York,  which  were  deposited  in  tha  cellar 
of  the  old  City  Hall  where  the  Agency  was  to 
be  located.  The  cry  among  the  personal  lib- 
erty men  was.  '  If  we  can't  sell  liquor  nobody 
shall!'  So  they  assembled  at  night  in  great 
numbers,  with  the  purpose  of  destroying  the 
Agency  liquors  and  burning  the  City  Hall  and 
also  the  residences  of  obnoxious  temperance 
men.  The  city  authorities  had  but  brief  notice 
of  the  intended  outbreak;  consequently  it  re- 
quired some  time  to  summon  the  military  to  the 
spot.  The  police  force  did  its  best,  in  the 
meantime,  to  make  head  against  the  howling 
mob.  There  had  been  many  mobs  iu  Portland 
in  the  old  rum  times,  no  one  of  which  had  evt  r 
been  successfully  resisted,  or  any  member  of  it 
punished.  So  these  misguided  patriots  sup- 
posed that  they  also  could  accomplish  their  pur- 
pose, which  was  to  break  down  the  Maine  law. 
Some  of  the  most  prominent  men  in  Portland 
were  behind  this  mob,  instigating  it  to  violence 
and  outrage.  The  Mayor,  after  long  and  vainly 
waiting  for  the  fury  of  the  mob  to  subside,  as- 
sured them  that  he  would  fire  upon  them,  but 
they  did  not  believe  it.  Twice  he  ordered  the 
military  to  fire,  and  twice,  at  the  aim,  he  or- 
dered '  Recover  arms.'  This  seemed  to  justify 
the  notion  of  the  mob  that  there  would  be  no 
firing.  The  third  time  there  was  no  order  to 
recover  arms,  and  the  rattle  of  the  musketry 
was  fearful.  The  military,  not  being  accus- 
tomed to  such  work,  fired  just  over  the  heads 
of  the  mob,  so  that  only  one  man  was  killed  and 
a  few  were  wounded — it  was  never  known  how 
many,  because  the  instigators  of  the  tumult 
feared  to  be  known  as  being  mixed  up  in  it.  It 
was  impossible  to  foresee  what  might  have  been 
the  result  if  this  savage  mob,  fired  with  strong 
drink,  had  succeeded  in  breaking  down  mu- 
nicipal authority,  thus  leaving  the  city  at  its 
mercy.    The  mob  was  summarily  suppressed. 


Legal  Suasion]. 


272 


[Legislation. 


and  the  mob  spirit  in  Portland  was  completely 
truslied  out.  This  manner  of  dealing  with  the 
rebellion  was  unanimously  approved  by  all  the 
better  part  of  the  people." 

In  every  instance  of  decided  conflict 
the  liquor  tratHc  has  yielded  to  official 
determination.  The  conclusion  is  inevit- 
able that  any  law  needed  to  protect  the 
people  against  this  desolating  traffic  can 
be  enfrrced,  if  honest  and  efficient  execu- 
tive officers  are  elected  by  the  people. 

J.  C.  Feknald. 

Legal  Suasion  is  a  term  which  prop- 
erly designates  the  permanent  influence 
of  penal  law  upon  the  morals  of  society. 
It  is  really  a  phase  of  moral  suasion,  but 
the  latter  term  lias  been  limited  to  a  class 
of  moral  efforts  to  lessen  evil  without  the 
assistance  of  force.  Hence  arises  the 
necessary  use  of  this  new  and  distinctive 
expression — Legal  Snasion.  To  abate  a 
bawdy-house  by  the  voluntary  consent  of 
its  inmates  is  moral  suasion;  to  abate  it 
by  police  force  as  a  nuisance  is  legal 
suasion,  provided  the  result  be  permanent 
moral  improvement. 

All  jurists  agree  that  the  ulterior  ob- 
ject of  criminal  law  is  not  the  punish- 
ment of  the  offender  but  the  prevention 
of  the  offense.  The  prevailing  motive  of 
crime  being  that  of  gain,  the  pnnishment 
is  inflicted  to  make  the  offense  unprofit- 
able. Freed  from  self-interest,  the  hu- 
man mind  is  better  able  to  judge  between 
right  and  wrong  and  thus  the  law  tends 
to  a  permanent  moral  result. 

Again,  the  standard  of  right  with  many 
people  is  good  citizenship,  and  a  general 
tendency  exists  to  obey  law  simply  be- 
cause it  is  law.  Morals  are  thus  affected 
tlirough  the  operation  of  what  may  be 
termed  an  artificial  conscience.  In  the 
early  history  of  tins  country,  for  instance, 
lotteries  were  a  popular  and  legal  method 
of  raising  funds  for  the  founding  of  col- 
leges and  hospitals  and  the  building  of 
roads  and  bridges.  At  tlie  present  day 
it  would  be  difficult  to  find  aiiy  consider- 
able number  of  people,  outside  of  Louis- 
iana and  Kentucky,  favorable  to  the 
existence  of  the  lottery  system.  This 
cliange  of  sentiment  is  not  due  to  the 
fact  that  the  inhabitants  of  the  excepted 
States  are  naturally  less  moral  than  their 
neighbors,  but  to  the  educative  effect  of 
prohibitive  laws  and  Constitutional  pro- 


visions in  the  States  where  the  sentiment 
against  lotteries  prevails. 

Another  instance  of  legal  suasion  is 
found  in  the  abhorrence  with  which  hu- 
man slavery  is  now  regarded;  yet  for- 
merly so  strong  was  the  moral  influence 
of  the  Christian  church  in  its  favor  that 
in  1859  a  Church  Anti-Slavery  Society 
was  instituted  "  for  the  purpose  of  con- 
vincing American  churches  and  ministers 
that  slavery  was  a  sin  and  inducing  them 
to  take  the  lead  in  the  work  of  its  aboli- 
tion." Such  a  changed  tone  of  opinion 
in  this  short  period  can  logically  be  ac- 
counted for  on  no  other  basis  than  that 
of  the  Emancipation  Proclamation  and 
the  succeeding  13th  and  14th  Amend- 
ments to  the  United  States  Constitution. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  a  similar 
moral  effect  is  produced  by  laws  prohibit- 
ing the  liquor  traffic.  It  is  hardly  con- 
ceivable that  the  State  of  Maine  in  the 
year  1S84  would  have  put  Prohibition 
into  her  Constitution  by  a  majority  vote 
of  three  to  one,  unless  for  30  years  the 
people  of  that  State  had  experienced  the 
practical  advantages  of  Prohibitory  legis- 
lation. 

It  is  true  that  unless  careful  discrimina- 
tion be  exercised  in  each  case,  there  is 
great  danger  of  misconceiving  the  pre- 
cise educative  effect  of  law.  For  a  law 
may  be  so  loosely  drawn  and  the  attempt 
at  its  enforcement  so  farcical  as  to  im- 
pede the  real  moral  working  of  the  law 
itself.  To  vhis  difficulty,  doubtless,  is 
due  the  sudden  revulsion  of  opinion 
which  occasionally  occurs  where  a  small 
but  energetic  body  of  corrupt  politicians 
bends  its  energies  to  cast  a  well-inten- 
tioned law  into  disrepute. 

Coleridge  A.  Hart. 

Legislation. — It  is  one  of  the  most 
interesting  facts  in  history  that  in  all 
English-speaking  nations,  colonies  and 
States  the  regulation  of  the  sale  of  liquor 
has  occupied  the  attention  of  Parliaments 
and  legislative  assemblies  almost  from 
the  beginning,  and  that  this  is  true  of 
none  of  the  other  countries  of  Christen- 
dom. One  of  the  things  contended  for 
bj?^  the  framers  of  the  Magna  Charta,  and 
conceded  by  that  instrument,  was  the 
right  to  have  it  decreed  that  all  measures 
for  wine  and  ale  should  be  of  uniform 
size.  Soon  followed  a  period  in  which 
the   prices   of  these   beverages   were  as 


Legislation.] 


273 


[Legislation. 


carefully  watched  and  adjusted  as  those 
of  bread,  for  in  those  days  it  was  within 
the  sphere  of  practical  political  economy 
for  the  Legislature  to  fix  the  prices  of 
labor  and  its  products,  leaving  nothing 
but  agricultural  products  to  competition, 
or  supply  and  demand.  During  the  first 
two  or  three  centuries  after  Magna 
Charta,  the  efforts  toward  restricting 
the  traffic  in  the  liquors  then  in  vogue 
(ale  and  wine)  were  only  partial  and  ten- 
tative. Indeed,  the  Judges  gravely  de- 
cided that  at  common  law  it  was  lawful 
for  any  one  to  keep  an  alehouse  (the 
King  V.  Joyes,  3  Show.,  468),  unless  it 
were  kept  in  a  disorderly  manner  (Stevens 
V.  Watson,  1  Salk.,  45).  By  the  act  of 
11  Henry  VII,  c.  3  (1494),  any  two  Jus- 
tices were  given  power  to  suppress  un- 
necessary alehouses. 

But  the  first  license  law  was  that  of 
5  &  6  Edward  VI,  c.  35  (1551-3).  It  re- 
quired that  none  should  keep  alehouses 
who  were  not  authorized  to  do  so  by  the 
Sessions  of  the  Peace  or  two  Justices, 
and  those  permitted  or  licensed  were  to 
give  bond  for  good  order  and  were  not  to 
allow  unlawful  gaming.  Any  person 
selling  without  license  was  to  be  fined  30 
shillings.  The  act  of  7  Edward  VI,  c.  5 
(155:]-4)  regulated  wines  separately, 
providing  that  none  should  sell  wines  ex- 
cepting in  cities  and  market  towns,  and 
then  only  in  restricted  numbers  and 
under  licenses  issued  by  the  Mayors  and 
Sessions  respectively ;  the  penalty  for  un- 
lawful selling  was  £5.  The  famous  Tip- 
pling acts  of  James  I  (1  James  I,  c.  9 
[1603-4]  )  applied  to  both  ale  and  wine- 
selling  and  fined  each  seller  10  shillings 
for  allowing 'townsmen  to  tipple;  while 
chapter  5  or  4  James  I  (160G-T)  pro- 
vided that  drunkenness  should  be  pun- 
ished by  a  fine  of  five  shillings  or  confine- 
ment for  six  hours  in  the  stocks.  An- 
other law  passed  in  the  reign  of  the  same 
king  (7  James  I,  c.  10  [1609-10] )  pro- 
vided that  any  alehouse-keeper  convicted 
of  violating  the  law  should  be  disqualified 
for  three  years  from  keeping  such  a  house. 
The  last  restrictive  act  of  this  series  was 
the  one  passed  in  1637  under  Charles  I 
(3  Charles  I,  c.  4),  by  which  was  estab- 
lished an  alternative  penalty  of  whipping 
for  the  first  offense  of  illegal  selling,  and 
for  the  second  offense  imprisonment  for 
one  month. 

The  vending  of  spirits  was  first  regu- 


lated in  1700  (13  and  13  William  III,  c. 
11),  a  Justice's  license  being  required  be- 
fore anybody  was  entitled  to  sell.  But 
distillers  were  permitted  to  retail  without 
license  provided  they  did  not  tolerate 
tippling  in  their  houses. 

English  legislation  includes  no  more 
celebrated  acts  than  those  designed  to  re- 
strain the  promiscuous  sale  of  geneva  or 
gin,  passed  in  the  reign  of  George  II. 
Soon  after  the  beginning  of  the  18th 
Century  the  evils  resulting  from  the  use 
of  distilled  spirits  in  England  became  in 
the  highest  degree  alarming.  Lecky,  in 
his  "England  in  the  18th  Century" 
(vol.  1,  p.  519),  speaking  of  the  universal 
demand  for  gin  at  that  time,  says  : 

"  Small  as  is  the  place  which  this  fnct  occu- 
pies in  English  hi-tory.  it  was  probably,  if  we 
consider  all  the  consequences  that  have  flowed 
from  it,  the  most  momentous  in  that  of  Ihe  18th 
Century — incomparably  more  so  than  any  event 
in  the  purely  political  or  military  annals  of  the 
country. " 

Among  the  most  famous  cartoons  of 
the  great  Hogarth,  portraying  the  man- 
ners, vices  and  follies  of  that  age,  are 
those  that  picture  the  evils  of  intemper- 
ance, particularly  mentionable  being  his 
shocking  "  Gin  Lane."  The  eminent 
writers  of  that  period  have  left  vivid 
descriptions  of  the  inordinate  drinking 
and  the  wretchedness  occasioned  by  it. 
The  following  is  a  striking  passage  from 
Smollet's  "  History  of  England  "  (vol.  3, 
chap.  7) : 

"  The  populace  of  London  were  sunk  into  the 
most  brutal  degeneracy  by  drinking  to  excess 
the  pernicious  spirit  called  gin,  which  was  sold 
so  ch-ap  that  the  lowest  class  of  the  people 
could  afford  to  indulge  themselves  in  one  con 
tinned  state  of  intoxication,  to  the  destruction 
of  all  morals,  industry  and  order.  Such  a 
shameful  degree  of  profligacy  prevailed  that 
the  retailers  of  this  poisonous  compound  set  up 
painted  boards  in  public  inviting  people  to  be 
drunk  for  the  small  expense  of  one  penny,  as- 
suring them  they  might  be  dead  drunk  for  two 
pence,  and  have  straw  for  nothing.  They  ac- 
cordingly provided  cellars  and  places  strev/cd 
with  straw,  to  whicli  they  conveyed  those 
wretches  who  were  overwhelmed  with  intoxica- 
tion. In  these  dismal  caverns  they  lay  until 
they  recovered  some  use  of  their  faculties  and 
then  they  had  recourse  to  the  same  mischievous 
potion ;  thus  consuming  their  health  and  ruin- 
ing their  families  in  hideous  receptacles  of  the 
most  filthy  vice,  resounding  with  riot,  execra- 
tion and  blasphemy.  Such  beastly  practices 
too  plainly  denoted  a  total  want  of  all  police 
and  civil  regulations,  and  would  have  reflected 
disgrace  upon  the  most  barbarous  community." 

The  first  of  the  Gin  laws  was  that  en- 


Legislation.] 


274 


[Legislation. 


acted  in  1729  (2  George  II,  c.  17),  and 
imposed  a  license  fee  of  £20  on  every 
seller  of  geneva.  It  Avas  repealed  in  1733 
by  the  act  of  G  George  II,  c.  17,  not  hav- 
ing served  the  purpose  of  checking  gin- 
drinking.  In  1736  (9  George  II,  c.  23) 
a  more  stringent  measure  was  adopted,  as 
follows : 

"Whereas,  Tlie  excessive  drinkina:  of  spirit- 
uous liquors  by  the  common  people  tends  not 
only  to  the  destruction  of  their  health  and  the 
debauching  of  their  morals  but  to  the  public 
ruin;   for  remedy  therof. 

"  Be  it  enacted,  thnt  from  Dec.  29  no  person 
shall  presume,  b^'  themselves  or  any  others  era- 
ployed  by  them,  to  sell  or  retail  any  brandy, 
rum.  arrack,  usquebaugh,  geneva,  aqua  viiaj, 
or  any  other  distilled  .spirituous  liquors,  mixed 
or  unmixeii  in  any  less  quantity  than  two  gal- 
lons, without  first  taking  out  a  liceu.sc  for  that 
purpose  within  ten  days  at  least  before  they  sell 
or  retail  the  same;  for  which  they  shall  pay 
down  £53,  to  be  renewed  ten  days  before  the 
year  expires,  paying  the  like  sum,  and  in  case 
of  neglect  to  forfeit  £100  ;  such  licenses  to  be 
taken  out  within  the  limits  of  the  penny-post 
at,  the  chief  office  of  Excise,  London,  and  at 
tlie  next  office  of  Excise  for  the  country.  And 
be  it  enacted  that,  for  all  such  spirituous 
liquors  as  any  retailers  shall  be  po.sse.ssed  of 
on  or  after  Sept.  29,  1736,  there  shall  be  paid  a 
duty  of  20s  per  gallon,  and  so  in  proportion 
for  a  greater  or  lesser  quantity,  above  all  other 
duties  charged  on  the  same." 

This  measure  was  strengthened  by  10 
'George  II,  c.  17,  §  9,  which  provided  that 
hawkers  of  liquor  not  able  to  pay  their 
fines  should  be  whipped;  and  prosecu- 
tions were  facilitated  by  another  law 
passed  in  1738  (11  George  II,  c.  26). 
The  act  of  1735  endured  for  only  eight 
years,  meanwhile  giving  rise  to  much  dis- 
cussion of  the  principles  lying  at  the 
foundation  of  restrictive  liquor  legisla- 
tion. The  elegant  Lord  Chesterfield's 
ever-memorable  plea  for  Prohibition  of 
vice  as  opposed  to  regulation,  belongs  to 
this  era.  _  (See  p.       .) 

The  Excise  duties,  which  had  been  in- 
creasing in  volume,  were  now  a  distinctive 
feature  of  the  Government  revenue. 
After  the  repeal  of  the  special  taxes  on 
spirituous  liquors  in  1743,  the  Excise 
duties  steadily  became  more  and  more 
important  from  the  revenue  point  of 
view,  and  were  relied  on  to  provide  a  large 
part  of  the  money  needed  in  the  wars 
upon  which  England  embarked.  Sj^irit- 
sellers  were  still  required,  however,  to 
take  out  magisterial  licenses,  as  ale  and 
wine-sellers  had  always  been  compelled  to 
do  and  are  now.     The  repealing  act  of 


1743  and  the  acts  of  1751  and  1783  con- 
solidated all  licenses  on  the  basis  of  ale- 
house licenses. 

In  the  present  century  the  tendency 
has  been  towards  an  increase  in  the  Ex- 
cise rates,  although  the  Beer  act  of  1830 
(discriminating  in  favor  of  beer,  sup- 
posedly in  the  interest  of  temperance) 
marks  a  departure  quite  as  interesting  as 
that  instituted  by  the  Gin  acts  of  a  hun- 
dred years  previously.  (See  Light  Liq- 
uors.) In  the  last  decade  there  have 
been  some  ind-ications  of  a  disposition  to 
give  a  more  radical  turn  to  legislation 
and  grant  Local  Option,  and  there  seems 
to  be  a  growing  realization  that  the  future 
policy  of  England  in  reference  to  the 
drink  traffic  will  be  gradually  adapted  to 
the  demands  of  temperance  agitators. 
This  tendency  is  shown  by  the  two  crush- 
ing defeats  of  the  liquor-sellers'  efforts 
for  compensation  in  the  event  of  the  ex- 
tinguishment of  licenses,  and  in  f  reqttent 
significant  utterances  from  British  states- 
men, notably  the  very  recent  remark  by 
Mr.  Gladstone  that  it  would  be  wrong  to 
do  anvthinsf  that  would  "throw  back  the 
cause  whose  progress  we  have  observed 
and  registered  from  day  to  day,  and  in  the 
great  future  triumph  of  which  we  have 
undoubting  confidence."     (See  pp.  95-6.) 

In  the  English  colonies  in  America, 
the  question  of  license  was  more  or  less 
prominent  from  the  first,  as  will  be  seen 
by  reference  to  the  dates  of  the  early 
laws  enumerated  under  the  names  of 
States  that  were  formerly  colonies.  These 
colonial  acts  were  expressed  in  strong 
language,  c^oied  trom  the-  English 
statutes  mostly ;  but  nothing  beside  reg- 
ulation by  license  was  attempted  (al- 
though there  were  fugitive  discrimi- 
nations against  distilled  spirits,  and  the 
sale  of  liquor  to  Indians  was  prohibited 
ill  a  number  of  cases).  License  fees  and 
penalties  for  violations  were  low.  It  was 
attempted  to  confine  liquor-selling  to 
those  who  kept  hotels  and  taverns  and 
actually  accommodated  the  public. 

Until  1830  there  Avas  no  perceptible 
change  in  the  character  of  the  enact- 
ments; but  before  the  end  of  the  decade 
beginning  with  that  year,  Ohio,  Ten- 
nessee and  Mississippi  had  passed  laws 
prohibiting  the  retail  selling  of  liquors  by 
refusing  license  therefor.  In  both  Mis- 
sissippi and  Tennessee  these  measures 
were  very  short-lived. 


Legislation.] 


o~rc 


[Legislation, 


Maine  enacted  a  law  prohibiting  the 
sale  of  liquor  in  1846,  and  in  1851  the 
Maine  la^v  prohibiting  both  manufacture 
and  sale  was  adopted.  It  was  followed 
in  the  same  decade  by  similar  laws 
(nearl}'  all  of  them  short-lived)  in  many 
states. 

The  development  of  Southern  Local 
Option  had  begun  before  the  war. 
During  .that  cataclysm  distillation  was 
prohibited  in  most  of'  the  States  of  the 
Confederacy  as  a  war  measure.  After 
peace  was  restored  the  Local  Option 
movement  advanced  rapidly  until  this 
policy  covered  most  of  that  section  and 
was  embodied  in  the  Constitutions  of 
Texas  and  Florida. 

Constitutional  Prohibition  and  High 
License  are  both  of  very  recent  origin, 
and  the  regulations  peculiar  to  these 
systems  may  be  best  studied  by  examining 
the  digests  of  laws  in  the  States  where 
they  prevail. 

Each  new  general  act  relating  to  the 
drink  traffic  is  more  extended  than  former 
ones ;  and  in  many  cases  anything  like  a 
complete  analysis  of  State  laws  consec- 
utively is  almost  out  of  the  question.  In 
the  ensuing  digests,  the  acts  of  the  sev- 
eral States  and  Territories  are  brought 
down  to  the  begining  of  1890.  Only  ac- 
tual legislation  is  considered  :  it  is  impos- 
sible to  notice  the  numerous  bills  (al- 
though some  of  them  are  highly  interest- 
ing) that  have  been  introduced  in  State 
Legislatures  from  time  to  time  but  have 
failed   to  pass  or  have  been  vetoed. 

The  subject  of  Federal  legislation  on 
the  liquor  question  deserves  special  treat- 
ment, and  is  therefore  notj touched  upon 
in  this  article,  except  in  the  cases  of  Ter- 
ritories for  which  separate  liquor  regu- 
lations have  been  provided  by  Federal 
authority.  (For  general  Federal  Legis- 
lation, see  United  States  Govern- 
ment AND  THE  Liquor  Traffic.) 

Since  the  liquor  laws  of  the  Dominion 
of  Canada  closely  resemble  those  of  many 
of  tlie  States,  they  may  profitably  be 
considered  in  this  connection.  But 
having  been  summarized  in-  the  article 
on    Canada,  they  are  not  repeated  here. 

The  manuscript  of  the  whole  of  this 
article  goes  to  the  printer  before  the  ses- 
sion laws  of  1890  are  obtainable.  There- 
fore the  law  as  it  existed  in  1889  is  given 
as  the  latest  law  in  each  case,  excepting 
North  Dakota. 


DIGESTS  OF  STATE  LAWS. 
Alabama. 

Earliest  Provisions. — The  act  of  Mississippi 
Territory,  of  March  4,  1803,  revised  iu  lb07. 
provided  that  every  person  who  should  be 
recommended  for  the  purpose,  to  the  County 
Court,  by  six  reputable  freeholders  of  the 
county,  might  be  licensed  to  keep  a  tavern 
on  payment  of  j20.  He  was  to  provide  tavern 
accommodations  to  travelers,  and  not  suffer 
gaming.  Anyone  presuming  to  keep  a  tip- 
pliug-iiouse  or  sell  liquor  without  a  license  for- 
feited $10,  and  for  subsequent  off enses  ?-'20.  But 
merchants  and  shopkeepers  were  not  prevented 
from  retailing  liquors,  in  any  quantity  above  a 
quart,  not  to  be  drunk  on  the  premises.  Selling 
to  or  entertaining  any  servant,  apprentice  or 
slave  without  permission  of  the  u:aster;  sell- 
ing to  soldiers  and  to  Indians,  and  selling  adul- 
terated liquor,  were  fined  as  above.  (Toul.  Dig ,, 
1823,  p.  727.)  Tavern-keepers  getting  drunk 
forfeited  their  licenses.  Any  one  else  getting 
drunk  was  by  an  act  of  1803  fined  $1.  (Id.,  p. 
218  )  An  art  in  1809  required  a  licensee  to 
take  oath  not  to  sell  to  a  slave  without  written 
consent  of  his  master.  (Id,  p.  730.)  License 
fees  were,  in  1814,  reduced  to  $10.  The  same 
year  owners  of  distilleries  were  authorized  to 
sell  their  product  in  quantities  of  not  less  than 
a  quart.  (.Id.,  p.  732.)  About  20  j^ears  later  the 
license  fee  was  again  made  $20.  and  the  free- 
holders were  required  to  live  within  five  miles 
of  the  petitioner  for  license.  (Laws,  1837,  No. 
47.) 

Other  Provisions  Before  the  War. — The  revenue 
a^t  taxe;l  licenses  to  retail  spirituous  or  ferment- 
ed liquors  $30.  ( Laws.  1842,  No.  1,  §  7. )  The 
law  relating  to  tavern  licenses  was  to  be  con- 
strued to  apply  to  cities,  towns,  or  villages  only. 
(Laws,  1845,  No.  10.)  Licen.se  for  retailing 
spirits  in  cities  was  placed  at  it^lOO;  in  towns  or 
villages  having  500  inhabitants  or  mt)re,  ^50; 
having  less,  $30.  and  in  the  couutrv,  $30.  ( Laws, 
1847,  No.  1,  S  98.)  Retailers  were  not  allowed 
to  retail  in  more  than  one  building  or  place 
under  the  same  liceLse.  (Id.,  i^  99.)  License  in 
cities  was  changed  to  i;75;  on  water-craft,  $60  : 
in  towns  or  villages  having  over  500  inhabitants, 
$37.50;  having  Tess,  4^25;  iu  the  country,  $15. 
(Laws,  1849  No.  1,  p.  8.)  .Judges  of  Probate 
might  at  regular  term  grant  licenses  to  retail  the 
same  as  County  Courts  then  did.  (Laws,  1849, 
No.  3,  S^  10  ) 

License  for  sales  of  liquor,  on  water-craft, 
was  required  to  be  in  the  name  of  the  captain, 
and  to  be  hung  up  in  a  conspicuous  place  in  the 
bar-room.  (Laws.  1857,  No.  273. )  Delivering 
liquor  to  slaves,  on  boats,  rendered  the  captain 
liable  to  indictment  and  fine  of  from  ?50  to  ^100. 
(Id..  No.  275,  t?  1. )  And  a  charge  that  such  cap- 
tain permitted  delivery  to  a  slave  shall  be  suffi- 
cient, and  proof  that  any  person  of  color,  not  con- 
nected with  the  vessel,  obtained  liquor  of  any 
person  connected  therewith,  or  was  seen  coming 
off  said  boat  with  liquor,  was  prima  facie  evi- 
dence of  the  guilt  of  the  accu.sed,  without  prov- 
ing the  name  of  the  slave  or  that  he  was  a 
slave.     (Id.,S2) 

Adulteration,  by  manufacturers  of  spirits, 
with  poisonous  or  unwholesome  substances,  was 


liegislation.] 


276 


[Legislation. 


prohibited  in  1857,  on  penalty  of  not  oyer  $500, 
or  imprisonment  one  year.  (Laws,  No.  274.) 
Four  1(  cal  acts  prohibiting  sale.s  of  liquor  within 
cerlaiu  distances  of  srhools  and  churches  were 
also  passed  in  1857.  Many  prohibitions  or 
Prolubitory  powers  had  previously  been  incor- 
porated in  charters.  By  the  act  of  1859,  No. 
79,  the  penalty  a.s;-ainst  adulteration  was  made 
from  $200  to  $500,  wi»h  imprisonment  for  one 
year,  in  the  cases  of  manufacturers  and  vendors. 

IVie  War  Period  —  Local  Prohibitory  laws 
continued  to  be  passed.  16  being  passed  in  1861, 
while  several  former  ones  were  repeakd.  By 
act  No.  25,  of  1881,  sales  to  free  negroes  were 
prohibited,  on  penalty  of  not  less  than  .<;500;  and 
sales  to  slaves  were  punished  by  fine  of  $200  to 
$!500,  or  imprisonment  from  one  to  five  years. 
As  a  war  measure,  distillation  of  grain  was  for- 
bidden, in  1862,  excL'pt  undtr  direction  of  the 
Governor,  under  heavy  penalties.  In  1863,  six 
acts  extended  such  provisions  to  peas,  potatoes, 
molasses  and  sugar,  and  increased  the  stringen- 
cy of  the  regulations.  No.  12S  of  the  acts  of 
1884  repealed  the  above  laws,  authorized  such 
distillation,  but  forbade  the  disiillation  of  corn 
and  wheat  under  penalty  of  * 5,000  to  ^50,- 
000,  or  imprisonment  from  one  to  12  months, 
or  both.  The  same  acts  authorized  granting 
licenses  to  distillers  of  cane  or  molasses  or 
fruit,  for  a  fee  of  $100  per  40-gallon  still. 
'Liquor  so  distilled  from  cane  was  taxed  $10  a 
g;dlou,  and  that  from  fruit  $5  a  gallon.  The 
penalty  for  distilling  without  license  was  from 
$5,000  to  $50,000,  for  the  first  offen.se.  with  a 
discretionary  imprisonment  of  one  to  thrte 
years.     This  law  was  re]'ealcd  in  1866. 

After  the  War. — A  few  local  prohibitions 
were  passed  in  1866  and  thereafter,  17  such 
being  passed  in  1870.  Act  No.  3,  Laws,  1871. 
exempt(  d  distdlers  of  fruits,  cane  and  grapes 
from  all  tax.  In  1872  v.'ere  passed  32  prohi- 
bitions to  sell  within  certain  distances  from 
towns,  churches,  schools,  factories,  etc.  Forty- 
one  local  prohibitions  were  made  in  1873.  and 
70  in  1874,  tlie  radii  of  such  protected  districts 
being  from  one  to  six  miles.  Such  enactments 
have  continued  to  be  very  numerous,  with  only 
a  .sm:dl  proportion  of  repeals  to  the  present 
time  (,1890).  They  are  the  peculiar  feature  of 
Alabama  legislation  upon  this  subject 

The  tax  on  licenses  was  somewhat  reduced  by 
the  Revenue  law  of  1874.  In  this  State,  the  pro- 
visions for  taxes  on  liquor  licenses  have  always 
been  coupled  with  those  on  all  other  kinds  "of 
business,  and  the  amounts  charged  apparently 
according  to  the  exigencies  of  the  revenue. 
The  ordinary  regulative  provisions  as  to  ob 
taining  licerses,  with  the  ccnduct  required  and 
the  penalties  attached,  have  also  applied  to 
other  kinds  of  license,  and  have  been  repeated, 
with  slight  variations,  in  each  of  the  revenue 
laws  which  are  almost  annually  passed.  In 
1875  (Laws.  No.  120),  it  was  provided  that  no 
license  should  be  granted  without  the  recom- 
mendation of  ten  freeholders,  and  oath  not  to 
sell  illegally. 

No.  204  of  Laws,  1874,  is  a  regular  Local 
Option  law,  author.zing  the  Probate  Judges  of 
17  counties,  upon  the  petition  of  any  free- 
holder within  the  proposed  limits,  to  .'ubmit  to 
vote  therein  the  question  of  the  Prohibition  of 


the  sale  of  liquor,  within  certain  distances  of 
any  place,  in  any  of  said  counties. 

The  Lair  as  It  Existed  in  1889.— It  shall  le 
the  duty  of  the  General  Assembly  to  pnss 
adequate  laws  giving  protection  against  the 
evils  arising  from  the  use  of  intoxicating 
liquors  at  all  elections.  (Const.,  Art  8.  §  6.) 
Selling  or  giving  any  liquors,  during  ""the 
day  of  any  eleciion,  or  on  the  day  preceding,  is 
unlawful,  and  it  is  the  duly  of  any  Sheriff  or 
Constable  to  arrest  all  persons  violating  thissec- 
t'on.  (Code,  1887,  t^  380.)  License  f (  es  are  re- 
quired of  persons  engaging  in  the  business  of 
the  retail  of  spirituous,  vinous  or  malt  liquor  on 
any  water-craft,  or  on  any  sleeping,  dining  or 
buffet  car,  to  the  amount  of  $250  ;  and  the  State 
has  a  pr.f  erred  lien  on  such  craft  or  cars  for  the 
same.  Retail  of  such  liquors  in  any  place  of 
less  than  1,000  inhabitants,  $125; 
places  of  1,000  to  3.000,  $175; 
pl-aces  of  3  000  to  10,000,  $250; 
places  of  more  than  10,000,  $800; 
dealers  in  lager- beer,  exclusively,  one  fourth 
above  rates.    (Code.  1887,  ^  629.) 

The  wholesale  license  fee  is  P200.  Any  dealer 
selling  only  one  quart  or  more  is  a  wholesale 
dealer  ;  and  if  he  sells  liquors,  or  permits  them 
to  be  taken,  in  le^s  quantily.  or  permits  the  .same 
to  be  drunk  by  the  glass  or  single  drink  in  or 
about  his  premises,  he  shall  be  cleemed  a  retail 
denier.  Compounders  and  rectifiers  pay  1200. 
Di  tillers  of  spirituous  liquors  pay  $200,  but 
t'.iis  does  not  api  ly  to  distillers  of  fruits. 
Brewers  pay  $15.  The  County  Commissioners 
may  add  to  such  taxes  not  exceeding  50  per 
cent,  for  county  pm-poses.     (Id.,  fi  630.) 

On  the  last  day  of  March,  and  every  three 
months  thereafter,  the  Judge  shall  forward  to 
the  Auditor  lists  of  all  licenses,  and  pay  to  the 
State  and  County  Treasurers  the  amounts  re- 
ceived therefor,  minus  2i.,  per  cent,  for  his 
commission.  If  such  Judge  fails  herein,  ho 
.'hall  be  impeached.  (Id  ,  S  683.)  All  licenses 
shall  be  kept  posted  up  in  plain  sight  near 
the  bar,  on  pain  of  forfeiture  of  license.  (Id., 
§636.) 

A  license  to  retail  must  not  be  granted  by  the 
Probate  Judge  until  the  applicant  produce  a 
recommendation  signed  by  20  respectable 
householders  and  freeholders,  residing  in  the 
town,  city  or  precinct  of  the  bifiness,  stating 
that  they  are  acquainted  with  him,  that  he  is  of 
good  moral  character,  and  a  proper  person  to  be 
licensed.  If  there  are  not  so  many  such  house- 
holders and  freeholders  in  such  district,  a  majcr- 
itv  of  the  whole  number  therein  is  sufficient. 
(Id..  §1319.) 

Every  applicant  for  license  must  take  and  file 
an  oath  not  to  sell  to  minors  or  persons  of  im- 
souiidmind,  without  permission  of  guardian  or 
parent,  or  to  any  person  of  known  intemperate 
habits,  or  keep  open  on  Sunday,  or  violate  the 
statute  prohibiting  sales  of  agricultural  products 
between  sunset  and  sunrise,  or  permit  the  same 
in  or  about  the  premi.'-es,  or  allow  any  gaming 
thereon      (Id.,  §  1320.) 

All  .'^ales  or  exchanges  of  liquor,  or  contracts 
for  the  same,  by  persons  not  licensed  as  above, 
or  by  licensed  persons  to  or  with  minors  or 
persons  of  unsound  mind,  without  consent 
of  parent  or  guardian,  or  a  person  of  known 


Legislation.] 


fw  t  i 


[Legislation. 


intemperate  habits  witliout  a  physician's  requi- 
sition, are  void.     (Id.,  t^  1833  ) 

Persons  selling  or  giving  liquors  fo  a  minor, 
wittiout  consent  of  his  parent  or  guardian  unless 
upon  physician's  prescription,  or  to  a  person  of 
known  intemperate  habits,  unless  upon  such 
prescription,  shall  be  fined  $50  to  §500.  Any 
minor  obtaining  such  liquor  by  means  of  false 
representation  as  to  his  age  must  be  fined  not 
more  than  $50.     (Id.,  ^  40:i8.) 

Persons  selling  within  one  mile  of  any  place  of 
religious  worship,  not  in  an  incorporated  town, 
on  any  day  of  public  preaching,  shall  be  fined 
$30  to  $50  or  punished  by  imprisonment  or 
both.  (Id  ,  §  4040.)  Any  person  who  conceals 
himself  in  any  place  and  disposes  of  intoxicat- 
ing liquor  in  evasion  of  law,  must  be  fined 
$350  to  §1,000,  and  may  be  imprisoned  not 
more  than  one  year.     (Id.,  i<  4041  ) 

And  any  owner  or  proprietor  of  any  place, 
permitting  such  evasion  knowingly,  shall  be 
fined  iroO  to  -$1,000,  and  may  be  imprisoned  not 
more  than  one  year.     (Id  ,  ^  4043.) 

Any  person  who,  while  intoxicated  or  drunk, 
appears  in  any  public  place  where  one  or  more 
persons  are  present,  or  at  any  private  residence 
not  his  own.  and  manifests  a  drunken  condition 
by  boisterous  or  indecent  conduct  or  loud  and 
profane  discourse,  shall  be  fined  $5  to  $100. 
(Laws,  1888.  No.  10.) 

There  is  a  law  requiring  scientific  temperance 
instruction  in  the  public  schools.  (R.  S.,  1888, 
g  934;  passed  in  1887.) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  two-thirds  of  all  the  members  of 
each  House  at  one  session ;  popular  vote  to  be 
taken  at  the  next  general  election  for  Represpn- 
tatives,  three  months'  notice  to  be  given.  A 
majority  carries  it. 

Alaska  Territory. 

May  4,  1887,  the  following  executive  order 
was  issued  by  President  Cleveland,  through  C. 
S.  Fairchild,  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  : 

"The  following  regulations  are  prescribed 
under  the  authority  of  Section  14  of  the  act  of 
May  17,  1884  entitled  'An  Act  providing  a  civil 
government  for  Alaska,'  and  Section  1955  of 
the  Revised  Statutes  : 

"  1.  No  intoxicating  liquors  shall  be  landed 
at  any  port  or  place  in  the  Territory  of  Alaska 
without  a  permit  from  the  chief  officer  of  the 
customs  at  such  port  or  place,  to  be  issued  upon 
evidence  satisfactory  to  such  officer  that  the 
liquors  are  imported  and  are  to  be  used  solely 
for  sacramental,  medicinal,  mechanical  or 
scientific  purposes. 

"3.  The  importation  into  said  Territory  of 
breech-loading  rifles  and  suitable  ammunition 
therefor,  except  for  the  personal  use  of  white 
settlers  or  temporary  visitors  not  traders,  is 
hereby  prohibited. 

"  3.  The  master  of  any  vessel  departing  from 
any  port  in  the  United  States  having  on  board 
intoxicating  liquors  or  breech  loading  rifles  and 
ammunition  suitable  therefor,  when  such  vessel 
is  destined  to  any  place  in  said  Territory,  or  if 
not  so  destined,  when  the  intended  course  lies 
within  the  waters  of  the  Territory,  will  be  re- 
quired to  file  with  the  Collector  of  Customs  at 
the  port  of  departure  a  special  manifest,  signed 


and  verified  in  duplicate,  of  all  such  liquors, 
arms,  and  ammunition  ;  and  no  clearance  shall 
be  granted  to  any  such  vessel  unless  the  articles 
embraced  in  the  special  manifest  are  sho»vn  to 
the  satisfaction  of  the  Collector  to  belong  to  the 
necessary  supplies  and  equipment  of  the  vessd, 
or  to  be  entitled  to  the  above  specified  exem]j- 
tions,  or  are  covered  by  bonds  taken  under  the 
provisions  of  said  Section  1955. 

"4.  One  of  the  special  manifests  above  pro- 
vided for  will  be  delivered' to  the  master,  to- 
gether with  the  clearance,  if  granted,  and  any 
intoxicating  liquors,  breech -loading  rifles  and 
ammunition  found  on  board  a  vessel  within  the 
waters  of  the  Territory  without  such  special 
manifest  will  be  seized  and  the  oft'enders  prose- 
cuted under  the  proviiions  of  Section  1,957  of 
the  Revised  Statutes." 

This  is  still  in  force. 

Arizona  Territory. 

Early  Providons. — Howell's  Code,  authorized 
by  the  first  act  of  the  first  Legislature  of  the 
Territory,  provided  (c.  49,  g§  3  and  4)  that  all 
tavern  or  inn-keepers,  all  keepers  of  restau- 
rants or  saloons,  and  all  oth:r  persons  selling  or 
disposing  of  spirituous  or  malt  liquors,  in 
quantities  of  less  than  a  quart,  should  pay  a 
license  tax  of  $30  per  quarter;  eating-houses 
selling  only  malt  liquors,  $10  per  quarter,  and 
peddlers  selling  liquors,  110  per  momh.  In 
1871  those  whose  sales  amounted  to  more  th.-m 
$5,0J0  per  quarter  were  taxed  $30  per  quarter, 
others  >8.  (Laws,  1871,  p  136.)  Selling  or 
giving  intoxicating  liquors  to  Indians  was  pro- 
hibited under  a  penalty  of  *100  to  $300.  or  im- 
prisonment from  one  to  six  months,  or  both. 
(Laws,  1873,  p.  73,  §  1.)  One-half  said  fine  re- 
covered was  to  go  to  the  informants.     (Id.,  t^  3  ) 

Noles  or  accounts  for  liquor,  by  the  drink  or 
bottle,  were  not  collectable  where  they 
amounted  to  over  15.  (Laws,  1875,  p.  43.) 
This  was  repealed  the  next  session.  (Laws, 
1877,  No.  5.)  All  station-keepers  upon  the 
public  highways  who  sold  liquor  were  taxe^l 
$10  per  quarter.    (Laws   1877,  No.  43.) 

Tie  Law  as  It  Existed  in  1889.— The  County 
Treasurer  shall  prepare  suitable  blank  licenses 
and  deliver  to  the  Sheriff  on  his  receipt  there- 
for, and  he  shall  issue  the  same  on  payment  of 
the  license  tax.  (R.  S..  1887,  J:?;  3333,  3333) 
Persons  doing  business  without  l'cen.se  .shall  be 
liable  to  a  fine  of  not  less  than  the  amount  of 
the  delinquent  tax,  nor  more  than  $300,  or  im- 
prisonment in  default  of  payment.  (Id., 
§  3336.)  All  persons  selling  or  disposing  of 
wines,  distilled  or  malt  liquors  in  quantities  of 
two  gallons  and  upward,  shall  pay,  on  quarterly 
sales  of  $35,000  and  upward,  $135  per  quarter, 
on  sales  of  $35,000  to  *15,000,  $100;  on  sales  of 
$15,000  or  less,  $70.  Dealers  in  quantities  from 
one  quart  to  two  gallons  shall  pay  $30  jjer 
quarter,  and  retailers  of  one  quart  or  less.  $50 
per  quarter  in  addition  to  any  tax  for  any  other 
business  in  the  same  place.  Persons  at  a  way- 
side inn  or  .station,  not  within  foiir  miles  of  any 
city,  town  or  village,  shall  pay  $10  per  quarter. 
(Id.,  §  8339.)  Distilleries  and  breweries  pay 
$10  to  $40  per  quarter,  according  to  the  volume 
of  their  business.  No  license  exempts  the 
prop^rty  used  in  the  business  from  tax  under 


Legislation.] 


278 


[Legislation. 


the  general  revenue  laws.  (Id.,  §  2240)  No 
license  shall  be  required  of  auy  physician  or 
apothecary  for  any  liquors  they  may  use  in  the 
preparation  of  medicines.  Licenses  are  not 
transferable,  but  in  the  case  of  the  death  of 
auy  licensee,  his  widow,  executor  or  administra- 
tor may  continue  the  business  until  the  expira- 
tion of  the  term.  (Id.,  4<  2'243).  Minors  under 
the  age  of  16,  unless  accompanied  by  their 
parents  or  guardians,  shall  not  be  allowed  in 
any  saloon  under  penalty  of  $10  to  $200  or 
imprisonment  five  to  50  days,  or  both.  (Pen. 
Code,  1887,  S  513.)  No  person  shall  knowingly 
sell  or  give  liquor  to  any  minor  under  16  with- 
out consent  of  parent  or  guardian,  under  pen- 
alty of  $5  to  $100,  or  imprisonment  20  to  90 
days,  or  both.  (Id.,  §  514, )  Every  person  fur- 
nishing intoxicating  liquor  to  an  Indian  or 
common  drunkard  is  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor, 
lid.,  §635.)  Every  person  who  adulterates  or 
dilutes  any  spirituous  or  malt  liquor  or  wine 
with  fraudulent  intent  to  cause  or  permit  it  to 
be  offered  for  sale,  or  fraudulently  sells  or 
otfers  the  same  for  sale,  is  guilty  of  a  misde- 
meanor.   (Id.,  g  606.) 

Arkansas. 

Early  Promdons.  — To  prevent  disorders  and 
mischief  which  might  result  from  a  multiplicity 
of  public-houses,  no  persons  were  allowed  to 
keep  such  without  license  by  the  County  Court, 
upon  penalty  of  $10.  Disorder  incurred  a 
penalty  of  $2  and  revocation  of  license.  The 
sum  to  be  paid  for  license  was  fixed  at  $10  to 
$30.  No  persons  were  to  sell  to  slaves  and  sol- 
diers without  license  obtained  of  master  or  of 
officer,  respectively.  (C.  L.,  1835,  p.  541.)  By 
R.  S.,  1838.  c.  148.  such  license  tax  was  made 
$10  to  $100,  and  violations  of  the  act  were  pun- 
ished b}''  fine  of  not  exceeding  $oO.  By  the 
act  of  1854,  p.  125,  a  person  applying  for 
license  to  retail  vinous  or  ardent  .spirils  must 
produce  a  petition  therefor,  siiiut  d  by  a  major- 
ity of  the  resident  voters  of  the  township; 
whereupon  it  was  the  duty  of  the  County 
Court  to  grant  the  license.  Every  separate  sale 
contrary  to  the  act  was  declared  a  distinct 
offense.  By  act  of  1854  p.  148.  no  license  was 
allowed  to  be  granted  in  Phillips  County  and 
Taylor  Township,  in  Columbia  County.  Dis- 
posing of  liquors  to  Indians  was  made  a  misde- 
meanor and  fined  from  $1  to  $500.  (Laws, 
1856  p.  155.)  Tliirteen  local  Prohibitory  laws 
w^ere  passed  in  1860  for  townships,  churches  and 
schools,  and  four  in  1866.  The  County  Courfs 
were  given  discretionary  authority  to  grant 
license  upon  the  above  petition  after  having 
fixed  the  price  of  county  licen.se  at  $25  to  $500. 
It  was  made  the  duty  of  the  Collector  of  Rev- 
enue to  ))ro.secute  pei'sons  selling  without 
license.     (Laws,  1866.  No.  42.) 

By  the  Revenue  law  of  1871  (Laws,  No.  35, 
§  154),  a  county  tax  of  $100  was  placed  upon 
all  liquor-sellers,  except  where  sales  were  ex- 
clusively for  medicinal  purposes.  And  in  the 
election  act  of  that  y(  ar  (Laws,  No.  65,  t^  28), 
saloons  were  to  be  closed  from  5  a.  m.  to' 10  p. 
m.  of  the  day  of  election  and  sales  or  gifts  of 
liquor  on  that  day  were  misdemeanors.  By 
the  Revenue  law  of  1873  (Laws,  No.  124.  §  157), 
a  State  tax  of  $100  was  added  to  the  above,  anel 


by  §  159,  selling  without  license  was  fined  $200 
to  f  1,000.  For  Washington  County  the  license 
law  was  made  more  stringent,  and  civil  damages 
resultinii;  from  intoxication  were  awarded 
against  those  selling  the  liquor  in  favor  of  any 
person  injured  thereby.     (Laws.  1873,  No.  127.) 

The_  Civil  Rights  law  of  1873  (No.  12,  4?  4) 
made  it  unlawful  for  saloon-keepei's  to  refuse 
to  sell  drinks  to  any  person  on  account  of  race 
or  color,  under  penalty  of  $25  to  $100. 

Laws  of  the  special  session  of  1874  (No.  37) 
provided  for  an  annual  election  in  each  town- 
ship, ward  of  a  city  and  incorporated  te)wn.  on 
the  question  whether  licenses  should  be  granted 
by  the  County  Board  of  Supervisors.  Each 
applicant  for  license  was  also  to  enter  into  bond 
of  $2,000  to  pay  damages  occasioned  by  reason 
of  liquors  drank  at  his  house.  Persons 
aggrieved  by  the  keeping  of  a  saloon,  or  losing 
money  at  gaming  therein,  were  given  right  to 
action  on  such  bond.  A  fine  of  not  less  than 
$100  and  imprisimment  not  less  than  SO  days, 
were  imposed  on  a  person  keeping  a  saloon 
without  license.  Six  local  Prohibitory  laws 
were  enacted  in  the  session  of  1874-5,  six  in 
1879,  over  20  in  1881,  and  about  the  same  num- 
ber at  each  biennial  session  since. 

The  Law  as  It  Existed  in  1889. — The  law  as  it 
stands  was  enacted  in  1879,  with  some  additions 
made  in  1881  and  1883. 

It  shall  be  unlawful,  without  license,  to  be 
procured  of  the  County  Court,  to  sell  any  spirit- 
uous, ardent,  vinous,  malt  or  fermented  liquor 
or  any  compound  or  preparation  thereof,  com- 
monly called  tonics,  bitters  or  medicated 
licjuors,  or  intoxicating  spirits,  to  be  drunk  as  a 
beverage;  provided  tliat  manufacturers  may 
sell  in  the  original  package  of  not  less  Ihan  five 
gallons  without  license.  (Dig.  Laws,  1884.  ^5 
450.)  The  applicant  for  license  must  file  his 
petition,  specifying  the  place  of  sale,  and  the 
receipt  of  the  Collector  for  the  license  fee.  (Id., 
i$4509.)  For  such  annual  license  he  .'^hall  pay 
$400  as  a  county  tax.  $300  as  a  State  tax  and  $2 
for  Clerk's  fees.  (Id.,  J5  4510.)  Persons  selling, 
or  keeping  a  saloon,  without  license  are  guilty 
of  a  misdemeanor,  and  sh  dl  be  fined  double 
the  license  fee,  and  each  day  of  unauthorized 
selling  is  a  separate  cflfense.  (Id.,  gj  4511, 
4519). 

At  each  general  election  for  State  officers  the 
question  shall  be  submitted  to  the  electors 
whether  license  shall  be  granted  in  the  county 
for  the  next  two  year,s.     (Id.,  §.^5   1513,  1515). 

Each  apiilicant  fen-  license  shall  give  bond  in 
$2,000,  conditioned  to  pay  damages  caused  by 
liquors  sold  He  shall,  besides  the  above  fees 
(?  4510).  before  being  licensed,  pay  the  addi- 
tional sum  determined  by  the  County  Court  of 
$50  to  $200.  (Id.,  §  45i6.)  The  law  does  not 
apply  to  one  who  manufactures  anel  sells  wine 
from  grapes  or  berries  or  other  fruits,  and  who 
sells  no  other  liquors.  (Id.,  t^  4520.)  Ail  the 
provisions  of  this  law  apply  with  equal  force 
to  the  sale  of  alcohol,  (Id..  §  4521.  (  No  debt 
for  spirits  sole!  in  a  saloon  shall  be  recoverable. 
(Id.,  ?<  452.) 

Whenever  the  aelult  inhabitants  residing  within 
three  miles  of  any  school-house,  academy,  col- 
lege, university  or  other  mstitution  of  learning, 
or  of  any  church-house,  ihall  desire  it,  aud  a 


Legislation] 


279 


[Legislation- 


majority  thereof  petition  therefor,  the  County- 
Court  simll  make  an  order  prohibiting  the  sale 
of  liquor  there  for  two  years.  ( Id.,  >^  4534.)  Fe- 
males as  well  as  males  are  included  as  inhabit- 
ants in  above  section.     (Id.,  §  4525.) 

This  three-mile  law  does  not  prohibit  the  use 
of  wine  for  sacramen'al  purposes  or  sales  upon 
a  physician's  proscription.  But  no  physician 
may  make  sucli  prescription  excL'pt  hf  has  filed 
his  affidavit  with  the  County  Clerk  that  he  will 
not  do  so  without  necessity  in  treatment  of  dis- 
ease. (Id.,  f?  4536.)  Persons  violating  this 
three  mile  law  shall  be  fined  $20  to  $100.  (Id., 
§4537.) 

Licenses  are  forfeited  for  allowing  gaming 
upon  the  piemises.  (Id.,  jj  1857.)  Dramshop 
ke  pers  allowing  fighting,  (juarreling  or  disor- 
derly condu(  tin  th-irplacessha'l  be  fined  not  over 
$50.  (ld..;<1858  )  Welling  to  United  Stat-s  soldiers 
forfeits  license.  (Id.,  S  1859.)  Selling  liquor  to 
minors  without  written  consent  of  parent  or 
guardian,  subjects  to  a  fine  of  $50  to  $100.  I  Id., 
g  1878.)  Selling  to  an  Indian  to  a  fine  of  $1  to 
$500.  lid,  §1879.)  Persons  contemptuously 
olfering  liquor  for  sale  within  one  mile  of  any 
campground  during  campmeeting,  or  of  any 
place  of  meeting  for  worship,  shall  be  fined 
not  less  than  $10.  This  do 's  not  apply  to  lic-nsed 
.places  of  sale.  (Id..  §^5 1896-7  )  Persons  using 
or  controlling  any  device  to  sell  liquor,  such 
as  is  known  as  the  "  blind  tiger, '  or  any  other 
such  are  guilty  of  a  mi.sdemeanor.  (Id.,  § 
1936)  If  any  pjrson  obtains  liquor  in  any 
room  or  place  of  another,  by  going  therein  or 
thereto  and  by  call,  sound,  word  or  token  it 
shall  be  prima  f(u,ie  evidence  of  the  guilt  of  the 
person  who  owns  or  controls  such  place.  (Id., 
g  1  )27.)  It  shall  bj  the  duty  of  all  officers  to 
execute  and  prosecute  under  this  act.  (Id.. 
{^  1923  )  On  oath  of  any  person,  filed  with  a 
Justice  of  the  Peace,  that  any  named  person  is 
violating  this  "  blind  tiger  "  act,  the  Prosecut- 
ing Attorney  must  prosecute  such  person  and 
cause  his  arrest.  (Id..  §  1929.)  Per-;ons  con- 
victed under  the  "  blind  tiger"  act  shall  be  fined 
$200  to  $500  and  imprisoned  30  days.  (Id., 
§  1933.)  The  •'  blind  tiger  "  act  does  not  apply 
to  persons  giving  liquors  at  their  residences  to 
friends,  or  to  licensL'd  d -alers.  (Id.,  §  1933.) 
Dramshops  shall  not  be  kept  open  on  Sunday, 
on  penalty  of  $25  to  $100.  (Laws,  1885,  jSTo. 
33.) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  a  major. ty  of  all  th3  members  of 
thj  two  Houses,  at  one  session  ;  popular  vote  to 
ba  taken  at  the  next  general  election,  six 
months'  notice  to  be  given.  A  majority  carries 
it. 


r 


California. 


Early  Provisions  — The  first  session  of  the 
Legislature  taxed  licenses  to  retail  any  spiritu- 
ous, vinous  or  fermented  liquors,  to  be  granted 
by  the  Court  of  Se-isions,  $50  to  $1,000,  at  dis 
cretion.  (Laws,  1850,  c.  1:J0,  §  1.)  Furnishing 
liquor  to  Indians  was  fined  $:i0.  (Id.,  c.  133, 
§15.)  The  Revenue  act  of  the  next  year  im- 
posed license  taxes,  for  counts'  purposes,  of  $50. 
(Laws,  1851,  c  6,  §60.)  The  license  tax  was 
the  next  year  but  one  placed  at  $5  to  $40  per 
month,     according    to    volume    of    business. 


(Laws,  1853.  c.  167,  art.  4.  §  3.)  Chapter  187, 
Laws  of  1855,  authorized  the  taking  the  sense  of 
the  people  on  the  passage  of  a  Prohiliitoiy 
liquor  law,  '  the  provisions  of  which  shall  pro- 
hibit the  manufacture  and  ?ale  of  all  spirituous 
and  intoxicating  liquors,  except  for  mechanical, 
chemical,  medicinal  and  sacramental  purposes." 
The  proposed  act  was  no  further  set  out. 
Promises  to  pay  for  liquor  sold  at  retail  to  the 
amount  of  over  $5  were  dec  ared  void  by  the 
Laws  of  185S,  c  233.  Adulteration  of  li  [uor  was 
prohibited  und^^r  penalt.v  of  $35  to  $500.  iLaws, 
1860,  c.  223,  §  1.)  On  affidavit  to  a  Ju.stic  >  of 
the  Peace  charging  adulteration  he  was  to  order 
the  seizure  of  not  exceeding  one  gallon  of  such 
liquor  for  analysis.  (Id.,  §2.)  No  person  con- 
victed under  this  act  was  to  be  again  licer.sed. 
(Id.,  §  3.)  Nothing  was  to  affect  compounding 
of  liquors  by  a  regular  physician  or  druggist 
for  medicinal  purposes.    (Id  ,  §  6.) 

By  the  laws  of  1863,  c  289,  it  was  to  bo  as- 
certained in  every  criminal  action  if  tlie  offense 
of  the  defendant  was  due  to  intoxication,  and  if 
.so  the  costs  and  expens  s  to  the  county  of  the 
aggregate  of  the  same  were  to  be  added  pro- 
rata to  the  amounts  required  for  license,  in  ad- 
dition to  the  regular  rate.  Section  80'5  of  the 
Penal  Code,  as  amended  in  1874,  prohibiting 
employment  of  females  in  dance-houses  where 
liquor  is  sold,  was  declared  unconstitutional,  as 
discriminating  against  the  employment  of  a 
female  in  a  lawful  business  on  ace  mnt  of  her 
sex.    (Matt  'r  of  Mairuire,  57  Cal,  (;04.) 

Tlie  act  of  1873-4,  c.  300,  to  perm't  the  voters 
of  every  township  or  Incorporated  city  in  the 
State  to  vote  on  the  question  of  granting  licen- 
ses to  sell  intoxicating  liquors  was  declare  1  un- 
constitutional, as  delegating  the  power  of  the 
Legislature  to  make  laws.  (Ex-parte  Wall,  48 
Cal..  279.) 

The  Law  as  It  Existed  in  1889. — Any  county, 
city,  town  or  township  may  make  and  enforce 
within  its  limits  all  such  local,  police,  i^anitary 
and  other  regulations  as  are  not  in  conflict  Avith 
general  laws.  (Const.,  art.  11,  §  11.)  Under 
this  section  it  was  held  thit  the  city  of  Pasa- 
dena might  prohibit  tippling  houses,  dramshops 
or  barrooms  where  liquors  were  dealt  in.  (Ex- 
parte  Campbell,  74  Cal.,  20.)  It  surrenders  the 
subject  to  local  control  entirely. 

I  ersons  selling  spirituous,  malt  or  fermented 
liquors  or  wine,  in  less  quantities  than  one  quart, 
must,  on  sales  of  $10,000  or  more  monthly.  p;iy 
$tO  per  month  ;  on  such  sales  of  ^5,000  to 
$10,000,  $20;  le.ss  than  $5,000,  $5.  (Pol.  Cod', 
§  3381.)  Wholesalers,  in  classes  according  to 
their  monthly  sales,  pay  from  $1  to  $50  per 
month.  (Id.,  §;^  3282-3.)  No  license  is  required  of 
physicians,  surgeons,  apothecaries  or  chemists, 
for  any  wines  or  spirituous  liciuors  they  may  use 
in  the  preparation  of  medicines.  (Id.,  §  3383.) 
Saks  of  liquors  at  theatres,  and  employing 
women  to  sell  liquors  thereat  are  misdemeanons. 
(Pen.  Code,  §  303.)  Selling  liquors  within  one 
mile  of  a  camp  or  field-meeting  for  religious 
worship  during  the  time  of  holding  such  meet- 
ing, except  regularly  licensed  busine.s.ses,  is  fin^^d 
$5  to  $500  (Pen.  Code,  §§  304-5.)  ."TTvery 
person  who  sells  or  gives  to  another  under  the 
age  of  16  years,  to  be  by  him  drank  at  the  time 
a3  a  beverage,  is  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  pro- 


liegislation] 


280 


[Legislation. 


vitled  this  does  not  apply  to  parents,  guardians 
or  physicians  (Pen.  Code,  §  396  ;  Acts  1871,  p. 
231.)  Selling  liquor  within  two  miles  of  Cali- 
fornia University,  in  Alameda  County,  is  pun- 
ishable by  line  of  $50  to  $100,  or  imprison- 
ment 30  to  90  days,  or  both.  (Pol.  Code,  §  1405  ; 
Laws,  1873,  p.  13.)  Selling  within  one  mile  of 
Napa  Insane  Asylum  is  fined  not  exceeding 
|500.  (Pol.  Code,  s^  2223;  Laws,  1873,  p.  27.) 
Sales  one  mile  from  College  ('ity,  Colusa 
County,  are  prohibited.  (4  Codes  &  Stats.,  p.  617; 
Laws.  1875,  p.  691.)  The  delivery  of  liquor  by 
retail  is  iuvalid  consideration  for  any  promise 
to  pay  exceeding  $5,  and  no  Court  will  give 
judgment  for  the  amount  thereof.  (4  Codes  & 
Stats  ,  p  616  ;  Laws.  1873,  p.  509.)  Sale  or  dis- 
trib'ition  of  liquor  in  the  Capitol  Building  is 
prohibited  under  penalty  of  $1,000.  Selling  on 
election  day,  while  the  polls  are  open,  is  a  mLsde- 
meanor.  (Laws,  1873,  c.  198.)  Selling  intoxi- 
cating liquors  to  those  addicted  to  the  inordi- 
nate use  of  such  liquor,  after  notice  thereof,  is 
punished  by  tine  not  exceeding  $200  or  impris- 
onment not  exceeding  six  months,  or  both.  (5 
Codes  &  Stats.,  p.  542;  Laws,  1889,  p  352.) 

The  provision  made  in  Laws.  1887  p.  46,  and 
5  Codes  &  Stats.,  p.  493,  is  a  very  elaborate  and 
technical  act  defining  pure  wine,  prohibiting  its 
sophistication  or  adulteration  and  requiring 
labels  to  be  marked  "  Pure  California  Wine." 
It  was  held  that  a  failure  to  thus  mark  was  not  a 
violation  of  the  act.  (Ex-parte  Kohler.  74  Cal. ,  38.) 

The  California  laws  also  provide  for  a  Board 
of  State  Viticultural  Commissioners  (to  be  sup- 
ported from  State  funds\  chnrged  with  the  duty 
of  promoting  the  interests  of  the  wine  growers 
and  producers. 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  bv  two-thirds  of  all  the  members  of 
the  two  Houses,  at  one  session;  the  popular 
vote  must  be  taken  at  the  next  general  election 
for  Representative^,  notice  to  be  given  "as 
deemed  expedient."    A  majority  carries  it. 

Colorado. 

The  history  of  liquor  laws  in  this  State  is 
brief.  They  now  exist  substantially  as  passed 
at  the  first  session  of  the  Legislature  in  1861, 
and  le-enacted  in  the  first  Revised  Statutes  of 
1868.  except  the  provisions  that  the  Board  of 
County  Commissioners  may  grant  licenses  to 
keep  saloons,  hotels,  public  houses  or  groceries 
upon  condition  that  the  applicant  .shall  pay  into 
th .'  county  Treasury  $25  to  $300  at  the  discretion 
of  the  Board,  and  that  he  shall  give  bond  in 
$500  conditioned  to  keep  an  orderlv  house  and 
will  not  permit  any  unlawful  gaming  in  his 
house.     (G.  S..  1883,  t^  2103.) 

The  Law  as  It  Existed  in  1 889.  —  The  ifcense 
fee  for  the  privilege  of  retailing  spirituous,  vin- 
ous and  malt  liquors  shall  be  in  cities  not  less 
than  $600  ;  in  incorporated  towns,  not  less 
than  $500;  in  counties,  where  the  Board  of 
County  Commissioners  may  grant,  $300.  (Laws. 
1889.  p.  228,  §  1.)  No  person  shall  be  licen.sed 
until  he  has  executed  a  bond  in  not  less  than 
$2,000  to  be  fix  jd  by  the  County  Commis.sioners 
or  nmnicip.il  authorities  granting  the  license, 
coiditionel  thit  he  will  keep  an  orderly  house, 
permit  no  unlawful  gaming,  and  not  violate  any 


law  or  ordinance  in  reference  to  selling  liquors, 
and  pay  all  damages,  fines,  penalties  and  for- 
feitures for  violating  such  laws  and  ordinances. 
(Id.,  tj  2.)  Licenses  to  s^dl  malt  liquors  exclu- 
sively may  be  gra^ited  on  payment  of  one-half 
of  the  above  sums,  respectively.  (Id.,  §  4.) 
The  Board  upon  application  for  license  may  re- 
ject or  grant  the  same  at  its  discretion.  (G  S., 
1883,  i?  2104.)  The  Board,  upon  complaint 
made  to  it,  has  power  to  revoke  the  license  upon 
being  satisfied  it  has  been  abused  or  that  the 
licensee  has  violated  the  law.  (Id.,  §  2105.)  It 
is  not  plain  that  the  Boards  of  Trustees  of 
incorporated  towns  and  the  City  Councils 
of  cities  have  the  right  to  revoke,  or  even 
the  discretion  to  grant,  as  stated  above.  The 
Board  of  County  Commissioners  only  is  there- 
fore mentioned  in  the  General  Statutes  of  1883, 
though  municipal  authorities  are  in  the  next 
section  given  the  exclusive  authority  to  license 
in  such  towns  and  cities.  (Id.,  tv  2103,  see 
below  ;  Id.,  i?  3312,  p.  18.)  Licenses  do  not 
authorize  sales  in  more  than  one  place,  and 
must  describe  the  place  intended  to  be  occu- 
pied. (Id.  t^2J06.)  A  saloon  or  grocery  shall 
be  deemed  to  include  all  places  where  liquors 
are  retailed.  (Id.,  jj  2107.)  Sales  by  persons 
not  licensed  are  fined  $20,  half  to  the'informer. 
(Id.,  ^5  2108. )  This  was  increased  to  a  fine  of 
$50  to  .S200  by  act  of  1889,  p.  231. 

No  person  may  sell  or  deliver  liquor  to  any 
Indian  under  penalty  of  |50,  one-half  to  the 
informer.  (G.  S.,  1883,  {^  2109.)  If  licensee 
knowingly  suffers  disorder,  drunkenness  or  un- 
lawful games  in  his  house,  his  licmse  shall  be 
suppressed  by  the  County  C'ommissioners.  (Id., 
t^  2110.)  Persons  carrying  on  the  business 
without  license  shall  be  fined  not  exceed- 
ing $300,  or  impri-soned  not  exceeding  six 
months,  or  both.  (Id.,  J5  2112.)  Persons  pro.se- 
cuting  or  giving  information  maybe  competent 
witnesses  at  the  trial,  notwithstanding  their  in- 
terest in  the  penalty.  (Id.,  J;  2115.)  Penalties 
may  be  recovered  by  action  in  debt,  or  by  in- 
dictment, before  any  Justice  of  the  Peace  or 
Court  of  competent  jurisdiction,  upon  complaint 
of  any  citizen  of  the  county.  (Id  ,  §  2116.) 
No  license  shall  be  issued  for  more  than  a  year 
or  less  than  six  months,  or  until  the  whole  fee 
has  been  paid  (Laws.  1889,  p.  230,  ^  6.)  No 
license  is  transferable  (Id.,  t^  7.)  No  license  fee 
may  be  refunded  for  any  unexpired  term  except 
in  case  of  the  death  of  the  licensee.  (Id  ,  ^  8.) 
City  Councils  and  Town  Boards  of  Trustees 
have  tiie  exclusive  right  to  license,  regulate  or 
prohibit  the  selling  or  givmg  away  of  any  in- 
toxiea'ing  liquor  within  the  limits  of  the  town 
or  city  or  within  one  mile  beyond,  such 
authorities  complying  with  the  general  laws  of 
the  State  in  force!  (G.  S.,  1883,  <i  3312,  p.  18.) 
The  .same  authorities  may  grant  jiermits  to  drug- 
gists to  sell  liquor  for  medicinal,  mechanical, 
sacramental  and  chemical  purposes  only.  (Id.) 
Thej'^  may  also  forbid  and  punish  the  selling  to 
minors,  apprentices,  insane,  idiotic  or  distracted 
persons  drunkards,  or  intoxicated  persons.  (Id., 
p.  19.)  Retailers  selling  or  giving  liquor  to 
common  drunkards  shall  be  fined  $50.  (G.  S., 
1883,  §  853.)  Any  person  procuring  liquor 
for  any  habitual  drunkard  knowingly  shall  be 
fined  $100  to  $300,  or  Imprisoned  three  to  13 


Legislation.] 


281 


[Legislation. 


months,  or  both.  (Id.,  §  854.~)  Selling  to  Uai- 
ted  States  troops  or  State  militia  is  punished  by 
imprisonment  not  exceedino;  three  months,  or  fine 
not  exceeding  $50,  and  forfeiture  of  license. 
(Id.,  t^  855.) 

If  any  person  sell  liquor  between  sunrise  and 
sunset  of  any  general  election,  or  election  for 
Mayor  of  any  incorporated  place,  he  shall  for 
the  first  offense  forfeit  §10  to  -SlOO,  and  for  the 
second  $50  to  «:200.  (Id.,  tj  856. )  This  section 
does  not  apply  to  wholesalers  of  over  29  gallons. 
(Id.,  §  857.)  Saloons  shall  be  closed  election 
day.  under  penalty  of  $50  or  20  days'  imprison- 
ment, or  both.  (Id.,  t?  1220.)  Any  person  sell- 
ing liquors  within  one  mile  of  any  gathering  of 
citizens  assembled  for  worship,  unless  a  regular- 
ly-licensed business,  shall  be  fined  not  over 
.«;100:  this  not  applying  to  persons  selling  at 
their  ov,'n  distillery,  store  or  dwelling-house. 
(Id.,  t;  878.) 

Every  person,  relative  or  employer  injured  in 
person,  property  or  means  of  support  by  the 
intoxication  of  anyone,  has  his  action  against 
the  s-'lk-r  of  the  liquor,  if  such  seller  has  b;en 
notitie  1  not  to  sell  to  such  person.  (Id.,  g  1034 ; 
Act,  187y,  p.  92.) 

Th3  importation  of,  or  bringing  into  this 
State  of  any  spjrious  or  adulterated  vinous  or 
malt  liquors,  is  prohibited.  (Laws,  1887,  p.  18, 
§  1.)  The  compounding,  manufacture  or  sale 
of  any  such  spurious  liquors  is  prohibited. 
(Id. ,§2.)  Any  such  liquor  found  to  contain 
any  thing  other  than  the  extract  or  property  of 
the  juice  of  the  grape,  or  than  the  quality  or 
property  of  malt  and  liops  combined  with  water, 
respectively,  is  spurious.  (Id.,  t^  3. )  No  vinous 
or  malt  liquors  shall  be  offered  for  sale,  unless 
the  package  be  plainly  marked  or  stamped  with 
the  manufacturer's  name  and  place,  and  the 
words  "pure"  ale,  "pure"  wine,  etc.,  us  the 
case  may  be.  (Id.,  i?4. )  No  dealer  in  liquors 
shall  keep  in  his  possession  any  spurious  liquors. 
(Id.,  §5.)  Any  p:irson  violating  this  act  shall 
be  fined  §1  to  $500  or  imprisoned  not  exceeding 
six  months,  or  both  (Id.,  i^  6. )  .lustices  of  the 
Peace  have  jurisdiction,  except  under  i^  5,  when 
the  party  if  not  discharged  upon  hearing  shall 
be  held  to  bail  to  the  next  District  Court.  (Id., 
g7. )  For  two  years,  and  until  otherwise  pro- 
vided, fines  collected  under  this  law  shall  be- 
long to  the  prosecuting  witness.     (Id.,  g  8  ) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  two-thirds  of  all  the  members  of 
the  two  Houses,  at  one  session ;  popular  vote  to 
be  takc'u  at  the  next  general  election  for  Repre- 
sentatives, three  months'  notice  to  be  given.  A 
majority  vote  carries  it. 

Connecticut. 

Colonial  Provisions. — No  one  was  to  sell  wine 
or  strong  water  without  license  (Colonial 
Records,  vol.  1,  p.  100  [1643].)  Tippling  in  '■  or- 
dinaries" was  prohibited.  (Id.,  p.  154  [1347].) 
So  was  selling  to  Indians,  under  penalty  of  40s 
to  £5.  (Id.,  p.  2  )4. 1  A  small  excise  of  40s  per 
hhd.  of  wine,  etc.,  was  levied  in  1654  (Id.  p. 
255  )  The  rates  at  which  liquor.?  were  to  be 
s  )ld  were  fixed  in  1656.  ( Id.,  p.  283.)  A  penalty 
of  5s  p3r  quart  for  liquor  sold  without  license 
was  imposed  in  1659,  (Id.,  p.  333.)  A  fee  of 
25  Gi  for  license  to  retail  liquor,  to  be  obtained 


of  the  General  Court,  was  required  in  the  same 
year.  (Id.)  If  any  person  was  found  drun^  at 
any  private  house  he  was  fined  20s,  and  the 
owner  of  the  house  10s.  (Id.,  p  333.)  Distilla- 
tion of  cirn  or  malt  into  liquor  was  prohibited 
at  the  same  time. 

Ludlow's  Code,  1650  (Id.,  p.  533),  provided, 
under  title  "  Innkeeper.^, "  and  Introduction: 
"  Foras:nuch  as  there  ii  a  necessary  use  of  houses 
of  common  entertainment  in  every  Common- 
wealth, and  of  such  as  retail  wine,  beer  and 
victuals,  yet  because  th  re  are  so  many  abuses 
of  that  lawful  liberty,  both  by  persons  enter- 
taining and  persons  entertained,  there  is  also 
need  of  strict  laws  to  regulate  such  an  employ- 
ment." It  was  ordered  that  no  such  licensed 
person  should  suffer  any  to  be  drunkea  or  drink 
excL'Ssively  (viz.,  above  half  a  pint  at  a  time), 
or  to  tipple  above  the  space  of  half  an  hour,  or 
at  luireasonable  times,  or  after  9  o'clock  at 
night,  on  penalty  of  5s  ;  and  every  person  found 
drunk,  so  as  to  be  bereaved  or  disabled  in  the 
use  of  his  imderstanding,  appearing  in  his 
speech  or  gesture,  10s  ;  for  excessive  drinking, 
3s  4i;  for  tippling  over  half  an  hour.  2s  M, 
and  for  tippling  at  unreasonable  times  or  after 
9  o'clock.  5s.  It  was  provided,  however,  that 
travelers  and  strangers  might  be  kept  and  eiiter- 
tained  in  an  orderly  manner.  Drunkenness  End 
excessive  or  long  drinking  for  second  offenses 
were  fined  doui)le  the  above  amounts,  and  in 
def  .ult  the  first  kind  ofoffen.se  were  to  be  given 
ten  .stripes,  and  the  second  three  hours  in  the 
stocks.  The  other  above  several  regulations 
were  also  duly  codified. 

It  was  ordered  that  only  the  Ordinary  in  each 
town  should  sell  wine  and  strong  waters.  (1 
New  Huven  Col.  Rec  ,  p.  27  [1646].)  And  it 
was  provided  that  no  one  sliould  retail  liquors 
without  license  upon  penalty  of  £5.  (2  Id.,  p. 
595  [1656].)  The  law  was  shortly  codified  in  an 
act  which  added  whipping  at  discretion  for 
those  .selling  without  license  and  not  able  to  pay 
their  tines.  (Conn.  Col.  Rec,  1689-1706,  p.  436.) 
Selling  liquor  without  license  was  fined  £5.  to  be 
doubled  for  each  succeeding  offen.se,  half  to  the 
complainant  ;  and  officers  were  to  po-t  the 
names  of  tavern-haunters  at  the  doors  of  taverns, 
and  selling  to  them  afterwards  was  fined  £5, 
and  their  drinking  thereafter  20s.    (Id.,  p.  562.) 

Early  State  Provisions.  —  Selling  without 
license  was  fined  $10,  doubled  for  each  subse- 
quent offense,  half  to  tlie  informer.  (Laws. 
1803,  p.  728.)  Cider,  ale  and  beer  were  excepted 
from  the  law  by  Laws  of  1810,  p.  33.  Retailers 
of  liquor  not  to  be  drunk  on  the  premises  were 
authorized  to  be  licensed  the  same  as  innkeep- 
ers and  pay  $5  for  their  licenses  and  forfeit  $50 
for  illegal  selling.  (Laws,  1813,  c.  12.)  All 
laws  then  in  force  regulating  the  sale  of  spiritu- 
ous liquors  were  repealed,  and  it  was  provided 
that  no  person  excepting  taverners  should  sell 
any  liquor  to  be  drank  in  his  house  or  place, 
upon  penalty  of  $5.  (Laws,  1842,  c  27.,  No 
one  was  to  sell  on  the  highway,  in  a  booth,  or 
any  place  erected  or  located  for  temporary  pur- 
poses, on  public  days,  at  camp  meetings,  or  on 
any  temporary  occasion,  under  penalty  of  $7. 
(Laws,  1844.  c.  36,  t^  1.)  No  jailor  could  sell  on 
his  premises.     (Id.,  §  2.) 

By  the  act  of  1845,  c.  50,  three  special  Com- 


Legislation] 


282 


[Legislation. 


missoners  were  to  be  elected  annually  by  each 
town,  who  only  should  grant  licenses  to  such 
persons,  under  such  limitations  and  restrictions, 
as  they  judged  proper,  aud  revoke  the  same  at 
pleasure.  Violators  of  the  act  were  fined  §10  to 
g;100.  This  act  was  repealed  by  the  Laws  of  1846.  c. 
56;  and  by  the  next  act  of  the  same  year, 
taverners  only  were  authorized  to  sell  to  be 
drunk  on  the  premises,  under  ijenalty  of  810. 
half  to  the  informer.  By  §  2  of  that  act  no 
person  but  a  taverner  was  to  keep  any  house  or 
place  for  the  sale  of  liquor,  under  penalty  of 
$80.  And  by  §  3  no  person  was  to  sell  to  com- 
mon drunkards  under  penalty  of  $10. 

ConnecUcuVs  Maine  Laic  of  1854  —An  elaborate 
Prohibitory  or  Maine  Jaw,  against  the  manufac- 
ture and  sale  of  liquor  (oiiTy  excepting  cider 
and  native  wine  in  quantities  of  five  gallons  or 
over),  providing  for  Town  Agents  to  sell  for 
sacramental,  medicinal,  chemical  and  mechan- 
ical purposes  only,  providing  penalty  of  $10  for 
first  conviction  and  $20  aud  imprisonment  three 
to  six  mouths  for  subsequent  convictions  for 
selling,  and  $100  for  first,  $200  for  second  and 
$200  "and  four  months  in  prison  for  third 
offenses  of  being  a  common  seller,  with  search 
and  seizure  clauses,  was  submitted  to  the  vote 
of  the  people  on  the  first  Monday  of  April, 
1854.  (Laws,  1853,  p.  151. )  Such  an  act,  more 
elaborate  and  with  somewhat  heavier  penalties, 
was  enacted  on  June  22.  1S54.     (Law.s,   c.  57.) 

Persons  found  intoxicattd  were  fined  not  ex- 
ceeding ••:  7  by  the  Laws  of  1859,  c.  58.  The  sec- 
tion (It)'*  of  the  Liquor  act  giving  Selectmen. 
Constables.  Mayors  and  Aldermen  the  powers 
of  Grand  Jurors  to  prosecute  under  the  act.  \/as 
repealed  by  Laws  of  1860.  c.  7.  And  §  27  of 
said  law,  which  made  sales  of  liquor  void 
and  not  actionable,  was  repealed  by  Laws  of 
1861,  c.  50.  And  by  Laws  of  1863  c.  22,  it  was 
euacted  that  no.hing  in  the  Prohibitory  liquor 
act  should  impair  the  obligation  of  any  con- 
tract. This  was  a  reversal  of  the  common  law 
that  contracts  made  in  violation  of  law  are  non- 
enforceable.  This  policy  was  again  reversed,  and 
rights  acquired  by  the  sale  of  liciuors  were 
again  made  null  and  void-  (Laws  of  1872,  c. 
71.)  The  manufacture  or  sale  of  adulterated 
liquor  was  punished  by  fine  not  exceeding 
$500,  or  imprisonment,  not  exceeding  one  j'ear, 
or  both,  by  Laws  of  1865.  c.  61. 

In  1867  a  license  law  was  enacted  and  held  in 
suspension  uutil  the  next  session,  accompanied 
by  the  majority  report  of  a  committte  in  favor 
of  it  and  against  the  Prohibitory  liquor  law  then 
in  force.  (Laws,  1867,  p.  183.)  The  next  Legis- 
lature did  not  concur.  In  1869  was  passed  a  law 
(c.  136)  providing  for  a  State  Chemist  and 
analysis  by  him  of  liquors,  which  is  still  in  force 
and  will  be  noticed  tielow.  Liquor-shops  were 
prohibited  to  keep  open  on  Sunday,  in  1872. 
(Laws,  c.  32.) 

License  and  Local  Option  (1872). — The  Prohi- 
bition law  was  impliedly  repealed  in  1872  by 
the  passage  of  a  law  authorizing  the  County 
Commissioners  to  license  applicants  recommend- 
ed by  a  majority  of  the  Selectmen  of  the  towns, 
though  the  towns  might  instructsuch  Selectmen 
to  so  recommend  no  one  for  liceni-e  The 
license  fee  was  $100,  and  the  penalty  for  viola- 
tion $20.  (Laws,  1872,  c.  99.)    The  license  fee 


was  made  $100  to  $500  at  discretion,  in  each 
case,  aud  district  licenses  for  the  sale  of  beer, 
ale,  and  Rhine  wine  only  were  provided  for.  as 
were  agents  to  be  appointed  by  the  County 
Commissioners,  to  prosecute  for  violations,  by 
Laws  of  1874,  c.  115.  By  the  Laws  of  1875,  c. 
104,  the  County  Commissioners  were  to  pay 
moneys  received  for  licenses  to  the  several 
towns.  By  Laws  of  1878,  c.  137,  the  Mayors  of 
cities,  Wardens  of  boroughs  and  Selectmen  of 
towns  might  close  saloons  between  12  p.  m. 
Saturday  night  and  12  p.  m.  Sunday  nhjht  fol- 
lowing. Town  Agents,  to  sell  for  medicinal 
and  similar  purposes  only,  in  towns  voting 
against  license,  were  provided  for  by  Laws  of 
1879,  c.  66.  Twenty-five  per  cent,  of  the  license 
moneys  was  awarded  to  tiie  counties  by  Laws  of 
1879,  0. 107.  The  Clerk  of  the  Superior  Court 
was  to  keep  a  record  of  all  licenses.  (Id.,  c.  124.) 

Prolabitory  Amendments  Projosed. — In  188() 
(Laws,  p.  601)  a  Prohibitory  law  with  all  the  or- 
dinary provisions  was  proposed,  but  never  fi- 
nally enacted.  And  in  1882  (Laws,  p.  224)  a 
Prohibitory  Amendment  to  the  Constitution 
was  proposed  tothe  next  Legislature,  which  was 
not  concurred  in.  Another  such  Amcn(;ment 
was  proposed  in  1887  (Laws,  p.  766),  concurred 
in,  submitted  to  the  people  (Laws,  1889,  c.  163), 
and  defeated  at  the  polls. 

The  Law  as  Li  Existed  in  1889.— The  term 
spirituous  anel  intoxicating  lie|unrs  .shall  beheld 
to  include  all  spirituous  and  intoxicating  liquors, 
all  mixed  liquois,  all  mixed  liquor  of  which  a 
part  is  spirituous  and  intoxicating,  all  distilled 
spirits,  all  wines,  ale  and  porter,  all  beer  manu- 
factured from  hops  and  malt,  or  from  hops  and 
barley,  and  all  beer  on  therecei)tacle  containing 
which  the  laws  of  the  United  States  require  a 
revenue  stamp  to  be  affixed,  and  all  fermented 
cider,  sold  to  be  drunk  on  the  premises,  or  iu 
quantities  of  less  than  five  gallons  (made  one 
gallon  by  Laws  of  1889,  c.  137),  to  be  delivered 
at  one  time.     tG.  S.,  1888,  §  3048.) 

Upon  petition  of  25  voters  of  a  town,  the 
Selectmen  must  submit  the  question  of  license  to 
the  next  annual  town  meeting.  Licenses  not  in 
accordance  with  that  vote  are  void,  ild.,  f;;^ 
3050-1. )  Whenever  a  town  has  so  voted  against 
license,  delivery  of  liquor  by  the  vendor  or  his 
agent  in  such  town  shall  be  deemed  a  sale  within 
such  town,  although  the  contract  of  sale  was 
made  outside  the  town.    (Id.,  jj  3052.) 

The  County  Commissioners  may  license,  for 
a  period  not  extending  beyond  the  first  Monday 
of  the  mouth  next  after  the  next  annual  town 
meeting,  by  licenses  .signed  by  themselves,  suit- 
able persons  to  sell  liquors  in  .suitable  places. 
(Id..  «;  3053.)  But  no  person  who  has  been  con- 
victed of  a  violation  of  liquor  law,  or  paid  a  tine 
to  settle  such  a  prosecution,  or  forfeited  his 
bond  to  appear  to  answer  such  charges, 
shall  be  deemed  a  suitable  person.  (Id.,ani'd 
by  Laws,  1889.  c,  117.)  The  County  Commis- 
sioners shall,  on  or  before  the  10th  of  every 
month,  report  to  the  Town  Treasurers  the  licen- 
ses uranted  aud  the  monc  y  received  therefor.  (G. 
S.,  1888,  i;  3054.)  The  said  Commissoners  shall 
pay  5  per  cent,  of  such  license  moneys  to  the 
County  Treasurers,  ami  on  the  first  of  the  next 
mouth  shall  pav  the  .est  of  the  money  to  the 
Town  Treasurers.    (Id.,  §,^  3055-6.)    The  Com- 


Legislation.] 


28^ 


[Legislation. 


missioners  shall  report,  by  the  1st  of  December, 
specitically,  of  all  liceuses  granted  by  them 
for  the  ytar  ending  June  30  preceding  (Id.,  § 
3057. )  They  may,  upon  complaint  made  of  any 
violation  of  the  law,  revoke  any  license  ;  and 
they  have  the  power  of  Justices  of  the  Peace  for 
the  purpose  of  a  hearing  th?reou.  (Id.,  §  3058.) 
Any  prosecuting  agrnt,  of  his  own  motio:]  or 
upon  comsilaiot  of  two  legal  voters,  may  prefer 
charires  before  the  Commissioners,  who  shall 
within  14  days  suuunon  the  accused  to  appear 
and  show  reason  wliy  his  license  should  not  be 
revoked.  (Id  ,  tj  3059.)  The  fees  of  the  prose- 
cuting agent  shall  be  ^5  per  day,  those  of  others 
the  same  as  in  ordinary  crimiaal  cases,  to  be 
taxed,  drawn  and  paid  by  the  Commissioners. 
(Id.,  f5  3080. )  Such  revocatic  n  is  not  subject  to 
app-al.  On  revocation,  the  Treasurer  of  the 
county  shall  sue  on  the  bond,  and  on  proof  of 
any  violation  of  the  conditions  thereof  recover 
the  full  amount  of  the  bond.  (Id.,  :^  3061.) 
County  Commissioners  shall  not  deal  iu  liquors, 
or  become  surety  on  the  bond  of  any  person 
licensed.     (Id,  §3062.) 

Application  for  license  shall  be  signed  by  the 
applicant  and  five  electors  and  taxpayers  of  the 
town.  It  shall  specify  the  building  wherein 
liquor  i,  to  be  sold.  And,  if  within  200  feet  of 
church  or  public-school  premises,  it  shall  state 
the  distance.  The  Town  Clerk  shall  certify  as 
to  the  siiiner.-*.  The  application  shall  be  then 
transmitted  to  the  Commissioners  and  a  copy 
of  the  application  filed  with  the  Clerk,  who  shall 
advertise  the  same  iu  some  paper  of  the  town,  or 
if  none,  1)y  posting,  two  weeks  before  the  hear- 
ing thereon  by  the  Commis-siuners.  The  ex- 
pense of  advertising  or  posting,  and  50  cents, 
shall  be  paid  to  the  Clerk  on  the  filing.  Any 
person  of  the  town  may  file  with  the  Com- 
missioners any  objjction  to  the  granting  of  the 
license,  and  the  Commissioners  shall  give  five 
days'  notice  of  the  hearing  on  the  objection, 
when  they  shall  decide  whether  to  grant  the 
licen.se  or  not.  (Id.,  i;  3063.)  Before  license, 
a  bond  in  $3,000  shall  be  filed  with  the  Com- 
missioners, and  no  liquor-dealer  can  be  a  surety 
thereon.  Any  conviction  of  violation  of  the 
law  forfeits  the  bond,  and  the  Treasurer  mu.st 
sue  upon  it  and  shall  recover  the  full  amount 
thereof.     (Id.,  §3064.) 

The  license  fee  shall  be  $100  to  $500,  as  the 
Commissioners  shall  determine,  in  each  case, 
except  in  towns  of  less  than  3,000  people,  when 
it  shall  be  $100  for  all  liquors,  and  $50  for  ale, 
lager  beer,  cider  and  Rhine  wine  only  ;  and  for 
portions  of  a  year,  such  proportion  as  the  Com- 
missioners judge  proper.  A  druggist's  license 
to  sell  forcomiDouuding  prescriptions,  and  upon 
prescrijitions,  shall  be  ^12,  or  $10  in  towns  of 
less  than  5  000  inhabitants.  Druggists'  licenses 
to  .sell  in  quantities  not  exceeding  one  gallon, 
not  to  be  drunk  on  the  premises,  are  $50  ;  and 
druggists'  licenses  to  sell  only  on  prescription, 
not  to  be  drunk  on  the  premises,  in  No-License 
towns,  .•;12  (Id.,  §  3064. )  One  sale  only  shall 
be  made  on  one  prescription.  (Id.,  g  3065.) 
Prescriptions  shall  be  dated  and  filed  by  the 
druggist  (Id.,  fj  3066.)  Druggi.sts  must  sign 
an  application  for  license,  to  be  lodged  with  the 
Commis-sioners  two  weeks,  and  objections  may 
be  made  as  in  other  cases,  and  revocation  the 


same  way.  (Id.,  §  8067.)  Druggists'  licenses 
shall  contain  the  words,  '•  This  license  does  not 
authorize  the  sale  of  spirituous  or  intoxicating 
liquor  to  be  drunk  on  the  pi-emises."  (Id.,  § 
3068.) 

Every  license  shall  specify  the  building  and 
town,  and  authorizes  sales  in  no  other  place, 
and  shall  be  made  revocable,  in  terms,  for  vio- 
lation of  law.  The  Commissioners  may  indorse 
the  licen.se  with  permission  to  remove  to  another 
specified  building  in  the  town.  (Id.,  ^  3069  ) 
All  licenses  shallhave  plainly  printed  on  their 
faces  §,•  3092  and  3094,  G.  S.  (Id..i^  3070) 
On  the  death  of  a  licensee,  his  executors  or  ad- 
ministrators may,  with  the  consent  of  the  Com- 
missioners, transfer  his  license  to  a  suitable  per- 
son, who  must  himself  make  application  and 
execute  bond  as  for  original  licen.^e.  (Id,f5 
3071  )  Everyone  shall  have  his  license  framed 
and  hung  in  plain  view  iu  the  room  of  sale,  on 
penalty  of  $5.  (Id.,  i^  3072.)  The  Clerk  of  the 
Superior  Court  of  the  county  .shall  keep  a  rec- 
ord of  all  licenses.  Persons  not  having  their 
licenses  so  recorded  shall  be  fined  $5  a  week. 
A  certificate  of  such  Clerk  that  any  person  is  or 
is  not  duly  licensed  or  that  his  license  has  been 
revoked,  is  prima  facie  evidence.     (Id.,  J^  3073.) 

No  liquors  shall  be  sold  in  any  State,  county 
or  town  building  No  license  shall  be  granted 
for  any  building  used  as  a  dwelling-house,  ex- 
cept a  hotel,  until  access  from  the  dwelling  por- 
tion has  lieen  effectually  closed;  and  if  any 
such  way  is  opened  it  forfeits  the  license.  (Id., 
§  3074.)  No  license  shall  be  granted  to  any 
Sheriff,  Constable,  Grand  Juror,  Justice  of  the 
Peace.  Prosecuting  Agent,  Selectman  (except 
such  Selectman  is  a  hotel-keeper),  or  to  any  fe- 
male not  known  to  be  a  woman  of  good  repute, 
or  any  female  member  of  the  household  of  a 
person  who  has  been  refased  license  or  who  has 
forfeited  his  license,  or  to  a  house  of  ill-fame  or 
place  reputed  to  be  a  house  of  ill- fame,  or  to  any 
person  keeping  a  gambling  place      (Id.,  §  3074  ) 

Whenever  any  licensee  is  convicted  of  a  vio- 
lation of  ?g  3087-3101  he  shall,  in  a  Iditioa  to 
the  other  penalties,  forfeit  his  licen.se.  and  the 
Commissioners  shall  revoke  it  and  he  may  not 
be  licen.sed  again  for  a  year.     (Id,  tj  3075.) 

License  to  sell  is  not  n  quired  of  importers 
into  the  United  States  of  liquors  remaining  in 
the  original  packages.  (Id.,  t^  3076. )  Executors 
or  administrators,  or  the  trustees  of  an  insolvent 
estate,  may  sell  the  liquors  belonging  to  the 
estate  in  one  lump,  to  a  regularly-licensed 
dealer  only.  (Id.,  §3077.)  No  person  shall 
sell  liquor  by  sample,  by  soliciting  orders,  with- 
out taking  out  a  license;  but  if  he  does  so  he 
may  solicit  orders  in  any  town  where  liquor 
may  be  legally  sold.  (Id,  i;  3078.  i  Whenever 
any  license  has  been  obtained  by  fraud,  the 
Commissioners  may  revoke  the  same  without 
refunding  moneys  paid  therefor.  (Id  ,  g  3079. ) 
No  licensee  shall  employ  any  minor  as  a  bar- 
tender or  porter  on  his  place,  on  penalty  of 
revocation  of  his  license  by  the  Commissioners. 
(Id.,  t<  3080.)  All  liciuors  intended  to  be  sold 
unlawfully  shall,  together  with  the  vessels  con- 
taining them,  be  deemed  nuisances.  (Id.,  § 
3081.) 

Any  Justice  of  the  Peace  or  Police  Court, 
upon  the  sworn  complaint  of  two  voters,  or  of 


Legislation] 


284 


[Legislation. 


any  prosecuting  agent,  setting  forth  with  reason- 
able certainty  as  to  the  kind  of  liquor,  place  and 
owner,  that  such  liquors  are  intended  to  be  sold 
in  violation  of  law,  may  issue  a  warrant  direct- 
ing any  police  or  other  officer  to  search  the  prem- 
ises ana  seize  the  liquor.  If  the  piac3  is  a 
dwelling  house,  the  prosecuting  agent  or  one  of 
the  said" complainants  shall  make  oath  that  he 
believes  unlawful  sales  have  been  made  there 
within  30  days.  And  the  Justices  or  Court 
must  find  that  there  is  an  adequate  reason  for 
such  belief  (Id.,  §3082.)  On  such  seizure  the 
Justice  or  Court  shall  within  two  days  post  and 
leave  at  the  place  of  seizure,  and  at  the  u.sual 
residence  of  the  owner,  a  summons  notifying 
him  and  all  concerned  to  appear  in  six  to  12 
days  to  show  cause  why  the  liquor  is  not  a 
nuisance.  (Id.,  g  3083.)  The  costs  under  the 
last  two  sections  shall  oe  paid  by  the  town 
except  when  paid  by  defendants.  (Id., 
§  30S4;  see  Laws,  1889,  c.  48,  g  1.)  The 
Court  shall  direct  by  warrant,  if  the  complaint 
is  sustained,  some  officer  to  destroy  the  liquor. 
If  judgment  be  that  the  liquor  is  not  a  nuisance 
the  Court  sliall  direct  that  it  be  restored  and  the 
costs'taxed  and  paid  as  in  case  of  acquittal  of  a 
criminal  charge.  (G.  S.,  1888,  g  8085  ;  am'd  by 
Laws,  1889,  c.  48,  §  2.)  All  proceedings  for 
seizure  shall  be  in  rem.  and  conducted  as 
civil  actions,  and  the  defendants  have  the  right 
of  appeal      (G.  S.,  1888,  S  3086.) 

Any  person  selling  without  license,  or  con- 
trary to  his  license,  shall  for  the  first  offense  be 
fined  not  more  than  ^50,  for  the  second  shall  be 
fined  $50  and  imprisoned  30  days,  for  third  and 
subsequent  ones,  $100  and  60  days  imprison- 
ment. (Id.,  g  30ri7.)  Every  person  keeping  a 
bar  or  place  in  which  it  is  reputed  liquors  are 
kept  without  license,  shall  be  fined  not  over  $30. 
(Id..  §3088.) 

The  Selectmen  shall  semi  annually  prepare  a 
list  of  those  persons  aided  by  the  town  wnouse 
liquor,  and  lodge  a  copy  "thereof,  forbidding 
sales  to  such  person.s,  or  their  families  except 
upon  prescription,  also  signed  by  the  Selectmen, 
with  every  licensed  dealer  in  town.  (Id.,  § 
3089.)  Every  licensee  who  sells  to  such  per- 
sons after  such  notice,  shall  be  fined  $10  to  $50, 
or  imprisoned  10  to  60  days,  or  both.  (Id.,  § 
309U. )  Whenever  any  person  shall  complain  to 
the  Selectmen  that  his  father,  mother,  husband, 
wife,  child  or  ward  is  addicted  to  the  excessive 
use  of  liquors,  the  Selectmen,  believing  the 
same,  upon  request,  shall  notify  every  licen.sed 
dealer  in  town  not  to  sell  to  such  person  so  desig- 
nated. Such  notices  remain  in  force  as  long  as 
the  dealer  is  annually  licensed,  or  may  be  re- 
voked in  a  year  by  the  Selectmen.  (Id.,  § 
3091;  am'dby  Laws,  1889,  c.  136.)  Licensees  who 
deliver  liquor  to  a  minor  for  his  or  any  other 
person's  u.'^e,  or  to  any  intoxicated  p  r  on,  or  to 
any  husband  or  wife  after  receiving  notice  from 
v/ife  or  husband,  respectively,  not  to  do  so,  or 
knowingly  to  any  habitual  drunkard,  or  to  any 
persons  after  a  Selectmen's  notice,  as  in  last  sec- 
tion, or  allow  any  minors  to  loiter  upon  their 
premises,  shall  be  fined  not  more  than  $50,  or 
be  imprisoned  10  to  60  days,  or  both.  (G.  S., 
1888,  t^  3092  ) 

Every  person  keeping  open  any  place  for  the 
sale  of  "liquor  to  be  drank  on  the  premises  on 


election  day  shall  be  fined  ^50.  (Id.,  3093  ; 
Laws,  1889,  c.  197.)  Licensees  shall  not  keep 
open  their  places  between  11  p.  M.  and  5  a.  m.. 
on  penalty  of  $25  to  $50;  but  this  does  not 
apply  to  druggists  ;  and  the  town,  or  the  au- 
thorities of  any  city,  borough,  or  town,  may  fix 
the  Lour  of  closing  as  late  as  12  p.  m.  (G.  S., 
1888,  t;  30y4.) 

Drugaists  violating  i;§  3087-3101  shall  be 
fined  .j50  to  $100.  (Id.,  §  3095.)  Any  person 
violating  §§  3065-6  shall  be  fined  $25  to  $100. 
(Id.,  i^3096.) 

Keeping  open  a  saloon  or  reputed  place  of 
sale  of  liquor,  or  gaming  place  on  Sunday  from 
midnight  to  midnight,  shall  be  punished  hy  fine 
of  $50  to  $100,  or  imprisonment  not  mo^e  than 
six  months,  or  both;  but  this  does  not  apply  to 
druggists.     (Id.,  §  3097.) 

Every  jailer,  prison  keeper  or  other  officer 
who  shall  furnish  liquor  to  any  prisoner  under 
his  charge,  except  as  medicine,  shall  be  fined 
$20.  (Id.,  J;  3098.)  Every  person  who  de.ivers 
liquor  to  any  prisoner  without  permission  of 
the  keeper  shall  be  fined  $10     (Id.,  i^  3099.) 

Persons  manufacturing  adulterated  liquors 
shall  be  fined  not  over  $250,  half  to  the  informer. 
(Id.,  §3100.) 

Persons  selling  liquor  to  be  drunk  on  their 
promises  shall  be  liable  fur  any  damages  to  the 
person  or  property  of  another,  caused  by  the 
intoxication  of  the  person  so  sold  to.  (Id., 
§3101.) 

Prosecutions  may  be  before  Justices  of  the 
Peace  or  any  City  or  Police  Courts,  but  no 
such  Justice  shall  fine  more  than  $100  or  im- 
prison more  than  60  days.  An  original  informa- 
tion may,  in  all  cases,  be  filed  in  the  Superior 
Court  by  the  Suites  Attorney.  (Id.,  §  310,'.) 
The  County  Commissioner.-,  subject  to  the  ap- 
proval of  a  Judge  of  the  Superior  Ci;urt,  may 
appoint  one  or  more  persons  as  prosecuting 
agents,  who  shall  inquire  into  and  pro.secute 
for  violations  of  this  law.  They  shall  render 
monthly  accounts  of  their  doings  to  the  Com- 
missioners and  hold  office  two  years,  unless 
sooner  removed  Selling  liquor  vacates  their 
offices.  (Id  ,  §  3103.)  Prosecuting  agents  shidl 
receive  not  exceeding  $10  (to  be  taxed  by  the 
Court)  in  e.ich  case.     (Id.,  §  3104.) 

Whenever  a  person  arrested  for  intoxication 
discloses  to  the  prosecuting  officer  where  and 
how  he  procured  the  liquor,  and  testifies  at  the 
trial  of  tlie  accused,  such  evidence  shall  not  be 
used  affainst  him  for  his  intoxication.     (Id., 

§  3105.  y 

Any  officer  having  a  warrant  for  the  arrest  of 
a  person  for  keeping  a  house  of  ill-fame  or  dis- 
orderly house,  or  keeping  open  on  Sunday,  or 
for  the  seizure  of  liquors,  may  make  forcible 
entry  into  the  place  describi  d,  after  demanding 
admittance  as  an  officer.  The  County  Commis- 
sioners, the  Sheriff,  the  Chief  of  Police  or  any 
Deputy  Sheriff,  or  policeman  specially  author- 
ized by  such  Sheriff  or  Chief,  respectively,  may 
at  any  time  enter  upon  the  premises  of  any 
licensee,  to  see  how  the  business  is  conduoted 
and  to  preserve  order.    (Id.,  §  3106.) 

Whenever  liquor  is  found  in  possession 
of  one  having  a  United  States  "license,"  such 
"license"  shall  he  prima  facie  evidence  that  the 
liquor  was  intended  for  sale.     (Id.,  §  3107.) 


Legislation.] 


285 


[Legislation. 


Where  towns  have  voted  aiainst  license 
therein,  the  Selectmen  shall  appoint  one  agent 
for  every  5,000  inhabitants  or  fraction  th;jreof 
in  said  town,  to  sell  liquor  for  sacramental, 
medicinal,  chemical  and  mechanical  purposes 
only.  He  holds  office  one  year,  or  until  re- 
moved The  Selectmen  shall  authorize  thf 
Town  Treasurer  to  furnish  said  agent  necessary 
money  to  purchase  liquor  for  the  agency.  (Id. , 
1:5  3109.)  Such  agent  shall  give  bonds  in  $500, 
to  be  forfeited  to  the  town  on  any  violation  of 
the  rules  in  relation  to  his  agency.  (Id.,  Jj  3110.) 
He  shall  sell  only  at  the  place  designated.  He 
shall  purchase  and  sell  according  to  rules  of 
the  Selectmen.  He  shall  keep  an  accurate  ac- 
count of  his  purchases  and  sales,  as  to  quantity, 
kind,  price,  date  and  names,  and  residence  of 
sellers  to  him,  and  buyers  from  him,  and  in 
the  latter  case,  the  use  to  which  the  liquor  was 
to  be  put.  This  account  shall  be  open  to  the 
Selectmen,  Grand  Jurors  and  prosecuting 
agents,  and  the  civil  authority.  (Id.,  ij  3111.) 
He  shall  s?ll  liquor  at  not  over  25  per  cent,  ad- 
vance on  cost,  and  shall  receive  compensation 
not  dependent  on  his  .sales,  fixed  by  the  Select- 
men. (Id.,  ^3113.)  Persons  purchasing  of 
him,  who  make  false  representations  of  the  use 
to  which  the  liquors  are  to  be  put,  shall  be  fined 
§50  or  imprisoned  not  over  GO  days,  or  both. 
(Id.,i^  3113.) 

All  contracts,  any  part  of  the  consideration  of 
which  has  been  the  ille!.al  .sale  of  liquor,  are 
void  and  action  cannot  be  maintained  to  re- 
cover upon  the  s.ame.    (Id.,  g  3114.) 

Whenever  a  town  that  has  voted  No-License 
reverses  that  vote,  the  liquors  in  the  hands  of 
the  Town  Agent  may  be  sold  by  the  Selectmen 
at  wholesale.     (Id.,  §8115.) 

When  in  any  liquor  prosecution  any  sample 
of  suc'i  liquor  is  pr.sented  in  Court,  it  may 
order  such  sample  conveyed  to  a  State  Chemist 
for  analysis.  (Id..  ^3116.)  State  Chemists 
shall  analyze  such  samples,  keeping  a  record  of 
the  same,  copies  of  which  shall  be  Ie';al  evi- 
dence of  the  facts.  (Id.,  t$8117. )  Liquors  may 
be  levied  upon  and  sold,  on  execution,  in  the 
same  manner  as  other  personal  property,  with- 
out license,  in  quantities  of  not  less  than  five 
gallons,    (Id..  §  1159) 

No  part  of  the  buildings  or  grounds  of  an 
agricultural  fair  shall  be  leased  for  the  .sale  of 
liquor.  (Id.,  ^5  1723.)  No  person  shall  sell 
liquor  within  1  000  feet  of  such  grounds,  on 
l)enalty  of  not  more  than  $50  for  tiie  first  of- 
fense, $50  and  30  days'  imprisonment  for  the 
seeond,  and  $100  and  60  days  for  third  and 
subsequent  offenses,  (Id.,  t^  1725.)  The  com- 
manding officer  of  any  encampment  or  parade 
may  prohibit  the  sale  of  liquor  within  one  mile 
thereof.     (Id.,  §3187.) 

Every  person  found  intoxicated  shall  be 
fined  $1  to  $20,  or  imprisoned  not  over  30  days. 
(Id.,  §  15-12.)  Any  Justice  of  the  Peace  having 
personal  knowledge  of  any  drunkenness  may 
render  judgment  thereon,  without  previous 
complaint  or  warrant,  having  the  person  first 
brought  before  him.     (Id.,  §  689.) 

Physiology  and  hygiene  relating  especially 
to  the  effects  of  liquors,  stimulants  and  nar- 
cotics on  the  system,  shall  be  taught  in  the  pub- 


lic schools,  and  teachers  must  be  qualified 
therein.     (Id,  §  2141.) 

In  towns  that  have  voted  No-License,  all 
places  used  for  clubs  or  societies  where  liquor 
is  sold  or  distributed  to  the  members  thereof, 
shall  be  deemed  common  nuisances.  (Laws,  18S9, 
c.  127.)  And  whoever  keeps  or  assists  in  keep- 
ing such  nuisance,  shall  be  fined  not  more  than 
$50.    (Id.) 

Town  Clerks  within  10  days  after  election 
shall  return  to  the  Secretary  of  State  the  num- 
ber of  votes  for  and  against  license.  (Laws, 
1889,  c.  115  ;  G.  S.,  1888,  ^^  54.) 

No  Agent  shall  procure  and  deliver  liquors 
for  any  one  not  licensed  to  sell,  without  a  writ- 
ten order  from  such  person  or  firm  therefor. 
Such  Agent  shall  keep  such  orders  on  file,  and 
produce  the  same  when  called  for  by  any  prose- 
cuting agent  or  Grand  Juror,  under  penalty  of 
§  3087  G.  S.    (Laws,  1889,  c.  187.) 

A  druggist  shall  not  sell  on  physicians'  pre- 
scriptions, unless  they  state  kind  and  quantity, 
name,  date  and  residence,  the  need  of  the  liquor, 
and  are  signed  by  physicians  (who  shall  be 
known  to  the  druggist);  they  must  be  filled 
within  three  days.  "(Laws,  1889,  c.  199,  §  1.) 
Such  pre-criptions  shall  be  filed  and  entered  in 
a  book,  and  such  entry  shall  be  open  for  in- 
spection, and  be  sufficient  evidence  of  sale. 
(Id.,  §2.)  Physicians  knowingly  issuing  pre- 
scriptions falsely,  as  procured  for  a  beverage, 
shall  be  fined  §25  to  $50,  and  druggists  violating 
this  law  shall  be  fined  $50  to  $100,    (Id.,  §  3.) 

Town  or  probate  records  shall  not  be  kept 
where  liquor  is  sold  as  a  beverage,  on  penalty 
of  --7  to  $100.     (Laws,  1889,  c.  27.) 

Disclosure,  by  a  person  prosecuted  for  in- 
toxication, shall  be  requested  by  the  prosecuting 
officer,  and,  if  refused,  the  accused  shall  ha 
committed  for  contempt  for  10  to  30  days. 
(Law.s.  1889,  c  167.) 

No  premises  where  liquor  is  sold  .shall  be  ob- 
structed by  any  curtain  or  screen,  to  prevent  a 
view  of  the  bar  and  interior  from  the  street 
during  times  when  sales  are  prohibited,  on  pen- 
alty of  not  more  than  $50  or  imprisonment  not 
more  than  30  days,  or  both.  (Id.,  c.  112.)  This 
does  not  apply  to  druggists.     (Id.) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  a  majority  of  either  House,  and  it 
at  the  next  session  this  is  concurred  in  by  two- 
thirds  of  each  House  a  special  election  on  the 
question  may  be  ordered — a  majority  vote  of 
the  people  being  necessary  to  adoption. 

There  is  a  law  requiring  scientific  temperance 
instruction  in  the  public  schools.  (R,  S.,  1888, 
§  2141  ;  passed  in  1886,  c.  116.) 

Dakota  Territory. 

The  first  Legislature  authorized  license  by 
the  County  Commissioners  for  $10  to  $100, 
fined  sales  without  license  $30  to  $100,  and 
made  it  the  duly  of  public  officers  to  make  com- 
plaint of  violations  of  the  law.  (Laws,  1862, 
c.  83  )  Selling  or  giving  liquor  to  Indians  was 
punished  by  imprisonment,  30  to  90  days,  and 
fine  of  $20  to  $100,  and  prosecutions  by  officers 
and  individuals  were  provided  for.  (Laws, 
1862,  c.  47.)  The  License  law  of  1864  (c.  23) 
included  other  businesses  than  liquor-selling, 


Legislation.] 


2SG 


[Legislation. 


increased  the  saloon  license  from  125  to  $300, 
and  gave  tlie  Board  of  Commissioners  discretion 
to  grant  and  revoke. 

The  License  law  was  made  somewhat  stronger 
by  Laws  of  1872,  c.  25.  Uamaues  caused  by  an 
intoxicated  person  were  awarded  against  the 
liquor-seller,  and  the  real  estate  upon  which 
the  sales  were  made  was  made  liable  therefor. 
By  c  26  of  the  same  year,  selling  on  election 
days  was  punished  by  fine  of  $25  to  ^100  and 
imprisonment  for  not  exceeding  20  days. 

A  more  elaborate  license  law  was  passed  in 
1879.  (Laws,  c.  26.)  It  provided  license  fees  of 
$200  to  $500  to  be  fixed  by  the  Commissioners, 
increased  the  penalty  for  violation  to  a  fine  of 
8100  to  S;300  or  imprisonment  not  exceeding  60 
days  or  both,  and  provided  for  a  druggist's 
license  to  sell  for  medicinal  purposes  upon  pre- 
scription. 

Tins  law  was  amended  by  c  71,  Laws  of 
1887,  to  make  the  license  fee  from  $500  to 
$1  000.  Sales  within  half  a  mile  of  fairs,  within 
three  miles  of  the  University  of  Dakota,  and  in 
Iroquois  and  Denver,  were  proliibited  by 
Special  Laws  of  1885,  c.  3  i;  12  ;  c.  150.  and  c. 
49,  respectively.  Prohibition  by  Local  Option 
was  provided  for  on  petition  of  one-third  of  the 
voters  of  any  county,  and  a  majority  vote  on 
submis'^ion  of  the  question  at  time  of  general 
elections.  (Laws,  1887,  c  70  )  Injunction  was 
provided  to  be  issued  against  violators  of  this 
act.     (Id.,  ;<  5.) 

All  these  lawg  are  now,  of  course,  repealed  by 
the  adoption,  in  the  States  of  North  and  South 
Dakota,  of  Prohibitory  Constitutional  pro- 
visions.    (See  North  Dakota  and  South  Dakota 


) 


Delaware. 


Colonial  Provisions. — A  general  license  law  of 
1740  requireil  all  keepers  of  inns  or  alehouses  to 
obtain  licenses  of  the  Governor,  by  recommenda- 
tion of  the  Justices  of  the  Court  of  Quarter  Ses- 
sions; and  none  but  fit  persons  with  suitable 
places  were  to  bo  recommended.  Suffering  tip- 
pling at  unseasonable  hours,  gaming  or  drunken- 
ness was  fined  20.s;  for  a  second  offense,  40s  to 
£5,  and  for  a  third  was  punished  by  suppres- 
sion of  license  and  disqualification  to  receive 
one  for  three  years.  Selling  liquor  without 
license  was  fined  £5.  The  Justices  might  settle 
rates  and  prices  at  such  houses,  which  were  to 
be  po.sted.  (Laws,  vol.  1,  p.  192  )  No  Sheriff 
or  jailer  was  to  keep  a  tavern  or  sell  liquor  to 
prisoners.     (Id.,  p   207.) 

Early  State  Provisions. — Justices  of  the  Peace 
were  not  to  hold  court  at  an  inn.  (2  Id  ,  p.  1052 
[1792]  )  Tavern-keepers  or  any  persons  pro- 
moting horse-racing,  foot-racing,  cock-fighting 
or  shooting  matches,  and  selling  liquor  to  those 
assembled  thereat,  were  to  have  their  licenses 
suppressed,  and  be  fined  £10.  (3  Id  ,  p.  230 
[1802].)  Tavern  licenses  were  to  pay  $12.  (4 
Id.,p  261  [1809].)  The  penalty  for  permitting 
tippling,  drunkenness  and  gambling  was  placed 
at  .$10,  $20  for  second  offense,  $30  and  for- 
feiture of  license  and  disqualification  three 
years  for  third;  for  selling  without  license,  it 
was  $14.     (Laws,  1827,  c.  28.) 

By  the  Laws  of  1841,  c.  301,  applications  for 
inn  licenses  in  Wilmington  were  required  to 
pass  the  City  Council.     Laws  requiring  all  re- 


tailers of  goods,  wares  and  merchandise  to  take 
out  licenses  and  pay  fees  according  to  value  of 
stock,  but  not  in  excess  of  $30,  were  passed  in 
1843,  1845  and  1847,  the  first  one  taking  the 
place  of  an  act  of  1822.  By  Laws  of  1845,  c. 
83,  tavern  licenses  with  the  privilege  of  selling 
spirituous  liquors  were  fixed  at  Sl2  ;  without 
such  privilege  $5 ;  penalty  for  sell'ng  liquor  by 
licensees  of  the  latter  class,  $14  and  forfeiture 
of  license. 

Local  Option  and  ProMhitory  Legislation  of 
1847-57. — License  or  No-License  (and  con,se 
quent  Prohibition)  was  submitte;!  to  the  people 
to  decide,  by  Laws  of  1847,  c.  186.  This  was  de- 
clared unconstitutional,  as  a  delegation  of  the 
legislative  authority  to  make  laws.  (Ricev  Fos- 
ter, 3  Harring,  479. )  Selling  liquor  as  a  beverage 
by  keepers  of  public  houses,  was  ])rohibited.  up- 
on penalty  of  $20  for  first  and  $50  for  second  of- 
fense. (Laws,  1851,  c.  597.)  Later,  the  recom- 
mendation of  a  majority  of  the  voters  in  any 
school-district  was  required  for  liceui:''e  to  sell 
liquor,  together  with  a  recommendation  to  the 
Governor,  by  the  Judges  of  General  Sessions. 
The  fee  was  fixed  at  $25  ;  penalty  for  violation. 
$20.  (Laws,  1853,  §4^  2-5.)  tavern-keepers 
were  exempted  from  this  provision,  but  wire 
allowed  to  sell  only  for  consumption  within 
their  houses.  (Id.,g6.)  Alehou.ses  were  pro- 
hibited. (Id.,  g8.)  Records  of  applications  for 
license  were  required  to  be  kept  by  the  Clerks 
of  the  Peace.  (Id.,  §  10. )  A  Prohil)itory  liquor 
or  Maine  law  was  passed  in  1855,  (Laws,  c.  255.) 
This  act,  and  the  act  last  above  it,  were  re- 
pealed by  c.  330  of  Laws  of  1857. 

Return  to  License. — By  the  act  of  1857,  c.  438, 
licenses  to  sell  liquors  were  granted  at  from 
$20  to  $50,  without  recommendation.  Penalties 
for  unlawful  sales  were  placed  at  $5  to  $10, 
with  forfeiture  of  license  for  third  offense.  The 
act  of  1861,  c.  107,  required  the  recommenda- 
tion of  the  Grand  Jury  to  obtain  licenses,  and 
that  licenses  be  hung  up  in  the  barroom.  Sell- 
ing or  distributing  liquor  in  a  concert  saloon 
was  prohibited  bj^  Laws  of  1863,  c.  295.  Recom- 
mendation by  the  Judges  of  the  Court  of  Gen- 
eral Sessions  was  substituted  for  that  of  the 
Grand  Jury  by  Laws  of  1864,  c.  413. 

llie  LaiD  as  Lt  Existed  in  1889. — No  person 
shall  sell  intoxicating  liquor  except  as  herein- 
after provided.  (Revised  Code,  1874,  p.  259, 
§  1.)  The  Secretary  of  State  shall  furnish 
licenses  to  the  Clerks  of  the  Peace  to  issue. 
(Id.,  >^  2.)  All  officers  having  knowledge  of 
violations  of  this  act  shall  proceed  against  the 
delinquents.  (Id.,  p.  260,  §4.)  Licenses  shall 
be  conspicuously  hung  up  in  the  place  of  busi- 
ness. (Id.,  g  5. )  It  is  the  duty  of  the  Court  to 
charge  this  act  to  the  Grand  Jury,  and  their 
duty  to  present  all  violators  they  individually 
know  of.  (Id.,i?7. )  Any  retailer  of  goods  or 
druggist  of  good  character,  and  whose  stock  is 
worth  not  less  than  $500,  may  be  licensed  to  sell 
liquor  in  the  same  way  as  a  tavern  is  licensed; 
but  in  the  case  of  the  druggist,  he  can  retail 
only  in  quantities  greater  than  a  quart,  and  in 
the  other  case,  not  le.ss  than  a  half  gallon  (Id., 
t?  8),  not  to  be  drunk  on  the  premises,  upon  pen- 
alty of  $50  to  $100.    (Id.,k5  9.) 

To  be  licensed  as  a  tavern-keeper,  application 
must  be  made  to  the  Clerk  of  the  Peace,  describ- 


Legislation.] 


287 


[Legislation. 


ing  his  place,  stating  that  ho  has  tavern  accom- 
modations for  travelers,  and  that  an  inn  there  is 
necessary.  (Id.,  p.  361,  J?  1.)  He  shall  publish 
Lis  intention  t  j  apply  three  time^  in  two  papers, 
and  shall  lile  acertiticate  of  1'2  citizens  (half  of 
them  freeholders)  or  24  in  Wilmington.  (Id., 
t;  2;  Laws.  1889,  c.  5.15,  §  3  )  The  application 
is  laid  before  tlie  Court  of  General  Sessions, 
■which,  at  its  discretion,  marks  it  aj^proved  or 
not  approved,  and  the  license  issued  or  not,  ac- 
cordingly.   (Id..   ^§11,12.) 

Licen.sees,  selling  liquor  on  Sunday  or  elec- 
tion day  to  a  minor,  in  a  le  person,  habitual 
drunkard  or  intoxicated  p^-rson,  are  lined  $  lO  to 
$100,  and  on  second  conviction  forfeit  their 
licenses  and  are  disqualified  to  be  licensed  two 
years.  (Id,  p.  262.  t^  14. )  No  secret  door  shall 
be  allowed,  no  disorderly  or  lewd  conduct  or 
gambling;  nor  shall  any  pawn  be  taken  for 
liquor  under  the  same  penalty.  No  debt  for 
liquor  retailed  is  co'lectable.  (Id.,  §15.)  Any 
one  found  drunk  or  excited  by  liquor,  and  noi.sy 
in  any  public  place,  may  be  arrested  and  locked 
up,  and  on  hearing  b3  recommitted  five  days  or 
fined  not  exceeding  ^10.  (Id.,  t<  16.)  The  sale 
of  liquor  not  herein  authorized  is  a  misdemeanor 
and  fined  S.IO  to  *100.  (Id.,  p  263,  §  19.)  This 
act  do:s  not  apply  to  manufacturers  of  liquors, 
wine  or  cider,  selling  not  less  than  one  quart, 
not  to  be  drunk  upon  the  premises.     (Id..  §  20.) 

Hereaft.  r  no  licenses  shall  be  granted  to  any 
person  to  sell  intoxicating  licjuors,  but  they 
shall  authorize  sale  thereof  to  be  made  in  some 
house  described  in  the  petition.  The  owner  of 
the  house  shall  be  pjtitiouer  for  license,  which 
shall  be  granted  as  before.  (Laws,  1881,  c.  384, 
§  1.)  Judgments  for  violations  of  the  liquor 
laws  shall  be  liens  on  the  premises  licensed. 
(Id..  §  2  ) 

A  diamgist  must  take  oath  not  to  sell  over 
$75  worth  of  liquor  during  the  year.    (Id.,  ??  3.) 

If  any  tenant  is  convicted  of  violating  the  law 
his  lease  is  made  void  if  the  landlord  is  not 
privy  to  such  violation.    (Id..  §  4. ) 

A  tax  of  10  cents  a  gallon  is  laid  on  liquors 
manufactured.     (Id.,i^6.) 

The  Court  may  take  olhcial  notice  that  spirit- 
uous, mixed  or  fermented  liquors,  except  cider, 
are  intoxicating.    (Id  ,  §  7. ) 

Conviction  of  the  owner  or  occupier  of  prem- 
ises, of  unlawful  sales,  makes  the  continuance 
of  the  business  thereafter  a  nuisance,  which 
may  be,  by  addition  t)  the  judument  of  the 
Court,  suppres'^ed ;  and  the  Sh  "riff  shall  seize 
and  hold  the  building.    (Id.,  t^  9  ) 

Where  there  is  no  .specific  penalty  in  this  act, 
it  shall  be  $100  and  imprisonment  one  to  six 
month.s,  and  forfeiture  of  licen.se.     (Id  ,  §  12.) 

Whenever  it  is  shown  tliat  any  injury  has 
been  coused  to  any  one  of  known  intemperate 
habits  in  conseqvience  of  sales  to  him  of  liquor, 
the  wife,  husband  or  children  mav  recover  of 
the  vendor  actual  and  exemplary  but  not  ex- 
cessive damages.    (Id.,  §  14. ) 

Tnere  shall  be  a  special  baililT  for  Wilmington, 
for  the  special  duty  of  searching  out  violations 
of  the  liquor  laws.     (Id.,  i^  10.) 

Provisions  shall  be  made  immediately  for  in- 
structing all  pupils  in  physiology  and  hygiene, 
with  special  reference  to  the  effects  of  alcoholic 
drinks,  stimulants  and  narcotics  upon  the  human 


system.      Teachers  must  pass   satisfactory  ex- 
aminations therein.     (Laws,  1887,  c.  69  ) 

Druggists  may  not  s  "11  intoxicating  liquors 
unless  licensed  to  sell  the  same,  and  then  only 
upon  phy.sician's  prescription.  Such  sales  shall 
be  but  one  on  each  prescription,  which  itself 
must  be  filed  by  pasting  in  a  book  open  to  the 
public  upon  penalty  of  $100.  (Laws,  1889,  c. 
55.-),  t<  1.) 

The  price  of  tavern  licenses  shall  be  $300  in 
cities  of  over  10,000  iuhibitants :  elsewhere, 
§200;  druc  gist's  lieen.se,  $20;  retailer  of  mer- 
chandis",  $100.    (Id.,  s  2.) 

Lie, 'used  places  shall  be  kept  so  as  to  be  seen, 
fully,  and  easily,  by  passers-by,  and  not  ob- 
structed by  screens,  blinds  frosted  glass  or  any 
other  device,  upon  penalty  of  $50  to  $100. 
(Id.,  §4.) 

In  case  tavern -proprietors  die.  the  executor  or 
administrator  may  assign  the  license  with  tlie  ap- 
proval of  the  associate  Judges,  as  the  proprietor 
himself  might  have.    (Laws.  1889,  c.  554.) 

An  Amendment  to  the  C'mstitutiou  may  be 
proposed  by  two-thirds  of  each  House,  with 
the  approbation  of  the  Governor  :  if  ratified  by 
a  three-fourths  vote  in  the  next  Legislature,  it 
goes  to  the  people,  who  may  adopt  it  by  a  ma- 
jority. 

District  of  Columbia. 

See  United  States  Government  and  the 
Liquor  Traffic. 

Florida. 

Earlii'st  Provisions. — The  Revenue  act  of  the 
first  Legislature  of  Florida  taxed  tavern-keepers, 
or  persons  retailing  spirituous  liquors,  $20  in 
cities  and  $5  in  the  country.  (Laws,  1822,  p. 
67.)  This  was  made  $5  except  in  St.  Augustine 
by  the  Laws  of  1827,  p.  49.  and  $5  everywhere 
by  the  Laws  of  1828,  p  236.  for  tavern-keepers, 
and  $2  for  retailers  of  spirituous  liquors  selling 
under  half  a  gallon.  Selling  liquor  to  slaves, 
without  express  license  of  their  owners,  was 
punished  with  fine  not  exceeding  $100  and  im- 
prisonment not  exceeding  three  months.  (Laws 
1834,  c.  753.)  Retailers  of  spirituous  liquors 
received  licenses  of  the  Coimty  Clerks  on  pay- 
ment of  $25,  and  on  giving  bond  in  $1()0 
for  keeping  orderly  houses.  The  penalty  for 
selling  without  license  was  a  fine  of  not  over 
$500  and  imprisonment  not  exceeding  tliree 
months.  (Laws,  1840,  No.  42.)  The  law  against 
selling  liquor  to  slaves,  free  negroes  or  mulattos, 
without  written  permission  of  the  master  of  the 
slave  or  guardian  of  tlie  free  negro  or  mulatto, 
was  modified  in  1842,  a  fine  of  $20  being  im- 
posed, one-half  to  the  informer.  (Laws,  1843, 
c.  17.) 

The  Revenue  act  of  1845  (Laws,  c.  10,  §  32) 
made  the  license  fee  $30,  reduced  to  $20  at  tlie 
adjourned  session;  licenses  to  be  granted  by 
Sheriffs.  (Id.,  p.  64.)  Sellers  by  the  quart  and  up- 
ward, not  to  be  drunk  on  the  premises,  were 
exempted  from  retail  license.  (Laws,  1846,  c. 
91.) 

The  retail  license  was  placed  at  $300  by  the 
Laws  of  1853,  c.  513.  And  by  the  Laws 
of  1858,  c.  994,  the  penalty  for  selling  without 
license  was  $50  to  $500.  "The  license  was  re- 
duced to  $100  by  the  Laws  of  1859,  c.   1003. 


Legislation.] 


288 


[Legislation. 


And  sellers  by  the  quart  or  over  mieht  allow 
the  liquor  to  be  drunk  on  the  premise.«.  (Laws, 
1859,  c.  1008. )  Distilleries  were  prohibited,  and 
required  to  be  abated  as  nuisances  by  tl)C  Gov- 
ernor, except  those  distilling  liquor  for  use  in 
the  Confederate  Army  and  for  medicinal  pur- 
poses; penalty,  $1,000  to  $5,000,  or  imprison- 
ment three  to  13  months,  or  both.  (Laws, 
1863,  c.  1383.)  By  the  laws  of  18G3.  c.  1433, 
such  distillation  was  prohibited  under  the  high- 
er penalty  of  $10,000  and  imprisonment,  but 
distillation  from  fruits  of  the  country  was 
allowed. 

Retail  licenses  were  charged  $300  by  the  Rev- 
enue act  of  1835,  c.  1501,  §  6,  reduced  to  §50  by 
Laws  of  1868,  c.  1713,  §  3,  and  raised  to  $100  by 
Laws  of  1873.  c.  1887,  k^  1.  Selling  without  li- 
cense was  fined  double  the  required  fee.  In 
1881  the  license  Avas  made  $300,  thoiigh  only 
§25  wascharL'ed  for  selling  beer  and  wine  ex- 
clusively ;  distillers  were  cfiarged  S300.  (Laws, 
1881.  c.  3319,  §5  10.)  In  1887  (Laws,  c  3681)  the 
whiskey  retailer'.-A  license  was  raised  to  $400,  and 
the  beer  and  wine  license  was  abandoned. 

The  Lnw  as  It  Existed  in  1889. — The  Revenue 
law  of  1889(Law.s,  c.  3847,  i^  1)  enacts  that  no 
person  shall  engage  in  a  business  requiring 
license  without  a  State  license.  Counties,  cities 
and  towns  may  impose  additional  license,  equal 
to  half  the  State  license.  Licenses  shall  be 
for  one  year,  or  a  fractional  part  thereof, 
expiring  Oct  1.  and  maybe  transferred  with 
the  approval  of  the  Comptroller.  (Id.)  Dealers 
in  .spirituous  wines  and  malt  liquors  shall  pay 
.f--400,  and  distillers  $100.  for  each  place  of 
bus'ncss.  No  license  is  required  for  distilling 
from  the  products  of  the  vines  or  fruit-trees 
of  the  State,  and  no  license  shall  be  granted 
in  Prohibition  disiricts.  Makers  of  domestic 
wines  are  permitted  to  sell  in  quantities  of 
one  quart  or  more,  and  druggists  are  allowed 
to  sell  mixtures  made  officinal  by  the  United 
States  Dispensatory  without  license.  Liquor- 
dealers  on  boats  shall  only  need  to  take  out 
license  in  the  county  where  they  do  their  prin- 
cipal business,  and  at  landings  can  sell  to  no 
one  but  passengers  and  crew.  Selling  without 
license  is  fined  double  the  amount  of  the  required 
license  tax.     (Laws,  1883,  c.  3413,  §  13.) 

Applications  to  the  County  Commissioners 
for  license  to  sell  liquor  shall  bo  signed  by  a 
majority  of  the  registered  voters  of  the  election 
district  in  the  presence  of  two  credible  wit- 
nesses, and  contain  the  oath  of  the  applicant 
that  each  signature  is  genuine.  The  petition  is 
to  be  published  in  full,  in  a  paper  published  in 
the  county,  for  two  weeks  preceding  a  hearing 
thereon,  at  the  expense  of  the  applicant.  (Laws, 
1883,  c.  3416,  ^2.)  No  Collector  shall  issue  a 
licen.se  without  permit  of  the  County  Commis- 
sioners, and  the  license  shall  provide  that  it 
may,  by  them,  be  revoked  for  violations  of 
this  act.     (Id.,  i;  3  ) 

No  person  shall  sell  liquor  to  any  minor  or 
person  intoxicated.  (Id.,  t^  4)  The  County 
Commissioners,  upon  the  affidavit  of  two  reliable 
citizens  that  such  sales  have  been  made  by  any 
dealer,  may  suspend  his  license.  (Id.,  t;  5. )  Such 
affidavit  shall  be  made  before  the  Clerk  of  the 
County  Court,  who  shall  notify  the  dealer  to 
appear  at  the  next  regular  meeting  of  the  Board, 


when  the  Commissioners  shall,  if  the  charge  is 
sustained,  revoke  the  license.  (Id  ,  §  6.)  Any 
person  or  firm  that  shall  give  or  by  pretended 
sale  of  a  different  article  shall  furnish  liquor,  to 
entice  custom  or  evade  the  law,  s-hall  be  deemed 
selling  without  license.  (Id.,  §  7.)  Barrooms 
shall  be  closed  on  days  of  election  Sales  or 
gifts  of  liquor  within  two  miles  of  any  election 
precinct,  on  such  days,  shall  be  punished  by 
imprisonment  not  longer  than  six  months,  or  by 
fine  of  not  exceeding  $500.  (Laws,  1883,  c. 
3457. ) 

The  Board  of  County  Commissioners  of  each 
county  in  the  State,  not  oftener  than  once  in 
every  two  years  upon  application  of  one-fourth 
of  the  registered  voters,  shall  call  and  provide 
for  an  election  to  decide  whether  the  sale  of 
Intoxicating  liquors,  wines  or  beer,  shall  be  pro- 
hibited in  the  county,  the  question  to  be  de- 
termined by  majority  vote;  which  election  shall 
be  conducted  in  the  manner  of  general  elections 
— provided  that  intoxicating  liquors  shall  not 
be  sold  in  any  election  district  in  which  a 
majority  vote  has  be^n  cast  against  the  same  at 
the  said  election.  Elections  under  this  section 
shall  be  held  within  60  days  from  the  time  of 
presenting  said  application,  except  if  any  elec- 
tion so  ordered  shall  thereby  fall  within  63  days 
of  any  State  or  national  election,  it  must  be  held 
within  60  days  after  any  such  election.  The 
Legislature  shall  provide  necessary  laws  to  carry 
out  and  enforce  the  provisions  of  this  article. 
(Const.,  1885,  Art.  19,  ^§  1.  3  )  Upon  such  ap- 
plication, the  Clerk  of  the  Board  of  Crmmis- 
sioners  shall  give  30  days'  notice  of  the  election 
by  publishing  in  a  paper  in  each  town,  or  if 
there  is  no  newspaper  in  the  county,  by  posting 
in  ten  places.  The  Clerk  of  the  County  Court 
shall  appoint  registration  officers  who  shall 
register  voters  for  such  election.  (Laws,  1887, 
c  3700,  t^  1.)  If  any  county  votes  for  license, 
such  shall  be  granted  as  provided  by  law, 
but  liquors  shall  not  be  sold  in  any  precinct 
voting  against  license.  (Id.)  Penalty  for  vio- 
lating this  law  is  placed  at  not  exceeding  $500 
fine,  or  imprisonment  not  longer  than  six 
mouths,  or  both.     (Id.,  §  3  ) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  three-fifths  of  all  the  members  of 
the  two  Houses,  at  one  session;  the  popular  vote 
to  be  taken  at  the  next  general  election  for 
Representatives,  three  months'  notice  to  be 
given.     A  majority  carries  it. 

Georgia. 

Oglethorpe's  ProldbiHon  of  Bum  (1738-43).— 
The  second  day  after  the  arrival  of  James  Ogle- 
thorpe with  his  colonists  in  Georgia  (February, 
1733),  in  an  address  to  them  regarding  their 
duties,  he  said  that  "  the  importation  of  ardent 
spirits  was  illegal."  This  announcement,  how- 
ever, was  made  on  his  own  responsibility,  and 
did  not  have  formal  legal  effect  until  the  policy 
was  approved  in  London  (November,  1733)  by 
"the  Trustees  for  establishing  the  Colony  of 
Georgia  in  America."  In  a  letter  to  Oglethorpe, 
dated  Nov.  33.  1733,  the  Trustees  said  :  "As  it 
appears  evidently  by  your  letters  that  the  sick- 
ness among  the  people  is  owing  to  the  excessive 
drinking  of  rum  punch,  the  Trustees  do  abso- 


Legislation.] 


289 


[Legislation. 


lutely  forbid  their  drinking,  or  even  having 
any  rum,  and  agree  with  you  so  entirely  in  your 
sentiments  that  they  order  all  that  shall  be 
brought  there  to  be  immediately  staved.  As 
the  Trustees  are  apprehensive  all  their  orders  to 
this  purpose  may  be  ineffectual  while  the  trad- 
ing-house IS  so  near  and  can  supply  the  i)eople, 
they  are  of  opinion  that  the  trading-house  shall 
not  be  permitted,  but  on  condition  that  they  offer 
no  rum  for  sale,  nor  indeed  keep  any."  Parlia- 
ment accordingly  passed  an  act  proliibiting  '•  the 
importation  of  rum  and  brandies  "  into  Georgia, 
which  was  read  at  a  meeting  of  the  Trustees  on 
April  23,  1785.  This  prohibition  was  warmly 
supported  by  the  influence  of  Wesley,  Whitfield 
and  others;  but,  giving  rise  to  dissensions 
among  the  colonists,  and  being  neutralized  to  a 
considerable  extent  by  the  contrary  policy  of 
the  neighboring  colony  of  South  Carolina  as 
well  as  by  illicit  traffic,  it  was  rescinded  by  act 
of  Parliament  in  1742.' 

Lakr  Colonial  Provisions. — After  the  repeal 
of  the  Rum  act,  the  magistrates  of  the  colony 
were  authorized  to  grant  licenses,  "  under  prop  r 
restrictions  and  regulations,"  for  the  selling  of 
rum.  In  1752  the  governing  power  was  taken 
out  of  th(!  hands  of  the  Trustees,  in  1754  the 
first  Royal  Governor  arrived,  and  in  January, 
1755,  the  first  General  Assembly  of  Georgia 
met.  Only  two  months  later  (March,  1755)  this 
General  Assembly  jiassed  an  act  forbidding  the 
selling  or  giving  of  "any  beer  or  spirituous 
liquor  whatsoever"  to  any  slave  wilhout  the 
owner's  consent,  under  penalty  of  20s  fine  for 
the  first  offense  and  40s  for  ihe  second,  with 
recognizance  in  £20  not  to  offend  for  one  year 
— the  accused  to  be  committed  to  prison  without 
bail  for  a  period  not  exceeding  three  months  in 
case  he  should  be  unable  to  present  suitable 
bondsmen. 

The  thirtieth  legislative  act,  passed  in  1757,  was 
"  for  regulating  taverns  and  punch  houses  and 
retailers  of  spirituous  liquors,"  the  preamble  to 
it  declaring:  "The  measures  hitherto  taken  to 
prevent  vmfit  persons  from  obtaining  licenses  to 
keep  taverns,  punch-houses  and  retailing  of 
strong  liquors  have  proved  ineffectual,  and  the 
increase  of  tippling-houses  are  become  hurtful 
and  prejudicial  to  the  common  good  and  welfare 
of  tills  His  Majesty's  Province,  but  more  espe- 
cially the  little  tippling-houses  which  are  for  the 
most  part  haunts  for  lewd,  idle  and  disorderly 
P'jople,  runaway  sailors,  SL^rvants  and  slaves." 
It  provided  that  from  Oct.  1,  1757,  no  person 
should  sell  any  intoxicating  drink  in  less  quan. 


1  These  particulars  are  obtained  from  Prof.  H.  A. 
Scomp's  "  l^iiitc  Alcoliol  in  the  Realm  of  King  Cotton." 
Snmminjj  up  his  account  of  this  early  experiment,  Prof. 
Scomp  says  (p.  \\i)  : 

"  For  nearly  nine  years  Prohibition  of  the  rum  traffic 
\vas  of  legal  f  ^rce  in  Cieorgia.  While  Oglethorpe  reuiained 
in  Savannah,  the  Prohibition,  as  we  have  seen,  was  faith- 
fully enforced ;  but  when  war  and  other  causes  had  sepa- 
rated him  from  the  little  metropolis,  the  execution  of  the 
laws  was  committed  to  weaker  hands,  to  men  most  of  whom 
^^■ere  themselves  violators  of  the  statutes  they  were  sworn 
to  defend.  Then  the  temptations  of  the  Indian  trade,  the 
influence  of  the  Carolinians,  the  allurements  and  the  com- 
merce with  the  West  Indies  and  the  Northern  Colonies,  all 
flowing  with  rum,  the  confusion  of  wars  and  the  corrupt- 
ing presence  of  an  immoral  soldiery — all  these  causes 
operated  to  the  demoralization  of  the  people  and  the  final 
abrogation  of  the  law." 


tity  than  three  gallons  at  one  time  to  any  one 
person  without  obtaining  a  license  from  the 
Treasurer,  under  jienalty  of  £3  for  each  offens3 
(half  to  the  infornKr);  the  annual  license  fee  to 
be  £3  in  Savannah,  40s  in  Augusta  and  Ebeue- 
zer  and  20.3  elsewhere;  each  licensee  to  execute 
a  bond  in  £20  not  to  sell  to  negroes  or  Indians. 
Any  unlicense;!  person  selling  to  Indians  was 
fined  £5.  A  curious  provision  of  this  act  was 
that  no  liquor  license  should  be  granted  to  any 
joiner  bricklayer,  plasterer,  shipwright,  silver 
or  goldsmith,  shoemaker,  smith,  tailor,  tanner, 
cabinet  maker  or  cooper,  who  should  "be  able 
and  capable  b}'  his  or  their  honest  labour  and 
industry  of  getting  a  livelihood  and  maintaining 
himself  and  family  by  exercising  any  of  the 
trades  aforesaid." 

An  act  (No.  55)  for  the  better  regulation  of 
drinking-places  was  passed  in  1759. 

No  person  keeping  a  public  house  of  enter- 
tainment was  to  suffer  any  persons,  except 
strangers  or  lodgers,  in  h's  house,  or  to  allow 
themto  remain  drinking,  f)r  in  any  manner  idly 
spending  their  time  Sundays,  on  penalty  of  Ss 
for  the  person  so  entertaining  as  well  as  for  th3 
one  entertained.  (Dig.  Ga.,  Phila.  1801.  p.  80 
[1702J.)  Liquor-sellers  suffering  any  appren- 
tices, overseers,  journeymen,  laborers  or  ser- 
vants to  game  in  their  houses,  were  fined  40>' ; 
and  any  person  st  gaming  there  10s.  (Id.  p.  96 
[1764].)  Patrols  might  enter  tippling- house?  to 
correct  slaves  found  there.     (Id.,  p.  123  [17651  ) 

Another  act  regulating  taverns  was  passed  in 
1765  (No.  127),  another,  explaining  an<l  amend- 
ing, in  1766  (No.  146)  and  another  in  1767.  Tip- 
pling-house-keepers  were  not  to  s:'l!  sailors  over 
Is  Gd  'vorth  of  liquor  in  any  one  day.  or  permit 
them  to  tipple  or  drink  af'er  9  o  clock,  unle-s 
by  consent  of  the  master  of  the  vessel,  under 
penalty  of  20.?  (Id.,  p.  131  [1766 1.)  Persons 
selling  or  giving  liquor  to  slaves,  without  con- 
sent of  owners,  were  fined  £5  ;  for  the  second 
offence  £10,  with  recognizance  in  £20  not  to 
offend  again  for  a  year.  (Id  ,  p.  174  [1770].) 
lu  1777,  suffering  gaming,  by  licensed  tavern- 
keepers,  was  fined  £20.     (Id.,  p.  201.) 

Early  State  Laws. — An  act  to  enforce  the  col- 
lection of  arrearages  due  from  persons  keeping 
taverns,  etc.,  and  to  amend  former  acts  regu- 
lating them,  was  passed  in  1777.  (No.  459) 
Another  act  regulating  taverns  was  passed  in 
1786  (No.  353),— an  act  regulating  taverns  and 
reducing  the  rates  of  tavern  license,  requiring 
applicants  to  petition  the  Justices  of  the  inferior 
Court  of  the  county  who  at  discretion  granted 
the  license  if  the  place  was  convenient  and 
petitioner  had  .sufficient  accommodations  for 
travelers,  upon  bond  in  £50  to  keep  an  orderly 
hou.se.  Selling  without  license  was  fined  £10  ; 
but  merchants,  makers  and  distillers  might  sell 
in  quantities  of  a  quart  or  over,  not  to  be  diunk 
on  the  premises,  except  that  m.erchant9  might 
not  sell  less  than  a  gallon  in  Chatham,  Liberty 
or  Eppingham  Counties.  The  license  fee  was 
made  §2.  In  1791  Savannah  and  Augusta  v/ere 
given  sole  pov<?er  to  regulate  taverns  and  licen- 
ses.    (Id.,  p.  453.) 

The  act  of  1809  (Laws,  p.  78)  made  the  license 
fee  $5,  and  provided  that  persons  might  have 
license  to  retail  liquors  without  being  obliged 
to  keep    places  of  public  entertainment,  pro- 


Legislation.] 


290 


[Legislation. 


vided  such  persons  gave  bonds  in  $500  to  keep 
orderly  houses. 

Tlie  First  Grant  of  Local  Option. — By  the 
Laws  of  1833,  p.  125,  the  inferior  Court  was  per- 
mitted to  grant  or  withhold  licenses  at  discretion 
in  Camden  and  Liberty  Counties. 

Keeping  a  tippling-shop,  or  retailing  liquor 
without  license,  was  punisbed  by  tine  of  $50. 
This  was  to  correct  the  wording  of  the  Penal 
Code,  ^  27,  10th  Division,  which  was  so  worded 
as  not  to  apply  to  cities.     (Laws,  1853,  No.  73.) 

Liquor  licenses  having  in  some  counties  been 
given  to  free  persons  of  color,  or  to  persons 
acting  as  their  guardians,  thereby  evading  the 
law,  selling  by  such  persons  was  forbidden, 
even  when  acting  as  agents  for  whites,  upon 
penalty  of  $100  in  case  of  a  white,  or  39  lashes 
in  case  of  the  free  person  of  color.  Sales  by 
such  persons  of  color  to  slaves  were  punished 
by  39  lashes  and  $50  for  the  first  offense,  and  50 
lashes  and  $100  for  second  offense;  and  if  the 
fine  were  not  paid  the  offender  might  be  sold 
for  time  enough  to  produce  it.  (Laws,  1853, 
No.  75.)  By  Laws  of  1858.  No.  164,  the  price 
of  license  in  Wilson  County  was  made  $100. 
By  No.  165  the  Grand  Juries  in  four  counties 
might  fix  the  license  fee  each  year.  By  No. 
167  the  inferior  Court  of  another  county  was 
given  power  to  grant  or  refuse  licenses,  and  to 
demand  as  much  for  those  granted  as  they 
chose.  By  Laws  of  1859,  No.  341,  peddling 
liquor  was  prohibited  in  32  named  counties, 
and  by  No  288  a  petition  of  a  majority  of  the 
voters  within  three  miles  was  required  for  a 
license.  Selling  liquor  to  slaves  and  free  per 
sons  of  color  was  for  the  first  offense  punished 
l)y  fine  $50  to  $200  and  imprisonment  10  to  30 
days.  (Laws,  1859.  No.  78.)  Peddling  liquors 
in  19  counties  was  prohibited  by  Laws  of  1860, 
No.  219. 

War  Provisions. — Distillation  of  corn  or  grain, 
except  for  medicinal  and  similar  other  purposes, 
was  prohibited  upon  penalty  of  $2,000  to  $5,000 
and  imprisonment  not  over  12  months ;  and 
no  grain  was  to  be  exported  for  distillation,  ex- 
cept that  whiskey  might,  under  restriction,  be 
allowed  to  be  di.stilled  for  the  Confederate  Gov- 
ernment. (Laws,  1862,  N OS.  19  and  20.)  These 
acts  were  repealed  in  1865.     (Laws,  No.  110.) 

Since  the  War. — The  oath  to  be  taken  by  re- 
tail dealers  not  to  sell  to  minors,  cither  white  or 
colored,  without  consent  of  parei  t,  was  so 
amended  by  Laws  of  1866.  No.  17.  Selling 
liquor  on  election  days  within  one  mile  of  city, 
town  or  precinct  where  elections  might  be  held, 
was  fined  not  over  $50,  with  alternative  im 
prisonment  not  exceeding  10  days,  or  both. 
(Laws,  1869,  No.  132.)  By  Laws  of  1871,  No. 
221,  liquor  selling  was  prohil.il ed  within  one 
mile  of  Clement's  Institute,  and  one  such  law  was 
passed  the  next  year.  By  Laws  of  1872,  No. 
22.  gaming  in  saloons  was  prohibited.  This 
was  made  to  apply  only  to  minors,  by  Laws  of 
1873,  No.  4:^.  In  1873,  five  local  liquor  laws 
were  passed  affecting  six  counties  and  three 
other  places.  They  prohibited  the  sale,  or  re- 
quired a  license  to  be  recommended  l)y  a  ma- 
jority or  more  of  the  residents  of  the  vicinity 
of  the  saloon.  Such  laws  now  increased  in  num- 
ber every  year,  and  to  indicate  them,  even  by 
count,  would  be  tedious. 


Selling  to  minors  was  prohibited  by  Laws  of 
1875,  No.  113,  and  to  drunken  persons  by  No. 
12,  the  last  being  an  amendment  to  apply  to 
sellers  whether  licensed  or  not.  Sale  to  minors 
was  allowed  on  written  consent  of  parent  or 
guardian  by  Laws  of  1877,  No.  109.  Domestic 
wines  were  exempted  from  the  license  laws  by 
Laws  of  1877,  No.  32.  And  in  the  General  Tax 
act  of  that  year  (No.  123,  ?  4)  liquor-dealers 
were  taxed  $25,  excepting  those  selling  not  less 
than  five-gallon  quantities  of  spirits,  produced 
by  themselves  of  fruits  grown  by  them. 

There  has  been  no  other  change  in  Georgia's 
liquor  laws  until,  out  of  the  local  Prohibitions 
aud  regulations  there  grew  the  General  Local 
Option  act  which  is  now  in  force. 

The  Late  as  It  E.risted  in  1889. — A  special  tax 
on  the  sale  of  spirituous  and  malt  liquors,  which 
the  General  Assembly  is  hereby  authorized  to 
assess,  is  hereby  set  apart  and  devoted  for  the 
support  of  comiiion  schools  (Const ,  art.  8.  ij 
8;  Code,  1882,  ^  5206.)  Dealers  in  spirituous 
and  malt  liquors  ard  intoxicating  bitters  are 
taxed  $25.  (Code,  1882,  tj  809  a.)  They  must 
annually  go  before  the  Ordinary  and  register, 
and  then  the  Ordinary  must  notify  the  Comp- 
troller of  the  State  and  the  Tax  Collector  of  the 
county.  And  the  Comptroller  must  keep  a  book 
as  a  register  of  liquor-dealers.  And  the  Collect- 
or, when  so  notified,  must  enter  the  name  in  a 
county  register  of  liquor-dealers.  After  regis- 
tering, the  dealer  must  pay  to  the  Tax  Collector 
his  tax.  On  his  failing  eo  to  register  ard  pay, 
he  is  punished  as  in  Code,  ij  4310,  by  fine  of  not 
over  $1,000,  imprisonment  not  over  six  months, 
or  chain  gang  not  over  12  months,  or  all  com- 
bined. (Id.,  g^  809  b-k;  see  Laws,  1882,  c. 
277. )  This  does  not  relieve  the  dealer  of  the 
United  States  or  local  taxes.  (Id.,  t^  809  1.) 
The  Ordinary  and  Tax  Collector  mu.st  lay  their 
registers  before  the  Grand  Juries  at  their  fall 
meetings.  (Id.,  809m.)  Except  in  incorporated 
towns  and  cities,  application  for  license  must  be 
made  to  the  Ordinary  of  the  county,  consented 
to  by  ten  of  the  nearest  residents  (five  of  whom 
must  be  freeholders  owning  land  nearest  the 
place  of  bu.siness).  Bond  in  $500  must  be  ex- 
ecuted to  keep  an  orderly  house  and  observe 
the  oath  taken  not  to  sell  to  minors  without 
consent  of  parent  or  guardian.  (Code,  1882,  § 
1419,  amended  18S4,  c.  422.)  Vendors  of  less 
than  one  gallon,  not  taking  .such  oath  by  the 
1st  of  June  of  each  year,  are  subject  to  penalty 
for  selling  without  license  (Code.  1882,  t^  1420!) 
Licenses  only  authorize  sales  in  one  place.  (Id., 
f?  1421.1  Corporate  towns  and  cities  must 
charge  as  much  for  licenses,  at  least,  as  is  re- 
quired in  the  county.  (Id.,  §  1422.)  Sellers 
must  not  furnish  liquors  to  one  who  is  drunk, 
under  penalty  of  selling  without  license.  (Id, 
V5  1423. )  A  dealer  furnishing  liquor  to  a  habit- 
ual drunkard  known  to  him,  or  of  whose  iiabits 
he  has  been  notified  in  writing  by  wife,  father, 
mother,  brother  or  sister,  is  guilty  of  a  mis- 
demeanor, (Laws  1882,  c.  351.)  Sale  of  liquors 
m  quantities  less  than  one  quart  makes  the 
seller  a  retailer.     (Code,  1882,  i^  1424.) 

Selling  to  minors  without  written  au- 
thority of  parent  or  guardian  is  punished  as 
in  Code,  §  4310  (Id..  §  4540  a),  and  so  is  em- 
ploying minors  in  barrooms.       (Id.,   4540  c.) 


Legislation.] 


291 


[Ijegislation. 


Keeping  a  tippling-shop  or  selling  liquor  with- 
out a  license,  is  punished  under  §  4310  of  the 
Code.     (Id,  §4565.) 

Persons  who  manufacture  wine  from  the 
grapes  of  a  vineyard  in  the  State  may  freely 
sell  the  same  in  quantities  not  less  than  one 
quart.  (Id.,  §  4565  a.)  But  where,  under  the 
General  Local  Option  law  or  any  other  local  or 
genc'val  law,  the  sale  of  liquor  has  been  or  may 
\)3  prohibited,  but  with  exceptions  in  relation  to 
any  kinds  of  wines,  a  tax  of  it^lO.OOO  shall  be 
annually  levied  on  every  dealer  in  domestic 
wines  or  other  intoxicants  not  prohibited  as 
aforesaid,  except  dealers  in  or  produceis  of 
wines  made  from  grapes  or  berries  raised  or 
purchased  by  them.     (Laws,  1H87,  No.  168.) 

The  General  Assembly  shall  by  law  forbid  the 
sale,  distribution  or  furnishing  of  intoxicating 
drinks  within  two  miles  of  election  precincts  on 
days  of  election — State,  county  or  municipal, — 
and  prescribe  punishment  for  any  violation  of 
the  same.  (Const.,  art.  2,  §  5;  Code,  1882,  § 
5037.)  In  pursuance  of  this  provision,  §  4570 
of  the  Code  of  1882  was  enacted  (amended  in 
1887  by  Laws,  No.  376),  prohibiting  any  person 
to  furnish  liquor  to  any  one  within  two  miles 
of  any  election  precinct  on  days  of  election, 
either  State,  county,  municipal  or  primarj% 
under  penalty  of  §  4310  of  the  Code.  This  "is 
not  to  operate  against  physicians'  prescriptions. 

Selling  within  a  mile  of  any  church  not  in  an 
incorporated  town  or  city,  during  worship,  or 
of  any  campground,  during  worship,  without 
consent  of  the  trustees  of  such  ground,  is  pro- 
hibited under  penalty  of  Code.  §  4310.  (Id.,  §§ 
4575-6-7.)  Carrying  liquor,  except  for  medic- 
inal or  sacramental  purposes,  to  any  place  where 
people  are  assembled  for  worship,  or  Sunday- 
school,  or  Sunday-school  celebration,  or  day- 
school  celebration,  shall  be  so  punished.  (Id., 
§  4577  b.)  Pursuing  business  on  Sunday  is 
prohibited  under  same  penalty.  (Id.,  §4579.) 
Selling  adulterated  liquor  is  prohibited  under 
same  penalty.     (Id.,  §  4551.) 

The  Laws  of  1857  (being  p§  1580-7  of  the 
Code  of  1882)  provide  for  Inspectors  of 
liquors,  spirits  and  wines,  monthly  inspections 
or  upon  call,  and  penalties  for  selling  drugged 
liquors,  or  evading  inspection,  or  selling  with- 
out inspection,  where  an  Inspector  has  been  ap- 
pointed. 

Upon  petition  to  the  County  Ordinary  by 
one- tenth  of  the  qualified  voters,  an  election 
shall  be  ordered  by  him,  within  60  days,  but 
not  for  any  month  of  a  general  election.  (Laws, 
1884,  No.  182,  g  1.)  Notice  of  such  election 
shall  be  published  four  weeks  in  the  oiiicial 
orijan,  and  it  shall  be  conducted  as  general 
elections.  (Id.,  §  2.)  Ballots  shall  be  "  For  the 
Sale"  or  "Against  the  Sale."  (Id.,  §2.)  One 
list  of  voters  and  tally-sheet  shall  be  delivered 
the  Ordinary,  who  shall  consolidate  the  returns 
and  declare  the  result,  when  the  act  goes  into 
effect,  after  a  further  notice  of  four  weeks  in 
the  same  papers  of  the  vote  "Against  the  Sale." 
(Jontests  of  the  result  may  be  made  in  the 
Superior  Court  by  petition  of  one-tenth  of  the 
voters,  such  contest  not  to  be  a  supersedeas  of 
the  result.  (Id,  §4.)  No  other  election  shall 
le  held  for  two  years  hereunder.  (Id..  §5.) 
The  law  against  selling  at  elections  applies  to 


these  elections.  (Id.,  §  7.)  Nothing  in  this 
act  shall  prevent  the  manufacture,  sale  or  use 
of  domestic  wines  or  cider,  or  the  use  of  wine 
in  the  sacrament,  provided  such  wines  or  cider 
are  not  sold  in  barrooms,  by  retail ;  nor  shall 
druggists  be  prohibited  selling  pure  alcohol  for 
medicinal,  art.  scientific  or  mechanical  purposes. 
(Id.,  §  8.)  No  election  hereunder  shall  be  held 
for  any  county,  city,  town  or  place  where  by 
law  the  sale  is  now  prohibited  by  local  legisla- 
tion. (Id.,  §9.)  After  vote  against  the  sale, 
selling,  bartering  or  giving  away  liquor  is  pro- 
hibited, in  the  county,  under  penalty  of  Code, 
§4310      (Id,  §10) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  vote  of  two-thirds  of  all  the  mem- 
bers of  the  two  Houses,  at  one  session ;  popular 
vote  to  be  taken  at  the  next  general  election  for 
Representatives,  two  months' notice  to  be  given. 
A  majority  carries  it. 

Idaho  Territory. 

The  Law  as  It  Existed  in  1889.— The  license 
clauses  in  the  Revenue  law  of  the  first  session 
of  the  Legislature  (1863)  were  still  in  force  in 
1889,  except  that  the  procedure  for  granting 
licen.ses  has  been  somewhat  elaborated,  piece- 
meal, in  succeeding  Revenue  laws.  These  are 
mere  official  regulations  to  insure  the  revenue, 
and  not  affecting  the  licenses. 

Retail  liquor  licenses,  procured  of  the  Tax 
Collector,  are  charged  $50  per  quarter,  or  $35 
within  the  limits  of  Boise  City,  or  |15  for  per- 
sons retailing  liquors  in  connection  with  the 
entertainment  of  travelers  at  any  point  one  mile 
or  more  outside  any  city  or  town.  (R.  S  ,  1887, 
§  1648.)  Merchants  selling  wines  or  distilled 
liquors  or  goods,  etc.,  pay  $1  to  $25  per  month, 
according  to  volume  of  bu-siness.  in  ten  classes. 
Sales  of  liquors  not  to  be  in  less  quantity  than 
a  quart.     (Id,  §i^  1649-50.) 

Selling  liquor  to  Indians  is  a  misdemeanor  by 
act  of  1863.  (R.  S.,  1887,  §  6929.)  Persons 
adulterating  liquor  or  selling  the  same  so  adul- 
terated, are  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor.  (Id.,  § 
6918.)  Carrying  on  business  without  license  is 
a  misdemeanor.  (Id,  §  6983.)  Keeping  open 
saloons  and  selling  liquor  Sunday  was  forbidden, 
under  penalty  of  $15  to  $50,  by  Laws  of  1872, 
p.  86.  Sales  by  retail  of  liquor  were  made  in- 
valid considerations  for  any  promise  to  pay  in 
excess  of  $10,  and  Courts  were  not  to  give 
judgment  on  account  thereof  in  excess  of  that 
sum.     (Laws,  1870,  p.  75.) 

[Idaho's  admission  as  a  State  was  provided 
for  by  act  of  Congress  in  1890.  J 

Illinois. 

Earliest  Provisions. — At  the  beginning  of  or- 
ganized government  in  Illinois,  it  was  provided 
that  ''for  preventing  disorders  and  the  mischiefs 
that  may  happen  from  a  multiplicity  of  public 
houses"  no  person  was  to  keep  such,  until  he 
obtained  permission  of  the  County  Commission- 
ers, upon  penalty  of  #1  per  day  (one-third  to 
the  informer).  And  he  should  suffer  no  drunk- 
enness, disorder  or  gaming,  under  the  same 
penalty.  The  license  fee  was  to  be  fixed  by  the 
Commissoners,  at  not  exceeding  $12;  and  a 
bond  (in  not  exceeding  $300)  to  obey  the  law 


Legislation.] 


0Q-) 


[Legislation. 


was  required.  Unlicensed  persons  were  fined 
|13  for  selling.  Selling  to  and  harboring  minors 
and  servants  after  being  warned  not  to  do  so, 
was  fined  i;3,  and  for  the  third  offense  license 
was  forfeited  and  the  licensee  rendered  forever 
incapable  of  being  licensed  again.  Selling  to 
slaves  was  fined  $3;  for  subsequent  offenses, 
$4.  (R.  L.,  1833.  p.  595  ;  passed  in  1819.)  Sell- 
ing to  Indians  was  fined  ^20.  Debts  for  liquor 
at  retail  of  over  50  cents  were  made  void,  and  no 
licenses  were  to  be  granted  those  who  had  not 
tavern  accommodations  for  four  persons.  (Laws, 
1823,  p.  14^.) 

The  Laws  of  1835  (p.  154)  provided  that  the 
license  rate  was  to  be  not  exceeding  $50,  taking 
into  consideration  the  place  where  the  tavern 
was  located.  Any  one  was  authorized  to  sell 
cider  and  beer  as  he  might  think  proper.  (Laws, 
1837,  p.  326.) 

Earliest  Local  Option  (1839). — Soon  these  laws 
were  all  repealed,  and  the  license  fee  was  placed 
at  $25  to  $300,  the  Commissioners  to  grant  and 
reject  at  discretion,  and  revoke  licenses  on  being 
satisfied  the  law  had  been  violated.  In  incor- 
porated towns  the  authorities  were  given  the 
exclusive  privilege  of  granting  licenses.  And 
if  a  majority  of  the  voters  in  any  county, 
ju.stice's  district,  incorporated  town  or  ward  in 
a  city  should  petition  against  licenses  therein, 
none  should  be  granted  until  a  like  petition  in 
favor  of  licenses  should  be  filed.  (Laws,  1839, 
p.  71.) 

A  grocery  was  defined  to  be  any  house  or 
place  where  spirituous  or  vinous  liquor  was 
sold  in  quantities  less  than  a  quart,  and  persons 
without  license  to  keep  a  grocery,  so  selling, 
were  to  be  fined  $10,     (Laws,  1841,  p.  178.) 

Short-lived  ProliiMtion  (1851-3). — All  retailing 
of  liquor  to  be  drunk  on  the  premises  was  pro- 
hibited and  fined  $25,  excepting  by  druggists 
or  physicians  for  medical,  mechanical  or  sac- 
ramental purposes.  And  all  acts  authorizing 
licenses  to  be  granted  were  repealed  by  Laws  of 
1851,  p.  18. 

The  act  of  1853,  p.  91,  declared  re-enacted  all 
laws  in  force  at  the  time  of  the  above-mentioned 
act,  except  that  license  fees  should  be  $50  to 
1300.  The  Laws  of  1871,  p.  552,  declared  un- 
lawful saloons  to  be  nuisances,  and  provided  for 
civil  damages.  This  provision  is  virtually  re- 
enacted  in  the  Revised  Statutes  now  in  force. 

The  Law  as  It  Existed  in  1889. — The  General 
Assembly  has  power  to  tax  liquor-dealers  by 
general  law.     (Const.,  art.  9,  §  1.) 

A  dramshop  is  a  place  where  spirituous,  vinous 
or  malt  liquors  are  retailed  in  less  quantity  than 
one  gallon.  (R.  S.,  1887,  c.  43,  §  1.)  Selling 
liquor,  withoiit  license  to  keep  a  dramshop,  to 
be  drunk  on  the  premises,  is  punished  by  fine  of 
$20  to  $100.  or  by  imprisonment  10  to  30  days, 
or  both.    (Id,  §2.) 

The  County  Boards  may  grant  licenses  to  as 
many  as  they  judge  the  public  good  requires, 
upon  application  by  petition  of  a  majority  of 
the  legal  voters  of  the  town  or  election  precinct, 
upon  payment  of  not  less  than  $500,  provided  a 
license  for  sale  of  malt  liquors  only  may  be 
granted  for  $150,  and  provided  such  Board 
shall  not  have  power  to  issue  any  license  to 
keep  a  dramshop  in  any  incorporated  city,  town 
or  village,  or  within  two  miles  of  the  same,  in 


which  the  corporate  authorities  have  the  author- 
ity to  grant  the  same,  or  in  any  place  in  which 
sale  of  liquor  is  prohibited  by  law.  (Id.,  ij  17, 
amending  §  3.)  The  corporate  authorities  of 
any  city,  town  or  village  cannot  grant  licenses 
for  less  than  $500,  or  $150  for  malt  liquors  only 
-  provided  that  City  Councils.  Town  Boards 
of  Trustees  at'd  the  President  anrl  Board  of 
Trustees  of  villages  may  grant  permits  to  phar- 
macists for  the  sale  of  liquor  for  medicinal, 
mechanical,  sacramental  and  chemical  purposes 
only,  under  such  restrictions  as  may  be  provided 
by  ordinance.  (Id.,i<16.)  Each  license  shall 
state  the  time  for  which  it  is  granted,  not  to  ex- 
ceed one  year.  The  place  of  the  dramsliop  shall 
not  be  transferable,  nor  shall  more  than  one 
place  be  kept  under  any  license.  Any  license 
may  be  revoked  by  the  County  Board  when- 
ever satisfied  the  licensee  has  violated  the  law, 
or  that  he  keeps  a  disorderly  house  or  allows 
illegal  gaming.  (Id.,  t$  4. )  No  person  shall  be 
licensed  without  giving  a  bond  in  $3,000,  con- 
ditioned that  he  will  pay  all  persons  all  damages 
they  may  sustain,  either  in  person  or  property  or 
means  of  support,  by  reason  of  sales  under  such 
license.  Such  bond  may  be  sued  by  any  ]XTson 
so  injured,  or  his  representatives.     (Id.,  ^  5.) 

Giving  or  selling  liquor  to  any  minor,  with- 
out written  order  of  the  parent,  guardian  or 
physician,  to  any  person  intoxicated  or  in  the 
hatiit  of  getting  .so,  is  punished  by  fine  of  $20 
to  $100  or  impri.soument  10  to  30  days,  or  both. 
(Id.,  §  6.) 

All  places  where  liquors  are  sold  in  violation 
of  law  are  common  nuisances,  and  whoever 
shall  keep  such  a  place  shall  be  fined  $50  to 
$100,  and  imprisoned  20  to  50  days;  and  it  shall 
be  apart  of  the  judgment  that  the  place  so  kept 
be  shut  up  and  abated  imtil  the  keeper  !.;ive  bond 
in  $1,000  not  to  sell  unlawfully.    (Id.,  "i-  7. ) 

Every  person,  with  or  without  license,  who 
shall  by  sale  of  liquors  cause  the  intoxication  of 
any  person,  shall  be  chargeable  for  a  reason- 
able compensation,  and  $2  per  day  beside,  to 
anvone  taking  care  of  such  intoxicated  person. 
(Id..  §  8.) 

Every  husband,  wife,  child,  parent,  guardian, 
employer  or  other  person,  who  shall  be  injured 
in  person,  property  or  means  of  support  by  any 
intoxicated  person  or  in  consequence  of  the  in- 
toxication, habitual  or  otherwise,  of  any  person, 
shall  have  action,  severally  or  jointly,  against 
any  person  or  ]:iersons  who  have  by  selling 
liquor  caused  such  intoxication,  in  whole  or  in 
part  ;  and  any  person  owning,  renting  or  per- 
mitting the  occupation  of  any  premises,  with 
knowledge  that  liquor  is  sold  therein,  shall  be  so 
liable,  severally  or  jointly,  with  the  person , 
selling,  and  for  exemplary  damages.  The  un- 
lawful sale  of  liquor  thereon  shall  make  void 
all  leases  of  the  premises  leased.  (Id.,  J:;  9.)  For 
the  payment  of  damages  iinder  the  above  section, 
the  real  estate  of  the  defendant  is  liable,  and  the 
real  estate  upon  which  the  liquor  was  sold  Avith 
the  knowledge  of  the  owner  ;  but  if  such  la.st 
real  estate  belong  to  a  minor,  his  guardian  shall 
be  held  liable  instead  of  the  ward.  (Id.,  t^  10.) 
Actions  for  damages  for  less  than  $200  imder 
this  law  may  be  brouiiht  before  a  Justice  of  the 
Peace.    (Id.,  §  11  ) 

Any  fine  or  imprisonment  in  this  act  may  be 


Xjegislation.] 


293 


[Legislation. 


enforced  by  iadictment ;  and  in  case  of  con- 
viction tlie  offender  sliall  stand  committed  until 
the  judgment  is  fully  paid.  (Id.,  §  12.)  Giving 
away  liquor,  or  other  shifts  or  devices  to  evade 
the  law,  constitute  unlawful  selling.  (Id. ,  g  13. ) 
In  all  prosecutions,  it  is  not  necessary  to  state 
the  kind  of  liquor  sold,  or  to  describe  the  place 
where  sold,  or  to  show  the  knowledge  of  the 
principal,  in  order  to  convict  for  the  acts  of  his 
agent  ;  and  the  persons  to  whom  the  liquor  was 
sold  are  competent  witnesses.  (Id.,  §  14.}  It  is 
no  objection  to  a  recovery  that  the  defendant  is 
punishable  under  any  city,  village  or  town  or- 
dinance. (Id.,  §15.)  A  person  licensed  to  sell 
malt  liquors  only,  selling  other  liquors,  shall  be 
fined  §20  to  8100  or  imprisoned  10  to  30  days,  or 
both,  and  forfeit  his  license.  (Id.,  §  18.)  Who- 
ever shall  sell  liquor  in  less  quantities  than  four 
gallons,  outside  the  incorporated  limits  of  any 
city,  town  or  village,  shall  be  fined  850  to  $100, 
or  be  imprisoned  30  to  90  daj's,  or  both.  (Id.,  § 
19.)  This  shall  not  be  construed  to  prevent 
County  Boards  from  granting  license  to  keep 
dramshops  as  now  provided  by  law,  and  all  per- 
sons so  licensed  shall  be  exempt  from  the  pro- 
visions of  the  last  above  section.     (Id.,  §  23.) 

The  City  Council  in  cities,  and  the  President 
and  Board  of  Trustees  in  villages,  have  the 
power  to  license,  regulate  and  prohibit  the  sell- 
ing of  liquor  therein,  and  may  grant  permits  to 
druggists  to  sell  for  medicinal  and  similar  ]3ur- 
poses  only,  conforming  to  the  general  law  when 
granring  licenses.  (R.  S.,  1887,  c.  24.  g  62,  p.  46.) 
And  they  may  forbid  and  punish  selling  to 
minors,  apprentices  or  servants,  or  in.sane,  idiotic 
or  distracted  persons,  or  habitual  drunkards,  or 
persons  intoxicated.     (Id.,  p.  48.) 

Adulteration  of  liquor,  or  selling  such  adul- 
terated liquor,  is  punished  by  fine  not  over 
$1,000,  or  imprisonment  not  over  one  vear,  or 
both.    (Id,  c.  38,  §8.) 

Any  intoxicated  person  found  in  any  public 
place  or  disturbing  the  public  peace  or  that  of 
his  own  family,  in  any  private  building  or  place, 
shall  be  fined  not  exceeding  .$5,  or  $25  for  any 
subsequent  offense — prosecutions  to  be  begun 
within  30  days.     (Id.,t^64.) 

Selling  liquor  within  one  mile  of  a  camp  or 
field-meeting,  during  the  time  of  holding  the 
meeting,  without  consent  of  the  authorities 
of  the  meeting,  is  fined  not  exceeding 
HOO,  provided  that  no  one  is  required 
to  suspend  his  regular  business.  (Id.,  f^  59.) 
Keeping  a  tippling-shop  open  on  Sunday  is 
fined  not  exceeding  S200  (Id.,  §259.)  Furnish- 
ing liquors  to  prisoners  is  punished  by  fine  of 
not  exceeding  $50,  or  30  davs'  imprisonment,  or 
both.  (Id.,  I  210.)  Sheriffs  and  jailers  shall 
not  permit  prisoners  to  send  for  or  have  liquor, 
except  upon  physicians  prescription.  (Id.,  c. 
75,  §  18.)  Selling  liquor  within  two  miles  of  fair- 
grounds shall  be  fined  $100  to  $500,  but  no  reg- 
ular business  is  affected.  (Id.,  c.  5,  ^§  12,  13.) 
Opening  a  saloon  or  selling  liquor  wiihin  one 
mile  of  the  place  of  holding  any  election  is 
prohibited,  upon  penalty  of  $25  to  $100;  audit 
shall  be  the  duty  of  officers  and  magistrates  to 
see  that  this  is  enforced.     (Id.,  c.  46,  fj  79.) 

There  is  a  law  requiring  scientific  temperance 
instruction  in  the  public  schools.  (Laws,  1889, 
p.  345.) 


An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  two  thirds  of  all  the  members  of 
the  lAvo  Houses,  at  one  .session  ;  popular  vote  to 
be  taken  at  the  next  general  election  for  Kepre- 
sontatives,  three  months'  notice  to  be  given.  A 
majority  carries  it. 

Indiana. 

Early  Provisions.— The  G-overnor  was  em- 
powered to  prohibit  the  sale  of  liquor  with- 
in 30  miles  of  any  council  with  the  Indians ;  pen- 
alty, $50  to  .|500.  (Laws,  1805,  c.  1  )  A  prohi- 
bition against  selling  liquor  to  Indians  was  en- 
acted, conditioned  on  similar  laws  being  passed 
by  Kentucky,  Ohio,  Louisiana  and  Michigan, 
(id.,  c.  7.)  The  Courts  of  Common  Pleas  were 
empowered  to  grant  licenses  for  not  exceeding 
$12.  (Id.,  c.  18.)  Selling  liquor  to  Indians 
within  40  miles  of  Vincennes  was  prohibited  in 
1806.     (Laws,  c.  27  ) 

Chapter  17  of  the  Laws  of  1807  was  the 
same  as  was  subsequently  (1819)  passed  in  Illi- 
nois. It  provided  that  the  Court  should  issue 
licenses  upon  bond  in  not  exceeding  $300  to 
obey  the  law.  The  Laws  of  1816,  c.  17,  §  7, 
provided  that  tavern  license  fees  were  to  be  paid 
to  the  County  Treasurer.  The  County  Com- 
missoners  were  entrusted  with  the  right  to  grant 
licenses,  each  applicant  presenting  a  certificate 
of  12  householders  that  he  wasa  person  of  good 
moral  character  and  that  the  place  would  be  for 
the  convenience  of  travelers,  and  giving  bond 
in  ^500  not  to  permit  disorder  or  gaming,  or  to 
sell  on  Sunday,  or  unlawfully.  Selling  to  minors 
and  intoxicated  pensons  was  fined  $3,  as  was 
selling  without  license.  (Laws.  1817,  c.  48. )  In  1819 
(Laws.  c.  36)  the  Circuit  Courts  were  given  the 
authority  to  license  and  tavern  accommodations 
were  required.  By  Laws  of  1824,  c.  107,  the 
licensing  power  was  again  vcsteil  in  the  County 
Commissioners.  The  Circuit  Court  was  to  sup- 
press the  license  or  abate  the  tavern  upon  vio- 
lation of  law.  And  there  was  a  general  fine, 
not  to  exceed  $50,  for  violating  the  act.  Twenty- 
four  signers  to  the  applicant's  certificate  were 
required.  (Laws,  1825,  c.  71.)  By  Laws  of 
1828,  c.  63,  the  County  Court  was  authorized  to 
grant  licenses  to  retail  to  those  Avho  did  not 
keep  taverns,  on  the  same  conditions  otherwise 
required. 

Earliest  Local  Option  {\SZ2). — The  laws  were 
consolidated  in  1833  (Laws,  c.  170),  with  the 
added  provision  that  licenses  to  retail  only 
should  not  be  granted  in  any  town  or  township 
where  the  majority  of  the  freeholders  remon- 
strated against  granting  the  same. 

All  tippling-houses  or  places  where  intoxicat- 
ing liquors  were  sold  without  license,  and 
drunk  in  and  about  the  same,  if  kept  in  a  dis- 
orderly manner,  were  nuisances,  and  the  keepers 
might'be  fined  $25  to  $100.  (Laws,  1840,  c.  85.) 
Licenses  to  retail  liquors  were  fixed  at  $25  to 
$200,  provided  that  a  majority  of  the  citizens, 
householders  of  any  town  or  township,  maght 
remonstrate,  in  writing,  against  granting  licenses 
therein,  and  the  County  Board  would  be  gov- 
erned thereby.  (Laws,  1840,  c.  5,  §g  16,  17.) 
This  was  repealed  as  to  three  counties  by 
Laws  of  1842.  c.  125.  License  was  not  to  be 
granted  in  any  township  in  Carroll  and  Cass 
Counties  unless,  at  the  next  annual  town  elec- 


Legislation.] 


294 


Legislation. 


tions,  the  majority  voted  therefor.  (Laws,  1841, 
c.  153.)  Licenses  in  12  counties  were  not 
to  be  granted,  except  upon  petition  of  a 
majority  of  the  legal  voters  of  the  township. 
And  the  license  fee  was  to  be  determined  by  the 
Board  in  16  other  counties.  (Laws,  1842,  c.  119.) 

Three  laws  making  theobtainment  of  licenses 
easier  in  seven  counties  were  passed  at  the  1843 
session,  and  one  prohibiting  sales  in  a  township. 

It  was  made  lawful  for  the  voters  of  the  sev- 
eral townships,  at  their  annual  spring  elections, 
to  vote  against  the  granting  of  licenses  to  retail 
liquors  therein.  (Laws,  1847,  c.  7.)  In  1849 
'50  and  '51,  many  laws  were  passed  modifying 
the  general  law,  one  way  or  the  other,  in  certain 
spec'Ified  counties  and  townships.  In  1853  (Laws, 
c.  66)  the  last  above-mentioned  provision  for 
Local  Option  was  re-enacted,  with  strict  nuisance 
and  civil  damage  features,  and  providing  for 
a  bond  of  12.000,  and  prohibiting  sales  on  Sunday. 

Prohibition's  Bmf  Reign  (1855-8. )— A  Prohi- 
bitory or  Maine  law  was  passed  in  1855  i  Laws, 
c.  105) ;  and  by  c  106  the  former  law  was  re- 
pealed, so  far  as  it  granted  licenses,  and  such 
licenses  granted  thereunder  were  made  void 
after  a  certain  date.  Under  the  Prohibitory  law, 
the  penalty  for  manufacturing  was  $20  to  $50 
for  the  lirst  offense,  $50  to  $100  for  the  second, 
and  $100  for  each  subsequent  one— a  penalty  of 
30  days'  imprisonment  to  be  added  for  each 
offense  after  the  first.  Penalties  for  selling  were 
the  same,  except  that  for  selling  to  minors  the 
fine  was  not  less  than  $50.  Every  device  or 
contrivance  to  deal  out  or  sell  liquor  ana  con- 
ceal the  person  selling  it  was  declared  a  nuisance, 
to  be  abated  under  fine  of  $50  to  $100  and  im- 
prisonment 30  to  90  days.  The  Prohibitory 
law  was  repealed  in  1858  (Laws,  c  15),  after 
liaving  been  declared  unconstitutional  generally. 
(Beebe  v.  State,  6  Ind.  501 ;  Herman  v.  State,  8 
Ind.  545  ;  O.  Daily  v.  State,  9  Ind  494  ;  10  lud. 
26,572.) 

C.  130  of  Laws  of  1859  was  a  license  law  re- 
quiring $50  license  fee,  prohibiting  sales  on 
Sunday  and  election  days,  to  minors  and  to 
habitual  drunkards  after  notice,  with  penalty 
for  selling  without  license  of  $5  to  $100,  to  which 
imprisonment  might  be  added,  not  exceeding  30 
days.  This  was  amended  by  giving  a  remon- 
strant against  granting  a  license  right  to  appeal. 
(Laws,  1861,  c.  72.)  Another  amendment  was 
made  by  Laws  of  1865,  c  96,  which  added  a 
penalty  of  $10  to  $50  for  selling  Sundays  or 
election  days,  the  original  law  havmg  no  penalty 
attached  to  it  C.  59  of  Laws  of  1873  was  a 
stricter  license  law,  requiring  a  petition  for 
license  to  be  signed  by  a  majority  of  the  voters 
in  the  townships  or  wards,  andabond  of  $3,000, 
with  penalty  of  forfeiture  of  license  for  violation 
of  the  act.  and  providing  that  no  violator  should 
be  qualified  to  receive  another  license  for  five 
years.  Full  civil  damage  provisions  were  added, 
as  were  also  the  usual  prohibitions.  No  fee  for 
license,  or  permit  to  sell,  as  it  wascalled,  was  re- 
quired, beyond  the  cost  involved  in  procuring 
it. 

The  act  of  1875,  c.  13,  repealed  all  former 
laws  relating  to  liquors,  and  now  remains  in 
force. 

The  Lmc  as  Tt  Kmtecl  in  1889. — It  is  unlawful 
to  sell,  barter  or  give  away  any  spirituous,  vinous 


or  malt  liquor,  in  quantities  less  than  a  quart, 
without  first  procuring  a  license  of  the  Board 
of  Commissioners  of  the  county.  (R  S.,  1888, 
§5312.)  'Intoxicating  liquor"  applies  to  any 
spirituous,  vinous  or  malt  liquor.  (Id.,  ^5  5313  ) 
Any  one  desiring  a  license  shall  give  notice  in  a 
paper  published  in  the  county,  or  if  there  is 
none,  by  posting  in  three  places,  at  least  20 
days  before  the  meeting  of  the  Board,  stating 
the  precise  location  of  his  premises  and  the 
kinds  of  liquor  he  desires  to  sell.  And  any 
voter  of  the  township  may  remonstrate  against 
such  license  on  account  of  immorality  or  other 
unfitness  of  the  applicant.  (Id.,  t<  5314.)  The 
Board  shall  grant  a  license  upon  the  giving  of 
bond  in  $2,000,  conditioned  that  the  applicant 
will  keep  an  orderly  house  and  pay  all  fines  and 
costs  and  all  judgments  for  civil  damages  against 
him,  if  such  applicant  is  a  fit  person  to  be  in- 
trusted with  the  sale  of  liquor,  and  if  he  be  not 
in  the  habit  of  becoming  intoxicated.  INo  ap- 
peal from  the  order  of  the  Board  shall  operate 
to  estop  the  applicant  from  receiving  lictnse  and 
selling  thereunder  until  the  close  of  the  next 
term  of  the  Court  in  which  it  might  be  lawfully 
tried.    (Id..  §  5315.) 

The  license  fee  to  sell  all  liquors  is  $100  ;  to 
sell  vinous  or  rualt,  or  both,  $50 — such  fees  to  go 
to  the  school  fund  of  the  county.  (Id.,  ts  5316.) 
No  city  shall  charge  more  than  $250  more,  and 
no  incorporated  town  more  than  $150  more, 
than  the  above  fees,  ild.,  §  5317;  amended 
by  Laws  of  1889.  c.  218.) 

License  shall  be  issued  by  the  County  Auditor 
upon  the  order  of  the  Board  granting  the 
license  and  the  receipt  of  the  County 
Treasurer  for  the  fee.  It  shall  specify  the  name 
of  the  applicant,  the  place  of  sale  and  time  to 
run,  and  permit  liquors  sold  to  be  drunk  on  the 
premises.  (R.  S.,  I888,  §  5318.)  No  license 
shall  be  for  more  or  less  than  a  year.  (Id. ,  § 
5319.) 

Persons  not  licensed,  selling  to  be  drunk  on 
the  premises,  shall  be  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor 
and  fined  $20  to  $100,  and  the  Court  may  add 
imprisonment  for  10  to  30  days.  (Id,,  t^  5320.) 
Criminal  and  Circuit  Courts  have  jurisdiction 
vmder  this  act.  (Id,  §5321.)  And  Justices  of 
the  Peace  have  jurisdiction  to  try  and  determine 
all  cases  under  this  act,  provided  that  if  the 
Justice  think  a  fine  of  $25  is  inadequate  in  any 
case,  he  is  lo  recognize  the  party  to  the 
Criminal  or  Circuit  Court.  (Id.,  j:?  5322.)  Every 
person  who  shall  sell  liquor  in  violation  of  this 
act  shall  be  personally  liable,  and  also  liable  on 
his  bond,  to  any  person  who  shall  .sustain  any 
injury  or  damage  to  his  person  or  property  on 
account  of  the  use  of  such  liquors  so  sold. 
(Id.,  45  5323.)  Cities  may  regulate  and  license 
all  inns,  taverns  and  shops  where  liquor  is  sold 
to  be  used  upon  the  premises.  (R  S.,  1888,  § 
3106,  c.  13.)  To  exact  license  money  from  per- 
sons selling  liquor,  cities  have  jurisdiction  two 
miles  beyond  the  city  limits.     (Id.,  ^  3154.) 

Adulterating  native  wine  and  selling  such  is 
fined  $10  to  $100  (Id.,  §  2072),  and  the  same 
penalty  is  charged  for  so  adulterating  liquors. 
(Id.,  «5  2073.)  Using  active  poison  in  intoxica- 
ting liquors  is  punished  by  imprisonment  one  to 
seven  years,  and  flue  not  exceeding  $500.  (Id.. 
g  2074.) 


liegislation] 


295 


[Legislation. 


"Whoever  is  found  drunk  in  any  public  place 
is  fined  not  exceeding  $5  ;  for  the  second  con- 
viction not  exceeding  $25,  and  for  third  not 
over  $100,  and  he  may  be  imprisoned  five  to  30 
days  and  disfranchised  for  any  determinate 
period.  (Id ,  §  2091.)  Selling ,  liquor  to  a 
drunken  man  knowingly  is  fined  $10  to  $100,  to 
which  may  be  added  imprisonment  for  30  days 
to  one  year,  and  disfranchisement  for  any  de- 
terminate period.  (Id..  §  2092.)  Selling  to  a 
habitual  drunkard,  after  nolice  in  writing  by 
any  citizen  of  the  township,  is  fined  $50  to  $100, 
to  which  may  be  added  imprisonment  30  days 
to  one  year  and  disfranchisement  any  determi- 
nate period.  (Id,,  §  2093.)  Selling  to  a  minor 
is  fined  $20  to  $100:  (Id.,  §  2094.)  Any  minor 
over  14  years  of  age  misrepresenting  his  age  as 
being  over  21  to  procure  liquor,  is  fined  $10  to 
$100.  i  Id.,  §2995.)  Furnishing  liquor  to  prison- 
ers, or  keepers  permitting  them  to  have  such 
liquor,  except  the  same  is  prescribed  by  a 
physician,  is  fined  $20  to  $100.  (Id.,  i^  2096.) 
Keeping  a  disorderly  liquor-shop  is  fined  $10  to 
$100.  (id.  t$  2097)  Selling  liquor  on  Sunday, 
or  any  legal  holiday  or  upon  election  day,  or 
between  the  hours  of  11  p.  m.  and  5  a.  m.,  is 
fined  $10  to  $50,  to  which  may  be  added  im- 
prisonment f  .r  10  to  69  days.  (Id.,  i^  2098.) 
Druigi.sts  sel.ing  on  such  days  or  nights,  ex- 
CL'pt  upon  physicians'  prescriptions,  are  so  pun- 
ished. (Id  ,  ^  2;)99.)  Selling  li(juor  within  one 
mile  of  an  a^semblage  for  ndiiiious  worship,  or 
any  agricultural  fair  or  exhibition,  without  au- 
thority of  the  managers  of  such  meeting  or 
fair,  shall  be  puni.shed  by  fine  of  $10  to  $50  and 
imprisonment  for  10  days.  But  this  does  not 
apply  to  regular  business.     (Id..  §  2100.) 

The  State  Board  of  Health  .shall,  in  its  annual 
report,  state  what,  in  its  best  judgment,  is  the 
effect  of  tlieuseof  liquors  upon  the  industry, 
health  and  lives  of  the  people.     (Id. ,  §  4987.) 

Appeals,  upon  the  granting  of  a  license  or  its 
refusal,  shall  be  to  the  Circuit  Court  within  10 
days,  upon  bond  to  pay  costs  and  not  witliout. 
(Laws,  1889,  c.  148.) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  a  majority  of  the  members  of  the 
two  Houses,  must  be  concurred  in  by  a  majority 
of  the  members  of  each  House  in  the  next 
Legislature,  and  to  be  adopted  must  be  approved 
by  a  majority  of  the  electors  voting  on  the 
question  at  the  polls. 

Indian  Territory.' 

Cherokee  Nation. — The  introduction  and  vend- 
ing of  ardent  spirits  in  this  Nation  shall  be 
unlawful,  under  penalty  of  having  the  same 
wasted  and  destroyed  and  the  oflicers  of  the 
Nation  are  authorized  to  put  under  oath  and  to 
exact  information  from  any  jiersons  in  searching 
for  ardent  spirits,  and  to  procure  search  war- 
rants to  search  any  house  in  which  there  is  good 
reason  to  believe  liquors  are  concealed.  The 
Sheriff  may  summon  a  guard  to  assist  in  wa.sting 
liquors  should  resistance  be  offered.  Persons 
introducing  or  trading  in  spirits  shall  be  fined 
$10  to  $50  (one-fourth  to  the  Sheriff  and  one- 
fourth  to  the  Solicitor  of  the  district).  Failure 
in  duty  on  the  part  of  the  Sheriff  or  Solicitor 
shall  be  fined  $25  (Laws  Cherokee  Nation,  1839- 


67,  p.  28  [passed  1841].)  Any  citizen  is  author- 
ized to  arrest  any  person  guilty  of  introducing 
spirituous  liquors,  and  who  may  be  found  con- 
veying the  same  to  any  point  thereof,  and  to 
waste  them.  And  the  members  of  any  assembly 
or  congr>  gation  for  religious  worship  are  author- 
ized to  take  temporary  measures  for  peace  and 
harmony,  by  the  suppression  of  the  sale  and  in- 
dulgence in  spirits. in  their  vicinity,  as  may  seem 
to  them  most  proper  and  best.  (Id.,  p.  29 
[pas.sed  I860].)  The  first  of  these  acts  was 
codified,  with  the  penalty  increased  to  $50  to 
$100,  in  Compiled  Laws,  Cherokee  Nation,  1881, 
p.  161. 

Chickasaic  Nation. — All  persons  are  prohi- 
bited from  introducmg  spirituous  licpinrs  into 
this  Nation  under  penalty  of  |10,  and  for  all 
succeeding  offenses  $40.  Any  person  giving 
away  or  selling  such  liquor  shall  be  fined  $25, 
and  for  succeeding  offenses  $50  (half  to  the  in- 
former in  both  cases).  In  case  the  offender 
refuse  to  pay  the  fine  the  liquor  shall  be  con- 
fi.scated  and  sold.  The  Sheriff  or  Constable 
shall  de.str<)y  any  whiskey  or  spirituous  liquor 
in  the  Nation,  and  citizens  called  on  are  bouni 
to  assist,  and  those  resisting  such  destruction 
may  in  helf-defense  be  killed  liy  the  officers  or 
citizens.  (Laws  Chickasaw  Nation.  1860,  p.  25 
|pas.sed  1856]  ;  re  enacted  and  approved,  Id.,  p. 
10511858].) 

Choctaw  Nation. — It  is  not  lawful  for  any 
person  to  introduce  for  their  own  use  or  sell  or 
give  away  any  vinous,  spirituous  or  intoxicating 
liquors,  except  wines  for  sacramental  purposes 
by  a  member  of  the  church,  on  penalty  of  $10 
to  $100,  or  on  default  of  payment,  imprison- 
ment one  to  three  months.  Any  person  found 
with  such  liquors  is  deemed  guilty.  The  Cir 
cuit  Judges  shall  give  this  act  in  charge  to  the 
Grand  Jury,  who  shall  diligently  inquire  into 
violations  of  the  same.  In  every  conviction 
under  the  act  the  District  Attorney  shall  be  en- 
titled to  $5.  The  Sheriff,  Light  horsemen  and 
Constables  are  authorized,  upon  suspicion  with- 
out warrant,  to  forcibly  enter  all  places,  .searcli 
for  and  seize,  break  and  destroy  all  bottles,  bar- 
rels, jugs  or  any  vessel  containing  liquor  and 
arrest  the  persons  in  charge,  and  such  officers 
shall  receive  $2  upon  conviction  of  the  offender. 
If  any  person  sell  or  give  away  liquors,  and  any 
person  be  thereby  maimed  or  injured,  si'.ch 
seller  shall  be  fined  $5  to  $100  for  the  per^^on 
injured.  (Laws  Choctaw  Nation,  1869,  p.  163 
[passed  1857].) 

Iowa. 

Earliest  Provisions. — By  the  Revenue  act  of 
the  first  Legislature,  groceries  retailing  liquors 
were  taxed  $100  in  incorporated  towns  and  $50 
elsewhere.  (Laws,  1838,  p.  401.)  By  the  Laws 
of  1839,  c.  22,  County  Commissioners  were  to 
grant  .such  licenses  for  $25  to  $100,  the  applicant 
to  give  bond  in  $100  to  keep  an  orderly  house, 
and  to  be  fined  $10  to  $50  for  offenses  against 
the  law.  And  selling  without  license  was  fined 
$50  to  $100.  Selling  on  Sunday,  except  for 
medicine,  was  fined  $5.     ^Laws,  1843,  c.  43) 

The  law  was  extended  to  all  cities,  and  the 
penalty  for  selling  without  license  was  reduced 
to  $3(J  to  $50  by  Laws  of  1845,  c.  28.  The 
question  of  license  or  no-license  was  submitted 


Legislation] 


296 


[Legislation. 


to   the   voters   of  each  county  to  determine. 
(Laws,  1846,  c.  49.) 

The  second  Legislature  of  the  State  enacted 
a  license  law,  placing  the  fee  at  $50  to  $125, 
with  bond  of  $150  to  keep  an  orderlj^  house, 
and  fining  sales  without  license  $50  to  $150. 
(Laws,  1848,0.  67.) 

Partial  Prohibition  (1855-84:).— A  Prohibitory 
liquor  or  Maine  law  was  submitled  to  vote  of 
the  people  on  the  first  Monday  of  April,  1855. 
(Laws,  c.  45.)  In  the  case  of  State  v.  Sanfo 
(2  L-i.,  165)  the  submission  clauses  were  declared 
unconstitutional,  but  the  rest  of  the  law  was 
upheld.  This  law  excepted  sales  of  five  gallons 
or  more  of  domestic  wines,  and  of  cider  by  the 
maker  when  sold  to  be  taken  away  at  one  time  ; 
appointed  County  Agents  to  sell  liquor  for 
medir  inal,  mechanicaland  sacramental  purposes, 
and  punished  manufacturing  by  a  fine  of  $100 
for  first  offense.  $200  for  second,  and  $200  and 
imprisonment  90 da^s  for  third;  tlie  penalty  for 
selling  was  $20,  $50  and  $100,  and  three  to  six 
months'  imprisonment,  for  first,  second  and  third 
offenses  respectively.  It  declared  the  building 
or  ground  of  unlawful  sale,  manufacture,  or 
keeping  a  nuisance,  and  authorized  search, 
seizure  and  forfeiture  of  liquors.  By  the  act  of 
1857  (Laws,  c.  157).  any  citizen  except  hotel- 
keepers,  keepers  of  saloons,  eating-houses, 
grocery-keepers  and  confectioners,  was  permit- 
ted to  buy  and  sell  liquors  for  mechanical, 
medicinal,  culinary  and  sacramental  purposes 
only,  on  procuring  the  certificate  of  12  citizens 
of  the  town  to  his  moral  character,  and  giving 
bond  in  $1,000.  He  was  to  keep  an  accurate 
account  of  his  purchases  and  sales.  Purchasers 
buying  of  him  were  fined  JIO  for  the  first 
offense  of  making  a  false  statement  of  the  use 
for  which  liquor  was  inquired,  and  $20 
and  10  to  50  days  in  prison  for  the  second 
offense. 

A  license  law,  allowing  County  Judges  to 
grant  licenses  upon  petition  of  12  freeholders 
of  the  township,  with  civil  damage  provisions, 
was  enacted  to  be  adopted  by  any  county  upon 
vote,  after  petition  by  100  citizens  of  such 
county.  (Laws,  1856.  c.  221.)  This  act  was 
declared  unconstitutional  in  whole  because  of 
its  submission  clauses,  and  because  it  would  not 
have  a  uniform  operation.  (Geebrick  v.  State,  5 
la.,  491.) 

Wilfully  selling  adulterated  or  drugged 
liquors,  was  punished  by  fine  not  exceeding 
$500,  or  imprisonment  for  not  over  two  years. 
(Laws,  1858.  c.  140  )  And  by  the  Laws  of  1858, 
c.  143,  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  beer,  cider 
from  apples  or  wine  from  grapes,  currants  or 
other  fruits  grown  in  this  State,  were  excepted 
irom  the  prohibitions  of  the  law. 

Persons  selling  liquor  were  charged  with  the 
expense  of  the  care  of  the  intoxicated  person, 
and  were  made  liable  in  civil  damaa-es  for  the 
injury  caused  by  intoxication  to  any  one's  per- 
son, property  or  means  of  support.  (Laws, 
18ti2  c.  47.) 

The  privileges  of  buying  and  selling  confer- 
red by  act  of  1857,  c.  157,  were  cut  off  by  c.  94, 
Laws  of  1862,  and  permits  for  the  sale  of 
liquor  for  such  excepted  purposes  were  required 
to  specify  the  house  of  sale  and  the  term  of  its 
continuance,  with  the  same  system  of  accounts 


for  every  purchase  and  sale  elaborated.  Such 
agent's  permit  was  forfeited  for  unlawful  sell- 
ing. And  search  warrants  were  allowed  to  be 
issued  upon  information  by  one  credible  person 
of  the  county,  in.stead  of  three.  Sales  of  liquor 
at  fairs  were  prohibited  by  Laws  of  1864,  c. 
109.  The  Laws  of  1868,  c.  128,  amended  the 
granting  of  permits  under  the  above  laws,  and 
made  a  hearing  upon  notice  necessary  to  the 
granting  of  such  permits,  and  directed  the 
County  Judge  to  consider  the  wants  of  the 
locality  and  the  number  of  permits  issued 
therefor  in  granting  the  same. 

Incorporated  cities  and  towns  were  given 
power  to  regulate  or  prohibit  the  sale  of  liquor 
for  purposes  not  prohibited  by  the  State  law, 
i.e.,  beer,  wine  and  cider.  (Laws,  1868,  c.  154.) 
In  1870  the  sale  of  beer,  wine  and  cider  was 
prohibited,  but  the  Board  of  Supervisors  of  each 
county  might  determine  whether  a  vote  should 
be  taken  upon  the  question,  and  not  till  such  a 
vote  w^as  in  favor  of  Prohibition  sliould  such 
Prohibition  be  in  force.  (Laws,  1870,  c.  82.) 
By  Laws  of  1872,  c.  24,  permits  to  sell  for 
the  excepted  purposes  were  allowed,  only  upon 
petition  of  a  majority  of  the  legal  voters  of  the 
township  or  ward.  The  bond  of  the  holder  of 
a  permit  was  increased  to  $3,000,  his  profits  were 
limited  to  33i-  per  cent.,  and  monthly  returns  of 
his  sales  to  the  Auditor  were  required.  Penal- 
ties were  $100.  Druggists  were  not  to  sell 
liquor  or  its  compounds  as  a  beverage.  (Laws, 
1880,  c.  75,  fj  9.)  Selling  on  election  day  was 
prohibited  by  Laws  of  1880,  c.  82. 

The  Constitutional  Amendivent. — A  Prohi- 
bitory Amendment  to  the  Constitution  was  pro- 
posed to  be  submitted.  (Laws,  1880,  c.  215  ; 
Laws,  1882,  p.  178.)  This  Amendment  was  in- 
validated, after  adoption,  on  account  of  an  in- 
formality in  its  passage,  as  indicated  in  the 
journals  of  the  Legislature.  (Koehler  v.  Hill, 
60  la.,  543.) 

The  LaiP  as  It  mcisted  in  1889.— In  1884,  1886 
and  1888  were  passed  the  laws,  more  and  more 
stringent  and  elaborate,  which  make  up  most  of 
the  present  sections  of  the  Revised  Code  of 
1888  upon  the  subject.  Citations  that  follow  are 
to  McCIain's  Code  of  1888.  The  corresponding 
matter  is  found  in  Miller's  Revised  Code,  at  g 
1523  and  following. 

No  person  shall  manufacture  or  sell,  directly 
or  indirectly,  any  intoxicating  liquors  except  as 
hereinafter  jirovided.  Keeping  liquor  with  in- 
tent to  sell  the  same  unlawfully  is  prohibited  ; 
and  the  liquor  and  vessels  contaiuina;  it  are  de- 
clared nuisances.     (Code,  1888,  §  2359.) 

Persons  holding  permits  may  sell  intoxicating 
liquors  for  pharmaceutical  and  medicinal  pur- 
poses, alcohol  for  specified  chemical  purposes, 
and  wine  for  sacramental  jiurposes.  Permits 
must  be  procured  of  the  District  Court,  and  con- 
tinue one  year,  with  renewal  annually  upon 
showing  to  the  Court  that  the  law  has  been 
complied  with  the  preceding  year,  and  giving  a 
new  bond  ;  but  parties  may  resist  renewals  the 
same  as  applications  for  permits.  (Id.,  t^  2360. ) 
Notice  of  application  for  permit  must  be  pub- 
lished three  weeks  in  a  newspaper  of  the  city, 
town  or  county.  And  in  one  of  the  official 
papers  of  the  county.  It  shall  state  the  name 
of  the  applicant,  the  purpose  of  the  application, 


Legislation.] 


297 


[Leg-islatiou. 


the  particular  location  of  the  place  where  liquor 
is  proposed  to  be  sold,  and  that  the  petition  will 
be  on  tile  10  days  before  the  first  day  of  the 
term  when  thg  application  will  be  made,  and  a 
copy  thereof  shall  be  served  on  the  County  At- 
torney. (Id,  ^2362.)  Application  for  permits 
shall  be  by  petition,  stating  the  applicant's 
name,  place  of  residence,  present  business  and 
business  for  two  years  previously,  a  particular 
description  of  the  place  of  sales,  that  he  is  a 
citizen  of  the  State,  a  registered  pharmacist 
and  proposes  to  sell  liquor  as  the  proprietor  of 
such  pliarmacy,  that  he  has  not  been  convicted 
of  unlawful  liquor-,selliug  for  two  years,  does  not 
keep  a  hotel,  eating-house,  saloon,  restaurant  or 
place  of  public  amusement ,  that  he  is  not  addicted 
to  the  use  of  liquor  as  a  beverage,  and  has  not 
been  engaged  in  unlawful  liquor  traffic  for  two 
years.  (Id.,  i^  2;]04.)  The  permit  shall  issue, 
or  be  renewed,  only  upon  a  bond  by  the  appli- 
cant in  ¥1.000,  conditioned  to  observe  the  law 
relating  to  the  sale  of  liquor,  and  to  pay  all  fines, 
penalties,  damages  and  costs  against  him.  Such 
bond  shall  be  for  the  benefit  of  any  person 
damaged  by  reason  of  violation  of  the  permit. 
(Id.,  g2364.) 

The  applicant  shall  file,  10  days  before  the 
term,  in  support  of  the  application,  a  petition 
signed  by  one-third  of  the  freehold  voters  of 
the  township,  town,  city  or  ward  in  which  the 
permit  is  to  be  u.sed.  Each  person  shall  state 
that  he  has  read  the  petition  and  is  personally 
accpiainted  with  the  applicant,  that  he  is  a  resi- 
dent of  the  county,  over  21  years  of  age,  of  good 
character,  reputed  to  be  law-abiding,  has  not 
bei'n  found  guilty  of  violating  the  liquor  laws 
for  two  years,  is  not  in  the  habit  of  using  liquor 
as  a  beverage,  that  the  permit  is  necessary  for 
the  convenience  and  accommodation  of  the 
people  of  the  locality,  and  that  he  believes  the 
applicant  is  worthy  of  confidence  and  will  ob- 
serve the  law.  At  or  before  9  A.  M.  of  the 
first  day  of  the  term,  a  remonstrance  against  the 
granting  of  the  permit  may  Ije  filed  by  any  per- 
son, tid.,  §  2365.)  On  the  first  day  of  the  term, 
having  ascertained  that  the  application  is  proper- 
ly presented,  the  Court  shall  hear  it  unless  ob- 
jection is  made,  and  if  objection  is  made  it 
shall  be  set  down  for  hearing  during  the  term. 
The  County  Attorney  or  any  citizen,  or  his  at- 
torney, may  resist  the  application,  and  in  any 
case  the  Coui  t  shall  not  grant  the  permit  until 
it  appears  by  evidence  that  the  applicant  is 
worthy  of  confidence  and  that  the  application 
and  petition  are  altogether  true.  If  more  than 
one  permit  for  the  same  locality  is  asked  for  at 
the  same  time,  the  various  applications  shall  be 
heard  together,  and  any  or  all  shall  be  refused 
or  granterl,  as  will  best  subserve  the  public  in- 
terest. (Id.,  s  2'!67.)  Permits  shall  not  issue 
until  the  applicant  makes  oath,  to  be  endorsed 
upon  the  bond,  that  he  will  not  sell  unlawfully 
and  will  make  required  returns  of  sales.  (Id., 
45  2307.) 

Permits  shall  be  deemed  trusts  reposed  in  the 
recipients,  not  as  a  matter  of  right,  and  may  be 
revoked  by  order  of  the  Court  upon  sufficient 
showing.  Complaint,  sworn  to  by  three  citizens, 
may  at  any  time  be  presented  to  the  District 
Court;  and,  with  five  days'  notice  to  the  accused 
to  appear,  the  Court  may  hear  and  determine 


the  controversy  and  the  permit  may  be  suspend- 
ed during  its  pendency.  After  revocation  of  a 
permit  for  violation  of  law,  such  adjudication 
may,  in  the  discretion  of  the  Commissioners  of 
Pharmacy,  work  a  forfeiture  of  tlie  certificate  of 
registration  as  a  pharmacist,  and  upon  receipt  of 
a  record  showings,  second  such  violation  of  law, 
such  Commissioners  shall  cancel  such  registra- 
tion. The  Clerk  must  forward  such  records  to 
them.  (Id.,  t^  2368.)  If  no  registered  pharma- 
cist shall  obtain  a  permit  not  in  any  township, 
some  person  not  a  registered  pharmacist  may 
under  like  conditions  obtain  a  p  rmit.  (Id.. 
§2369.) 

All  papers  relating  to  the  granting  or  revoca- 
tion of  permits  shall  be  filed  as  part  of  the 
records  of  the  Clerks'  offices.  The  applicant 
for  permit  shall  pay  all  the  costs  incurred  in  any 
case,  except  the  costs  of  any  malicious  resistance. 
(Id.,  §2370.) 

When  any  person  holding  a  permit  desires  to 
purchase  liquor  for  use  thereunder,  he  shall  ap- 
ply to  the  County  Auditor  for  a  certificate  au- 
thorizing such  purchase,  which  must  be  attached 
to  the  way-bill  accompanying  the  shipment  as 
authority  to  the  common  carrier.  After  use 
such  certificate  shall  be  returned  to  the  Auditor, 
who  shall  cancel,  fil^  and  preserve  the  same. 
(Id.,  g  2371. )  Requests  for  liquor  shall  be  dated 
and  s;iall  state  the  age  and  exact  residence  of  the 
signer  and  person  for  whose  use  the  liciuor  is  re- 
quired, the  amount  and  kind  required,  its  pur- 
pose, that  neither  the  applicant  nor  the  person 
who  is  to  use  the  liquor  uses  licpior  as  a  bever- 
age, and  be  signed  by  the  applicant  and  attested 
by  the  permit-holder,  but  must  not  be  granted 
by  the  permit-holder  unless  he  per.-ioually  knows 
the  applicant  and  tliat  he  is  not  a  minor  or  per- 
son addicted  to  drunkenness,  and  is  of  good 
ciiaracter,  and  believes  the  application  is  true. 
If  he  does  not  know  the  applicant,  one  whom 
he  does  know  must  in  writing  vouch  for  such 
applicant  in  the  same  way.  The  recjuests  shall 
be  upon  blanks  numbered  consecutively,  fur- 
nished by  the  County  Auditor,  in  books  of  100  to 
holders  of  permits,  who  shall,  after  filling,  re- 
turn to  the  Auditor,  who  will  file  and  preserve 
the  same.  All  unused  or  mutilated  blanks  shall 
be  returned  or  accounted  for  before  other  blanks 
shall  be  issued  to  the  permit-holder.  (Id.,  § 
2372.) 

On  or  before  the  10th  day  of  each  month, 
each  permit-holder  shall  make  returns,  under 
oath,  to  the  Auditor,  of  all  requests  filled  by 
him.  Every  permit-holder  shall  keep  strict  ac- 
count of  all  liquors  purchased  by  him,  and  the 
amounts  sold  and  used,  and  the  amount  on 
hand,  each  month.  Such  accounts  shall  be  open 
for  inspection  by  officers,  and  .shall  be  evidence. 
Monthly  statements  thereof  shall  be  made  to 
the  Auditor  with  the  return  of  the  above  re- 
quests. (Id.,  g  2373.)  On  trial  for  illegal  sales 
under  permits,  the  requests  for  liquors  and  re- 
turns made  to  the  Auditor,  the  general  repute 
of  the  accu.sed,  and  his  manner  of  conducting 
his  business,  and  the  character  of  applicants 
for  liquor,  shall  be  competent  evidence.  (Id., 
§2374.) 

Registered  pharmacists,  not  permit-holders, 
are  authorized  to  obtain  licjuois  inot  including 
malt)    of     permit-holders,    for    compounding 


Legislation.] 


298 


[Legislation. 


medicines,  tinctures  and  extracts  that  cannot  be 
used  as  beverages,  at  not  over  10  per  cent,  net 
profit  on  such  liquors,  such  purchasers  to  keep 
and  return  monthly  to  the  Auditor  a  record  of 
such  purchases  and  the  uses  made  thereof.  The 
Commissioners  of  Pharmacy  are  directed  to 
make  rules  to  govern  this  subject  and  revoke 
registrations  of  pharmacists  abusing  the  trust. 
(Id.,  t^  2375.)  A  permit-holder  may  employ 
not  more  than  two  registered  pharmacists  as 
clerks,  for  whose  acts  he  is  i)ersonally  respon- 
sible. (Id.,  §  3376.)  The  Commissioners  of 
Pharmacy  are  to  have  as  a  fund  for  further 
prosecutions  50  per  cent,  of  all  fines  collected 
in  prosecutions  instituted  by  them.  (Id., 
g  2378.) 

Any  person  making  a  false  signature  or  rep- 
resentation upon  papers  required  by  this  act 
shall  be  fined  !5=20  to  jf  lOO,  or  imprisoned  10  to 
30  days.  Permit-holdei's  o^;  clerks  making  false 
oaths  shall  be  punished  for  perjury.  Permit- 
holders  violating  the  law  are  guilty  of  mis- 
demeanors.    (Id,  i;  2379.) 

Selling  or  giving  to  minors,  except  upon 
written  order  of  parent  or  guardian  or  physi- 
cian, or  to  any  intoxicated  person  or  habitual 
drunkard,  is  fined  §100  (half  to  the  informer;. 
(Id.,  S2389.) 

Selling  without  a  permit,  by  any  device,  is 
fined  ,§50  to  .$100  for  first  ofEeusc,  and  ^300  to 
$500,  with  imprisonment  not  exceeding  six 
months,  for  subsequent  offenses.  (Id.,  cj  2381.) 
Persons  keeping  liquor  for  illegal  sale  shall  be 
punished  as  last  stated  above,  except  that  such 
imprisonment  is  alternative.     (Id.,  JJ  2383.) 

In  cases  of  unlawful  manufacture,  sale  or 
keeping,  the  building  or  ground  upon  which  it 
happens  is  a  nuisance  and  the  user  is  fined  not 
over  $1,000.  Any  citizen  of  the  county  may 
maintain  an  action  to  abate  and  perpetually  en- 
join the  same,  and  any  person  violating  any 
such  injunction  shall  be  fined  $500  to  $1,000,  or 
imprisoned  not  more  than  six  mouths,  or  both. 
(Id.,  t^  2384.)  It  is  the  duty  of  the  County  At- 
torney to  institute  actions  to  enjoin  such  nui- 
sances.    (Id.,  g  2385.) 

In  any  sach  action  the  Judge  ma}'  grant  a 
temporary  injunction,  if  the  nuisance  is  being 
maintained,  as  <:f  course.  (Id.,  t?  3386.)  A 
Judge  may  summarily  try  and  punish  parties 
violating  such  injunction,  by  the  penalty  of 
$4  2384.  which  (if  imprisonment  alone)  must  be 
three  to  six  months.  (Id.,  jj  2387.)  If  the  ex- 
istence of  such  a  nuisance  has  been  established 
by  action,  it  shall  be  abated  by  order  of  Court, 
by  seizing  and  destroying  liquor  therein,  re- 
moving all  fixtures  of  the  business  in  the  build- 
ing, and  closing  the  same  against  occupation 
for  saloon  purposes,  for  one  year.  ,  (Id., 
^5  3"^89. )  If  an  owner  appear  and  pay  costs,  and 
tile  a  bond  iu  the  full  value  of  the  property, 
conditioned  that  he  will  immediately  so  abate 
such  nuisance,  the  action  shall  be  abated.  (Id., 
§2391.) 

Finding  liquors  in  the  possession  of  anyone 
not  authorized  to  sell  the  same,  except  in  a 
private  dwelling  which  is  not  used  as  a  tavern, 
eating-house,  or  place  of  public  resort,  is  pre- 
sumptive evidence  of  illegal  keeping.  (Id,, 
§2392.) 

After  a  conviction  of  keeping  a  nuisance,  if 


any  person  engages  in  such  unlawful  business  he 
shall  be  imprisoned  three  months  to  one  year. 
But  no  equitable  order  or  judgment  shall  be 
deemed  such  conviction.  (Id,  J^  2393.)  In  no 
action  to  abate  a  nuisance  shall  fees  be  demand 
ed  in  advance,  and  costs  shall  be  paid  as  in  other 
criminal  cases.  But  the  costs  may  be  taxt  d  to 
the  prosecutor  if  he  act  maliciously  and  without 
pr()l)able  cause.  (Id.,  §  2396.)  Any  person  en- 
joined in  such  action  who  again  engages  in  the 
sale  anywhere  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
Court,  shall  be  guilty  of  contempt.    (Id.,  ?■  2398.) 

Keeping  a  United  States  revenue  "license" 
posted  in  any  place  of  business  is  evidence  that 
the  person  owning  it  is  engaged  in  unlawful 
selling,  and  prima  facie  evidence  that  liquors 
found  in  po.ssessiun  of  such  person  are 
kept  unlawfully,  if  such  person  is  not  author 
izedbylaw.     (Id.,  §  3400.) 

Search-warrant  is  provided  for  upon  complaint 
of  any  credible  re.sident  of  any  county  upon 
oath  tliat  he  believes  particular  liquor  in  a  par- 
ticular place  is  owned  by  the  person  named  or 
described  and  is  kept  by  him  tor  unlawful  sale. 
If  the  place  named  is  a  dwelling,  it  must  be 
staled  that  liquor  has  been  sold  there  within 
one  month.  (Id.,  g  3401.)  The  Information 
and  seaivh  warrant  shall  describe  the  place  and 
liquor  with  reasonable  particularity,  but  their 
insufficiency  only  entitles  the  owner  to  be  heard 
upon  the  merits  of  the  case.  (Id.,  tj  3402.) 
Upon  seizure  of  liquor  under  search-warrant, 
the  Justice  issuing  the  warrant  shall  cause  notice 
to  be  left  at  the  place  of  such  seizure  and  at 
the  last  known  place  of  residence  of  the  owner, 
summoning  such  person,  from  within  five  to  15 
days,  to  appear  and  show  cause  why  said  liquor 
and  the  vessels  containing  it  should  not  I  e  f(;r- 
feited.  The  proceedings  shall  be  the  same  ;  s 
in  cases  of  misdemeanor.  (Id.,  *  2404.)  When- 
ever decided  that  such  liquor  is  forfeited,  war- 
rant shall  issue  to  an  officer  to  destroy  it ;  in  the 
other  case  to  return  it.     (Id..  >?  2405.) 

If  any  person  is  found  intoxicated,  he  may  be 
taken  by  any  peace  officer  without  warrant,  and 
may  be  fined  >-10  or  imprisoned  30  days.  But 
this  may  be  remitted  upon  the  prisoner's  giving 
information  when,  where  and  of  whom  he  pur- 
chased the  liquor,  provided  he  give  bail  \"  ap- 
pear as  a  witness  against  the  party  who  sold  the 
liquor.  (Id.,  g  2405.)  In  any  information  or  in- 
dictment, it  is  not  necessary  to  set  out  exactly 
the  kind  and  quantity  of  liquor,  nor  the  exact 
time  of  ofllense ;  and  proof  of  any  violation  of 
liquor  law,  substantially  as  set  forth  and  within 
the  time  mentioned,  is  sufficient.  It  is  only 
necessary  to  allege  second  or  subsequent  offenses, 
without  Getting  forth  the  record  of  the  same. 
And  the  purchaser  of  liquor  is  a  competent  wit- 
ness.    (Id.,  ij  2406.) 

All  debts  for  liquor  unlawfully  sold,  and  all 
contracts  and  securities  based  in  whole  or  in 
part  on  such  unlawful  sale,  shall  be  void,  and 
no  action  for  liquor  sold  in  another  State  in  vi- 
olation of  the  law  of  this  State  shall  be  main- 
tained.'   (Id.,  g  3407.)    All  peace  officers  shall 

>  The  United  States  Supreme  Court  has  decided  that  any 
State  may  not  only  lawfully  supi)ies8  the  manufacture  of 
liquor  intended  for  consumption  within  the  State,  Init  also 
the  manufacture  of  liquor  intended  for  transportation  to 
or  sale  iu  another  State.    (Kidd  v.  Pearson,  128  U.  S.,  1.) 


Legislation.] 


299 


[Legislation. 


see  that  the  provisions  of  this  chapter  are  ex- 
ecuted and  shall  prosecute  violations,  under 
penalty  of  $10  to  $50  and  forfeiture  of  their 
offices.    (Id,  §3408.) 

If  any  express  or  railway  company,  or  com- 
mon carrier,  shall  transport  liquor  from  place 
to  place  in  this  State,  without  certificate  of  the 
Auditor  as  above  mentioned,  its  agent  so  offend- 
ing shall  be  fined  $100.  This  offense  is  com 
plete  in  any  county  of  this  State  to  or  through 
which  liquor  is  transported,  or  where  unloaded. 
(Id.,  §  2410.)  This  section,  in  so  far  as  it  applied 
to  liquors  brought  into  the  State  from  another 
State,  was  by  the  United  States  Supreme  Court 
declared  to  be  unconstitutional,  as  an  attempt  to 
regulate  commerce  between  the  States.'  (Bow- 
man V.  Chicago  &  N.  W.  R  R.  Co.,  125  U.  S., 
465. )  Any  person  making  a  false  statement  to 
procure  transporation  of  liquor  by  a  common 
carrier,  or  falsely  making  it  therefor,  shall  be 
fined -i^lOO.  (Code,  1888,  §  2411.)  Liquors  .shall 
not  be  conveyed  from  point  to  point  in  this 
Stat3  by  common  carriers  without  being  marked 
as  such,  and  all  liquors  so  carried  shall  be  sub- 
ject to  seizure.     (Id.,  J?  2413.) 

Every  person,  by  himself    or  by  associating 
with  others,  keeping  a  club  or  place  in  which 
liquors  are  distributed  or  divided  among  mem 
bers.  shall  be  fined  $100  to  $500,  or  imprisoned 
30  days  to  six  months,     dd.,  J;  2413.) 

Courts  and  juries  shall  construe  the  liquor 
laws  to  prevent  evasion,  and  so  as  to  cover  giv- 
ing as  well  as  selling.     (Id.,  §  2415.) 

"Intoxicating  liquors"  include  alcohol,  ale, 
wine,  beer,  spirituous,  vinous  and  malt  and  all 
intoxicating  liquors  whatever.  (Id.,  §  2416.) 
Any  person,  by  selling  liquor  unlav^fully,  who 
causes  the  intoxication  of  another,  shall  be 
liable  for  his  keep  and  $1  a  day  additional. 
(Id.,  §  2417.)  Every  wife,  child,  parent, 
guardian,  employer  or  other  person,  injured  in 
person,  property  or  means  of  support,  in  con- 
sequence of  the  intoxication  of  any  person,  has 
right  to  action  for  actual  and  exera]ilary  dam 
ages  against  the  person  or  persons  selling  liquors 
and  causing  such  intoxication.     (Id.,  §  3418.) 

For  all  fines,  costs  and  judgments  under  the 
liquor  law,  the  real  property  of  the  defendant 
and  of  the  owner  knowingly  permitting  the 
business  on  his  property,  are  liable.  And  any 
bond  given  by  defendant  may  be  sued  therefor. 
(Id.,  §2419.) 

Persons  making  false  statements  to  procure 
liquor  of  tho.se  authorized  to  sell,  shall  be  fined 
$10  ;  for  the  second  offense,  S^SO  and  imprison- 
ment 10  to  30  days.     (Id.. §  2420.) 

There  is  a  law  requiring  scientific  temperance 
instruction  in  the  public  schools.  (Code,  1888, 
§2884  ;  passed  in  1886,  c.  1.) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  a  majority  of  all  the  members  o^ 
the  two  Houses,  and  if  concurred  in  by  similar 
majorities  in  the  next  Legislature  may  be  sub- 

1  The  Supreme  Court,  has  decided  that  so  long  as  Con- 
gress does  not  specially  authorize  States  to"  prohibit 
the  inter-State  traffic  in  liquors,  such  imported  liquors  may 
not  only  be  lawfully  imported  into  one  State  from  another 
State,  but  may  also  be  sold  in  the  original  packages  at  the 
point  of  their  destination,  despite  State  prohibitions  to  the 
contrary.  (Leisy  v.  Hardin  [1890],  135  U.  S.,  100.)  But 
by  an  act  passed  in  1890,  Congress  concedes  to  each  State 
the  right  to  deal  with  imported  liquors  the  same  as  with 
liquors  manufactured  within  ita  own  borders. 


mitted  to  the  people  for  ratification  or  rejection 
— a  majority  vote  of  the  people  being  necessary. 

Kansas. 

Earliest  Provisions. — The  Laws  of  1859,  c.  91, 
required  the  petition  of  a  majority  of  the  house- 
holders of  the  township  or  ward  for  a  license, 
and  $50  to  $500  license  fee.  Selling  without 
license  was  fined  not  to  exceed  $100.  Selling 
on  Sunday,  election  day  or  4th  of  July  was 
fined  $25  to  $100.  with  imprisonment  10  to  30 
days  and  forfeiture  of  licen.se.  Persons  licensed 
had  to  give  bond  in  $3,000.  Tliey  were  not  to 
sell  to  intoxicated  persons  or  to  married  men 
again.st  the  known  wishes  of  their  wives.  Full 
civil  damage  provisions  were  included.  This 
act  did  not  apply  to  corporate  cities  of  over 
1.000  inhabitants,  which  had  full  power  to 
regulate  licenses  them.selves. 

Complete  Prohibition  was  t  *flcted  for  the 
unorganized  counties  of  the  State  in  1867. 
(Laws,  c.  81.) 

The  Constitutional  Amendment.— In  1879.  by 
Laws,  c.  165,  the  Amendment.  •  The  manufac- 
ture and  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  shall  be 
forever  prohibited  in  this  State,  except  for  med- 
ical, scientific  and  mechanical  pui'poses,"  was 
proposed,  and  it  was  adopted  in  1880.  becoming 
§10  of  Art.  15  of  the  C^onstitution.  In  1881 
was  passed  a  complete  Prohibitory  law,  which. 
as  amended  in  1885  and  1887  is  summarized 
below. 

The  Laic  as  It  Existed  in  1889. — Any  person 
or  persons  who  shall  manufacture,  sell  or  barter 
any  spirituous,  malt,  vinous,  fermented,  or  other 
intoxicating  liquors,  shall  be  guilty  of  a  misde- 
meanor, provided  that  such  liquors  may  be  sold 
for  medical,  scientific  and  mechanical  purposes, 
as  provided  by  law.  _(C.  L.,  1885,  g  3387.)  It  shall 
be  unlawful  to  sell  liquor  for  the  above  excepted 
purpo'=es  without  procuring  a  druggist's  permit 
therefor  from  the  Probate  Judge,  who  has  dis- 
cretion to  grant  the  same  for  one  year  to  any 
person  of  good  character  who  is  a  registered 
pharmacist,  engaged  in  the  business  of  a  drug- 
gist, who  can  be  intrusted  with  the  responsibil- 
ity of  so  selling  ;  and  such  Judge  may  at  any 
time  revoke  such  permit.  To  obtain  such  per- 
mit the  applicant  shall  file,  30  days  before  hear- 
ing thereon,  a  petition,  signed  by  the  applicant 
and  25  reputable  freeholders  who  are  electors, 
and  25  reputable  women  over  21  years, 
residing  in  the  township,  city  of  the  third  class 
or  ward,  setting  forth  the  place  where  such 
business  is  located,  that  the  applicant  is  of  good 
character,  etc.,  and  does  not  use  liquor  as  a 
beverage,  and  that  said  applicant  has  a  stock 
of  drugs  if  in  a  city  of  at  least  $1,000  value, 
or  elsewhere  *500  value.  The  applicant  shall 
publish  a  notice  of  his  application,  and  shall  be 
required  to  prove  the  truth  of  every  statement 
in  the  petition  ;  and  the  County  Attorney  shall, 
and  any  other  citizen  may,  appear  and  oppose. 
The  permit,  if  granted,  shall  be  recorded  upon 
the  journal  of  the  Probate  Court,  and  a  certified 
copy  thereof  posted  in  a  conspicuous  place  in 
the  store  where  the  business  is  carried  on.  The 
druggist  shall  file  bond  in  $1,000  not  to  violate 
the  law.  Any  applicant  or  citizen  may  appeal 
from  the  Probate  Judge's  decision  to  the  Dis- 
trict Court,  but  not  therefrom.   Upon  a  petition, 


Legislation.] 


300 


[Legislation. 


on  oath,  by  25  reputable  men  and  25  reputable 
women  of  the  township,  city  or  ward  afore 
said,  requesting  the  revocation  of  the  permit, 
the  Judge  shall  cite  such  druggist  I o  appear  ; 
and  if  it  ajjpear  that  he  is  not  in  good  faith  car- 
rying out  the  law,  his  permit  maybe  cancelled. 
On  appeal  as  above,  the  permit  shall  be  inoper- 
ative until  the  appeal  is  decided.  But  the  Pro- 
bate Judge  may  cancel  any  permit  at  anj'  lime 
of  his  own  motion.  Such  Jud^e  is.suing  a  per- 
mit to  one  not  legally  qualified  shall  Le  fined 
$500  to  f  l/'OO,  and  any  person  signing  a  petition 
for  any  applicant  known  tohimtobemthe  habit 
of  becoming  intoxicated  or  not  in  good  faith  a 
druggist,  shall  be  fined  $50  to  i^lOO.  (Laws, 
1887,  c.  165,  t5  1.) 

Any  regular  physician  in  case  of  actual 
need  may  give  prescription  for  liquor  or  ad- 
minister it  himself.  But  if  he  does  so  to  evade 
the  law  he  shall  be  fined  $100  to  $500,  or  be  im- 
prisoned 10  to  90  days.  (C.  L  ,  1S85,  g  2289.) 
Any  drug'iist  having  a  permit  may  sell  for 
medical  purposes  only  on  affidavit  of  the 
person  for  whom  the  liquor  is  required,  setting 
forth  the  purpose,  kind  and  quantity,  that  it  is 
actually  needetl  by  the  named  patient,  and 
stating  that  it  is  not  intended  as  a  beverage  and 
that  the  applicant  is  over  21  years  of  age  Such 
druggists  may  sell  for  mechanical  and  .scientific 
purposes  only  upon  a  similar  affidavit.  There 
shall  be  but  one  delivery  on  one  alfidavit,  andno 
druggist  shall  permit  drinking  on  his  premises. 
Any  such  druggist  may  sell  in  quantities  not 
less  than  a  gallon  to  another  druggist  having  a 
permit.  The  affidavits  above  required  shall  be 
provided  by  the  County  Clerks  in  printed  book 
forms  of  100  each,  consecutively  numbered. 
The  books  must  be  indorsed  with  the  dale  of 
delivery  and  the  name  of  the  person  to  whom 
delivered,  and  be  signed  and  sealed  witli  the 
oflcial  seal.  The  Clerk  must  keep  two  exact 
copies  (except  as  to  the  numbers  of  the  blanks), 
a  record  of  the  series,  and  the  numbers  thereof 
delivered  to  each  druggist.  These  copies  of  the 
books  must  be  filed  one  by  the  Clerk  and  one 
in  the  office  of  the  Probate  .Judge  as  well  as  the 
Clerk's  records  of  deliveries  of  books.  Such 
affidavits  tiled  by  the  druggists,  while  they  re- 
main in  book  form,  must  with  an  affidavit  be 
returned  monthly  to  the  Probate  Judge.  The 
druggist  must  also  file  at  the  same  time  an  affi- 
davit of  the  amounts  of  liquor  purchased  by 
him  and  the  amounts  remaining  on  hand.  The 
Probate  Judge  shall  receive  no  fees  under  this 
act,  but  receives  $15  per  annum  for  each  1,000 
inhabitants  of  his  county,  not  to  exceed  $1,000. 

Persons  making  false  affidavits  for  liquors 
shall  be  guilty  of  perjury  and  imprisoned 
six  months  to  two  years.  A  person  subscribing 
any  other  nnme  than  his  own  {o  such  shall  be 
guilty  of  forgery  in  the  fourth  degree.  Persons 
selling  to  others  liquor  so  obtained,  upon  affi- 
davit, as  a  beverage,  shall  be  fined  $100  to  $500 
and  imprisoned  30  to  90  days.  Each  druggist 
shall  keep  a  daily  record,  in  a  book  open  for 
ins^iection,  of  all  liquors  sold  by  him  orhiscm- 
plo.yees.     (Laws,  1887,  c.  165,  S  2.) 

No  person  shall  manufacture  liquor  except 
for  the  above  excepted  purposes.  To  obtain  a 
permit  therefor  ore  must  apply  by  petition 
signed  by  100  resident  electors  of  the  ward  or 


by  a  majority  of  those  of  the  township  or  city 
of  the  third  class  to  the  Probate  Judge  and  file 
bond  in  .'fl 0,000.  Such  manufacturer  shall  sell 
only  in  original  paekages  for  such  purposes, 
and  for  medical  purposes  only,  to  druggists 
duly  authorized  to  sell,  and  shall  not  sell  in  less 
quantities  than  five  gallons.  (Laws,  1887,  c.  165, 

Persons  selling  e.irectly  or  indirectly  with- 
out a  permit  shall  be  fined  ijlOO  to  ^500  and  im- 
prisoned bO  to  90  days.  (Id..  i<  2298.)  Persons 
manufacturing  without  permit  siiall  be  so  pun- 
ished ;  but  making  wine  or  cider  from  grapes 
or  apples  grown  by  the  maker  for  his  own  use, 
or  the  sale  of  wine  for  commimion  purposes,  is 
excepted  from  the  prohibition.     (Id.,  4^  2294.) 

A  druggist  not  keeping  the  required  record, 
or  refusing  permission  to  examine  it,  or  failing  to 
sign  or  make  returns  of  affidavits,  or  selling  as 
a  beverage  or  when  liquor  is  not  a  remedy  for 
the  ailment  described,  or  selling  to  any  minor 
or  intoxicated  person  or  habitual  drunkard,  or 
allowing  liquor  to  be  drunk  on  the  premises, 
shall  be  fined  §100  to  ^5'M  and  imprisoned  30  to 
90  elays,  forfeit  his  permit  and  be  (H.-eiualified 
to  obtain  another  for  five  yef.rs.  (Laws,  1287, 
c.  165.  s  3.) 

All  liquors  mentioned  in  g  2287,  C.  L,,  and 
all  other  liquors  or  mixture  s  thereof,  by  what- 
ever name  called,  that  will  produce  intoxication, 
will  be  held  intoxicating  liquors.  (C.  L.,  1885, 
§2296.) 

A  permit  to  sell  shall  continue  one  year  and  a 
permit  to  manufacture  five  years  unless  sooner 
forfeited;  but  the  Probate  Judge  may  require 
the  renewal  of  a  manufacturer's  bond  at  the 
end  of  any  year  on  SO  days'  notice,  upon  pain  of 
forfeiture.     (Id.,  g  2297. ) 

It  is  the  duty  of  all  Sheriffs,  Constables, 
Marshals,  Police  Judges  and  police  officers  hav- 
ing knowledge  of  violations  of  this  law  to  no- 
tify the  County  Attorney  and  furnish  him  the 
names  of  witnes.ses.  If  any  such  officer  fail  to 
do  so,  he  shall  be  fined  |100  to  •i;500  and  forfeit 
his  e)ffice,  and  such  officer  maybe  removed  there- 
for b}^  civil  action.  (Id.,  §  2298;  amended, 
1887,  c.  165.  §  9. ) 

Places  where  liquors  are  manufactured  or 
sold  unlawfully,  or  where  persons  are  permit- 
ted to  resort  for  drinking  liquor  as  a  beverage, 
are  declared  nuisances;  and  upon  judgment 
thereof  the  Sheriff,  or  any  Constable  or  Mar- 
shal, shall  be  directeel  to  abate  such  jilaces  by 
taking  possession  and  publicly  destroying  liquors 
found  and  all  property  used  in  keeping  such 
nuisance,  and  the  keeper  thereof  sLdil  be  fined 
5-100  to  ^500  and  imprisoned  30  to  90  days. 
The  County  Attorney  or  any  citizen  may  main- 
tain action  for  such  abatement.  The  injunc- 
tion shall  be  granted  at  the  commencement  of 
the  action  without  bond.  Persons  violating  the 
injunction  shall  be  punished  for  contempt  by 
$100  to  $500  fine  and  imprisonment  30  days  to 
six  months.     (Laws,  1887,  c.  165,  i^  4.) 

Every  person  causing  the  intoxication  of 
another  by  sales  to  him  of  liquor  shall  be  li- 
able to  any  one  for  the  charge  of  such  intoxicat- 
ed person  and  $6  per  day  besides.  (C.  L.,  1885, 
g  2300.)  Every  wife,  child,  parent,  guardian, 
emploj'cr  or  other  person  who  may  be  injured 
in  person,  property  or  means  of  support  by  the 


Legislation] 


301 


[Legislation. 


intoxication  of  any  person  has  right  of  action 
for  actual  as  well  as  exemplary  damages 
against  the  jDerson  or  persons  causing  such  in- 
toxication.    (Id.,  i^  230J.) 

Every  person,  by  himself  or  by  associating 
with  others,  keeping  a  c  lub-room  or  place  where 
liquor  is  received  and  kept  for  sale,  distribution 
or  division  among  the  members,  shall  be  pun- 
ished by  fine  of  $100  to  ^soOO  and  imprisonment 
30  days  to  six  mouths.  Jd..  J^  2303.)  Giving 
away  liquor,  or  any  shifts  or  device'^  to  evade 
the  provisions  of  the  law  shall  be  deemed  un- 
lawful selling.     (Id.,  2303.) 

All  fines  and  costs  for  any  violation  of  this 
law  shall  be  a  lien  upon  the  real  estate  of  the 
defendant  and  upon  the  building  or  premises 
where  unlawful  sales  are  knowingly  permitted 
by  the  owner.     (Id.,  t^  2304.) 

Upon  application  to  the  Probate  Judge  to  sell 
or  manufacture,  the  Judge  shall  notify  the 
County  Attorney,  who  shall  advise  with  him. 
1^0  person  who  shall  inform  under  this  act  shall 
be  liable  for  costs  unless  the  prosecution  is 
malicious  or  without  probable  cau.'^e.  (Id., 
§3305.)  In  pro-;ecutions  under  this  law  it  is  not 
necessary  to  state  the  kind  of  liquor  sold  or  the 
place  where  sold,  except  in  nuisance  cases  and 
those  in  which  lien  is  sought  against  the  premi- 
ses ;  nor  is  it  necessary  to  state  the  name  of  the 
person  to  whom  sold,  and  it  is  not  neces-^ary  to 
prove  in  the  first  instance  that  the  defendant  did 
not  have  a  permit.  The  persons  to  whom  liquor 
is  S3ld  are  competent  witnesses,  and  so  are  the 
me  nbarsof  a  club.  No  person  is  excused  from 
testifying  on  the  ground  that  he  will  be  in'rim- 
inated,  bu*;  his  testimony  shall  not  be  used  against 
him     (Id.,  ^2306.) 

All  Courts  shall  charge  the  Grand  Juries 
especially  with  this  law.     (Id.,  §  2307.) 

If  the  County  Attorney  is  notified  by  any 
person  or  officer  of  any  violation  of  this  law,  he 
is  authorized  to  subpoena  any  person  he  be- 
lieves to  have  knowledge  thereof  to  appear  be- 
fore him  to  testify  ;  and  if  such  testimony  dis- 
close a  violation  the  County  Attorney  shall  file 
a  complaint  against  the  person  and  in  the  war- 
rant direct  the  officer  to  seize  liquors  which  are 
particularly  in  such  person's  possession,  and  such 
liquors  shall  be  destroyed  or  returned  to  the  per- 
son according  to  the  result  of  the  case.  (Id., 
§  2310.)  If  any  testimony  before  the  County  At- 
torney as  above  provided  for  disclosi  s  the  sale 
of  liquor  by  an  unknown  person,  said  Attorney 
upon  complaint  filed  shall  issue  warrant  to 
search  the  premises  as  particularly  described 
and  seize  all  liquors  therein  and  arrest  the  keep- 
ers thereof,  who  if  found  guilty  shall  be  fined 
$100  to  S500  and  be  imprisoned "30  to  90  days, 
and  the  property  shall  be  seized  and  destroyed. 
The  County  Attorney  shall  receive  20  per  cent. 
of  all  sums  so  collected.     (Id.,  ?j  2312.) 

The  County  Attorney  shall  diligently  prose- 
cute violations  of  this  law,  and  the  bonds  given 
thereunder,  and  if  he  fail  to  do  sols  guilty  of  a 
misdemeanor  and  shall  be  fined  ¥l00  io  §500  and 
imprisoned  10  to  90  days  and  forfeit  his  office. 
Whenever  the  County  Attorney  is  unable  or  ne- 
glects to  so  prosecute,  the  Attorney-General 
shall  do  £0  in  his  stead.      (Laws,  1887,  c.  165, 

Any  person  receiving  an  order  for  liquors 


from  any  person  in  this  State,  or  contracting 
with  any  such  person  for  the  sale  thereof,  ex- 
cept such  person  is  authorized  to  sell  under  this 
law,  shall  be  punished  for  selling  liquors.  (C. 
L.,  1885,  S  3814.) 

When  ver  any  relative  of  any  person  notifies 
any  druggist  that  such  person  uses  liquor  as  a 
beverage  and  shall  forbid  sales  to  him,  druggists 
so  selling  to  him  shall  be  fined  $100  to  $5U0  and 
imprisoned  30  days  to  six  mouths.  ( Id  ,  cj  2315. ) 
Treating  or  giving  liquor  to  any  minor  by  any 
person  but  the  parent  or  guardian  or  physician 
of  such  minor,  shall  be  punished  as  last  above. 
(Id.,  4$  2316.) 

Common  carriers  knowingly  carrying  or  de- 
livering liquor  to  or  for  any  person,"  to  be  used 
unlawfully,  .shall  be  fined  jlOO  to  $500  and  im- 
prisoned 30  to  60  days. 

Any  citizen  may  employ  an  attorney  to  assist 
the  County  Attorney  to  perform  his  duties  as 
associate-counsel.     (Id.,  ij  2318  ) 

County  Clerks  or  Probate  Judges  neglecting 
or  refusing  to  perform  their  duties  under  this 
law  shall  be  fined  $500  to  81,000  and  forfeit 
their  offices.     (Laws,  1887,  c.  165,  §  7.) 

Drunkenness  in  any  public  place,  or  in  one's 
ownhou.se  disturbing  his  family  or  others,  is 
fined  not  over  >;35,  or  punished  by  imprisonment 
not  exceeding  30  days,  or  both.  (C  L.,  1885, 
J5  2323.) 

In  any  election  hereafter  held  in  any  city  of 
the  first,  second  or  third  class,  for  the  election  of 
city  or  school  officers  or  for  the  purpose  of  au- 
thorizing the  issuance  of  any  bonds  for  school 
purposes,  the  right  of  any  citizen  to  vote  shall 
not  be  denied  or  abridged  on  account  of  sex  ; 
and  women  may  vote  at  such  elections  the  same 
as  men,  under  like  restrictions  and  qualifica- 
tions, and  any  woman  possessing  the  ciualitica- 
tions  of  a  voter  under  this  act  shall  be  eligible 
to  any  such  city  or  school  office.  (G.  S.,  1889, 
§  1084  ;  passed  1887,  Laws,  e.  230.) 

The  Governor  shall  by  the  advice  and  con- 
sent of  the  Senate  appoint  a  Board  of  Police 
Commissoners  of  three  members  in  any  city  of 
the  first  class,  provided  lie  may  refrain  from 
making  such  appointment  if  not  necessary  for 
the  good  government  of  the  city,  in  each  case. 
(G.  S  ,  1889,  §  733,  g  1 ;  passed  1887,  c.  100,  s  1-) 
These  Commissioners  shall  appoint  a  Police 
Judge  and  a  Marshal  who  shall  be  Chief  of 
Police,  and  as  many  policemen  as  necessary 
(not  exceeding  one  for  every  1,500  inhabitants  i. 
They  may  appoint  special  policemen  to  serve  at 
any  designated  time  or  place  at  the  expense  of 
the  persons  applying  therefor.  (Id..  §§  734-5.) 
Neither  the  Mayor  nor  Council  shall  have  any 
government  of  such  police  force.  ( Id.,  j^  739. )  The 
Attorney  General  of  the  State  or  the  Assistant  At 
torney- General  of  each  county  may  upon  petition 
of  50  householders,  orshall  upon  direction  of  the 
Executive  Council,  prosecute  an  action  in  quo 
warranto  against  the  Mayor  and  Councilmen  of 
any  city  of  the  second  class  which  by  means  of 
license  pretends  to  authorize,  or  by  simulated 
fines  or  forfeiture  attempts  to  foster  and  en- 
courage the  illegal  manufacture  and  sale  of  in- 
toxicating liquors,  or  shields  offenders  against 
the  laws  of  the  State  relating  thereto,  or  habitual- 
ly neglects  to  require  the  police  officers  to  per- 
form their  duties  under  such  laws.     (Id.,  g  743.) 


Legislation.] 


303 


[Legislation. 


la  case  of  ouster  of  the  Mayor  in  such  suit,  the 
Governor  shall  appoint  Police  Commissioners  as 
in  case  of  cities  of  the  first  class.     (Id.,  §  745. ) 

There  is  a  law  requiring  scientific  temperance 
instruction  in  the  public  schools.  (G.  S.,  1889, 
g  5669  ;  passed  in  1885,  c.  169.) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  vote  of  two- thirds  of  each  House, 
at  one  session  ;  popular  vote  to  be  taken  at  the 
next  general  election  cf  Representatives,  three 
months'  notice  to  be  given.  A  majority  carries 
it. 

Kentucky. 

Earliest  Provisions.  -  In  1793  the  existing  Vir- 
ginia acts  were  repealed.  License  s  were  to  be 
given  by  the  County  Courts  to  persous  not  of 
bad  character,  upon  their  giving  bond  in  £100  to 
provide  tavern  accommodations  for  travelers, 
not  to  sutfer  unlawful  gaming,  or  .suffer  any 
person  to  tipple  or  drink  more  than  necesr-ary, 
or  allow  disorder.  Selling  without  license  was 
fined  £3,  and  on  second  offense  the  liquor  was 
confiscated  besides.  Producers  of  liquor  miirht 
retail  not  less  than  a  quart  not  to  be  drunk  on 
the  premises.  (Littel's  Stats  ,  vol.  1,  p  194.)  In 
1819  it  was  provided  that  County  Courts 
were  not  to  grant  licenses  unless  a  majority  of 
the  Justices  of  the  Peace  of  the  county  were 
present  and  the  applicants  showed  that  they  had 
tavern  accommodations.  Persons  making  tavern- 
keeping  a  mere  pretense  to  sell  liquor  were  li- 
able to  §200  fine  (half  to  the  informer).  (Laws, 
1819,  c.  467. )  In  1823  it  was  provided  that  cider 
and  beer  might  be  retailed  without  license. 
(Lnw.s  1823,  c.  639.)  A  license  tax  of  $10  was 
required  in  1831.  (Laws,  c.  595. )  By  the  Laws 
of  1833,  c.  511,  tavern-keepers  had  to  take  oath 
not  to  sell  to  slaves  except  by  permission  of 
Ihe'r  masters,  and  persons  of  color  were  not  to 
be  licensed.  In  1845  (Laws,  c.  417,  tJi^  1,  2,  3 
and  4),  it  was  made  unlawful  for  any  free  negro 
or  mulatto  to  manufacture  or  sell  any  spirituous 
liquors,  upon  penalty  of  $50  to  |300  and  com- 
mittal until  paid.  In  1848  (Laws,  c.  654),  licenses 
to  retail  spirituous  liquors  were  taxed  $10  for 
the  county,  and  persons  licensed  by  any  town  or 
city  were  not  to  sell  until  such  tax  was  paid. 
In  1849  selling  or  giving  liquor  to  slaves  was 
fined  #50,  with  forfeiture  of  license,  if  any. 
(Laws,  1849,  c.  444.) 

Legislation  Since  1850. — By  the  Revenue  act 
of  1850  (Laws,  c.  14),  license  to  retail  liquor  was 
kept  at  $10  and  a  merchant's  license  to  sell 
liquor  at  $5  And  c.  490  of  the  same  laws  pro- 
hibited adulteration  of  liquor  and  provided  for 
analysis  of  suspected  liquors  and  fine  of  not 
more  than  $500  or  less  than  20  cents  per  gallon 
for  knowingly  buying  or  selling  adulterated 
liquor,  and  Inspectors  were  to  condemn  the 
liquor.  The  privilege  of  selling  spirituous 
liquor  was  declared  not  to  be  iiuplied  in  any 
tavern,  coffee-house  or  restaurant  license,  but 
to  be  taxed  for  the  State  extra  at  %1Q  to  $25  in 
the  discretion  of  the  licensing  authority.  Mer- 
chants', druggists'  and  other  licenses  to  sell  not 
less  than  one  quart  were  to  be  granted  by  County 
Coiuts  at  $5  to  $15,  but  no  druggist  selling  ex- 
clusively for  medical  purposes  needed  a  license. 
(Laws,  1851,  c.  116.)  On  p.  41  of  the  same  ses- 
sions' laws,  taverns  were  regulated  as  having 


liquor-selling  rights,  and  their  suppression  for 
being  d'sorderly  and  unlawfully  selling  liquor, 
as  well  as  for  not  providing. "sufficient  accommo- 
dations to  travelers,  was  provided  for.  Dis- 
tillers were  allowed  licenses  as  merchants. 
Keepings  tippling-house  without  license  was 
fined  f  60  ;  and  retailing  without  license  within 
a  mile  of  a  place  of  worship  was  fined  $i!0. 

Selling  to  a  minor  without  consent  of  his 
parent  was  prohibited  in  1859.  (Laws,  c.  1133.) 
This  provision  was  amended  in  1869  (Laws,  c. 
232)  to  include  lager  beer  in  Louisville. 

By  the  Laws  of  1865-6,  c.  886,  all  licenses  to 
sell  liquor  granted  by  special  act  were  repealed, 
and  at  this  .session  began  the  series  of  local  acts' 
prohibiting  licensing,  prohibiting  selling  and 
providing  Local  Option  in  special  localities 
having  schools  and  churches,  and  also  granting 
Prohibition  or  Local  ( >ption  in  districts,  towns 
and  counties  These  acts  soon  became  very 
numerous  each  session,  and  culminated  in  a  Gen- 
eral Local  Option  law  in  1874,  though  the  num- 
ber of  special  acts  passed  by  the  Legislature  for 
localities  did  not  decrease,  and  .'uch  special  acts 
are  still  pa.s8cd  at  each  ses.sion. 

There  are  no  other  features  of  the  progress  of 
legislation  to  justify  tracing  the  sequence  of  en- 
actments. 

The  Late  as  It  Existed  in  1889. — Licenses  to 
sell  at  retail  spirituous,  vinous  or  malt  liquors 
shall  be  granted  by  the  County  Court ;  but  no 
such  license  shall  be  granted  until  10  days'  notice 
has  been  had  by  posting  in  five  places,  or  if  a 
majority  of  the  legal  voters  of  tt.e  neighbor- 
hood protest  against  the  same.  The  Court  shall 
determine  what  is  the  neighborhood  in  each 
case.     (G  S  ,  1887,  p.  1047,  t^  1.) 

The  tax  on  licenses  shall  be  to  retail  spirit- 
uous and  vinous  liquor  alone,  f  100 ;  malt  liquor 
alone,  150';  all  three,  $150.  (Id.,  g  2.)  Selling 
any  liquors  without  a  license  is  fined  $20  to 
$100.  (Laws,  1887-8.  p.  70)  Pers-ons  selling 
in  packages  of  less  than  five  gallons  shall  be 
considered  as  retail  dealers.  (G.  S.,  1887,  p.  1048, 

The  license  shall  specify  the  place  of  busi- 
ness, and  none  but  the  penon  named  can  sell 
under  the  same,  nor  shall  it  be  done  at  any  other 
place.  It  is  valid  for  one  year  only  and  is  not 
a.ssignab]e,  nor  shall  the  Clerk  give  copies  or 
duplicatts  thereof.  (Id.,  p,  1049.  i;  9.)  A  license 
granted  by  a  city  or  town  having  authority 
shall  be  void  unless  the  State  license  be  obtain- 
ed and  the  Sta  e  tax  paid.     ( Id. .  ^  10. ) 

It  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  druggist  in  any 
place  where  the  sale  of  spirituous,  vinous  or  malt 
liquor  is  prohibited  by  law,  to  sell  any  such 
liquor  or  any  nostrum  containing  alcohol  which 
may  be  used  as  a  beverage,  unless  he  obtain  a 
licen.se  to  do  business  as  a  drug<ji.st  in  such 
place  from  the  County  Court.  (G.'S.,  1887,  p.. 
502,  ^  1.)  Any  person  desirous  of  such  aliceu.se 
shall  give  10  days'  notice  of  application  there- 
for, to  be  posted  and  to  be  given  the  County  At- 
torney. (Id.,  §  2.)  The  County  Court  may 
upon  proof  of  the  required  notices  and  that  the 
applicant  is  of  good  character  and  in  good  faith 
a  dealer  in  drugs  and  medicines,  grant  a  licen.se 
to  sell  liquors  under  this  act,  provided  he  give 
bond  not  to  violate  the  liquor  laws.  (Id.,  t^  3.) 
Any  druggist  selling  any  liquor  in  any  place 


Legislation.] 


303 


[Legislation. 


where  retailing  is  prohibited  without  obtaining 
this  license,  or  while  his  license  is  suspended,  is 
fined  $50  to  §100  or  imprisoned  10  to  i50  days, 
orbutli.  (Id.,  >^4. )  No  person  so  licensed  un- 
der this  act  shall  sell  any  liquor  except  upon 
the  regular  prescription  of  a  regular  practicing 
p  jysician,  which  prescription  shall  be  pasted  in 
a  book  and  preserved  by  the  drugijist,  and  such 
prescription  shall  authorize  but  one  sale  and  no 
moT^  than  a  quart.  (Id.,  i^  5.)  Those  violaiiag 
the  last  .section  are  liable  to  fine  of  >^50  to  >100. 
(Id,  >^  6. )  And  upon  such  judgment  the  license 
^hall  be  forfeited.  And  any  surety  on  the  bond 
of  a  licensee  may  be  relea-^ed  upon  application, 
•and  the  license  be  suspended  until  a  new  bond 
is  given.  (Id.,  f?  7.)  Any  physician  giving 
such  a  prescription  no'  in  good  faith,  upon  a 
proper  examination,  and  believing  the  person  to 
be  sick  and  in  need  of  such  liquor  as  a  med- 
icine, shall  be  fined  $50  to  $200.     (Id.,  g  8.) 

Any  person  charged  on  affidavit  with  a  viola- 
tion, upon  examination  by  a  magistrate,  shall 
be  held  to  bail  or  committed  to  answer.  ( Id  , 
i^  9.)  It  is  the  duty  of  the  County  Attorney  to 
r.'sist  the  improper  granting  of  licenses  under 
this  act.  (Id.,  §  10.)  A  rejected  applicant  for 
such  a  license  has  an  ai)peal  to  the  Circuit 
(!ourt,  where  tht'  application  shall  be  heard  de 
novo.     (G.  S.,  1887.  pp.  504-5.) 

Tavern  licensees  must  give  bonds  not  to  suffer 
any  person  to  tipple  or  drink  more  than  is  ne- 
cessary in  their  houses.     (G.  IS.,  1887,  p.   1231, 

§■!•) 

The  County  Court  may  suppress  tavern 
licenses  for  violations  of  the  bond  until  the  next 
(younty  Court  session,  when  if  the  tavern- 
keeper  is  guilty  he  will  be  disqualified  to  keep  a 
tavern  thereafter;  if  not,  he  will  be  restored  to 
liis  right.  (Id.,  ii  5.)  Any  tavern-keeper  who 
Sills  liquor  while  his  license  is  so  suppre-sed  or 
suspended,  or  until  the  order  for  the  .same  is  re- 
versed, is  .guilty  of  keeping  a  tippling-house. 
(G   S,  1887,  p.  1232.  g9.) 

The  County  Court  shall  every  year  fix  the 
prices  to  be  paid  in  taverns  for  wines,  liquor-, 
lodging,  diet,  etc.;  penalty,  $30  fine.  (Id.,  Ji  11.) 
Every  tavern-keeper  must  keep  such  scale  of 
prices  ported  up  iu  his  public  room  under  penal- 
ty of  $75      (Id,  ij  12.) 

"  Tlij  Clerk  of  the  county  shall  make  out  a 
list  of  licensed  taverns  and  vendors  of  spirit- 
uous liquors  in  his  county  and  deliver  it  to  the 
Circuit  L'ourt  to  belaid  before  the  Grand  Jury 
on  the  first  day  of  every  terra,  under  penalty 
of  $20.     (Id.,  Jj  13.) 

A  merchant  may  sell  at  his  storehouse,  to  be 
taken  off  and  drunk  elsewhere,  any  liquor  not 
less  than  a  quart,  on  obtainino-  of  the  Countv 
Court  a  license.  (G,  S.,  1887.  p.  1233,^1-) 
License  will  be  so  granted  upon  satisfactory  evi- 
dence that  the  applicant  is  in  good  faith  a  mer- 
chant and  his  business  is  that  of  retailing  mer- 
chandise, and  that  he  has  not  assumed  it  with 
the  object  of  obtaining  a  license  to  .sell  liquors. 
(Id.,  §  2.)  Distillers  have  the  privilege  of  sell- 
ing at  their  residences  any  spirits  of  their  own 
manufacture,  not  less  than  a  quart,  not  to  be 
drunk  on  the  premises.  (G.  S.,1887,  p.  1234, 
f?3.) 

The  privilege  to  sell  liquors  shall  not  be  im- 
plied in  any  license  to  keep  a  tavern  or  coffee- 


Jiouse,  boarding-house,  restaurant  or  other 
place  of  entertainment,  unless  the  licensing  au- 
thority deem  it  expedient  and  specify  the  priv- 
ilege in  such  license.  (Id.,  pp  1234-5.)  On 
trial  for  suffering  a  person  to  tipple  or  drink 
more  than  is  necessary  in  a  tavern  or  coffee- 
house, the  intoxication  of  any  habitue  of  such 
place  shall  be  prima  facie  evidence.  (Id.,  p. 
1235,  §  2.)  It  .shall  be  deemed  a  breach  of  the 
bond  of  any  licensed  retailer  if  he  sell  or 
give  liquor  to  an  intoxicated  person.  (Id., 
i;  3.)  Any  licensee  shall  be  fined  ."i;25  for  selling 
to  any  known  inebriate.  And  any  relative  of 
the  inebriate  may  recover  a  like  amount  for  his 
own  benefit  if  notice  has  by  such  relative  been 
previously  given  forbidding  such  sales.  (Id.,  p. 
1235.) 

Upon  written  petition  of  at  least  20  legal 
voters  in  any  civil  di.strict,  town  or  city  in  his 
county,  the  County  Judge  shall  make  an  order 
directing  the  Sheriff  or  other  officer  to  open  a 
poll  in  such  place  at  the  next  regular  State, 
town,  city  or  county  election  held  therein,  to 
take  the  sense  of  the  voters  whether  or  not 
liquors  shall  be  sold  therein.  (G.  S,,  1887,  p. 
470,  f5  1.)  Such  officer  shall  give  notice  of  such 
election  two  weeks  in  a  newspaper  and  by  post- 
ing hand-bills  20  days  before  the  election.  (Id., 
j<  3.)  At  the  poll  the  question  shall  be  pro- 
pounded, "'Are  you  in  favor  of  the  sale  of 
spirituous,  vinous  or  malt  liquors  in  this  dis- 
trict, town  or  city  ?  "  (Id.,>5  4. )  If  a  majority 
is  against  selling,  tliat  fact  shall  be  certified  to 
the  Clerk,  who  at  the  next  term  shall  have  the 
same  spread  upon  the  order  book.  (Id..§  5.) 
After  such  entry  any  person  selling  liquor  in 
that  district  shall  be  fined  §25  to  $100.  ild., 
§  6.)  This  act  shall  not  apply  to  any  manufac- 
turer or  wholesale  dealer,  or  to  druggists  selling 
on  physicians'  prescriptions.  But  physicians 
must  not  give  such  prescriptions  except  for 
medicine  for  a  person  actually  sick.  (Id.,  §  7. ) 
The  County  .ludge  shall  not  make  an  order  for 
such  an  election  until  the  signers  of  the  petition 
htive  denosiied  with  him  sutficient  money  to  pay 
advertising  expenses  and  legal  fees.  (Id.,  i^  8.) 
T'uch  an  election  shall  not  be  held  oftener  than 
once  iu  two  years.     (Id.,  t^  9. ) 

Persons  knowingly  selling  or  preparing  for 
sale  any  wine  or  liquor  containing  any  adul- 
teration shall  be  fined  not  more  than  $500  for 
each  offense  or  less  than  S;20  for  each  gallon  so 
adulterated.  (G.  S.,  1887,  p.  787,  §  8  )  When 
an  Inspector  suspects  liquor  to  be  adulterated 
he  shall  procure  its  analysis  by  a  skilful  chemist 
at  the  cost  of  the  owner,  and  if  it  contains  any- 
thing impure  or  other  than  the  extract  of  grain 
or  substance  from  which  it  ought  to  be  male, 
he  shall  mark  the  cask  •'  condemned  for  im- 
purity." (G.  S.,  1887,  p.  787,  ?;  1.)  In  prosecu- 
tions against  wholesale  dealers  under  this  sec- 
tion the  fact  of  rectifying  the  liquor  shall  be 
primafacie  evidence  of  any  adulteration  on  the 
part  of  the  dealer.     (Id,,  p,  788,  i^  2  ) 

A  tavern-keeper  indicted  for  breach  of  his 
obligation,  on  conviction  shall  have  judgment 
rendered  against  him,  and  such  of  his  sureties 
as  have  notice,  for  $800.  (G.  S..  1887.  p  459, 
$5 1  )  Any  tavern-keeper  receiving  a  greater  price 
than  tavern  rates  fixed  shall  be  fined  §5.  (Id., 
t^  2. )    Any  person  (unless  licensed)  selling  liquor 


Liegislation.] 


304 


[Legislation. 


to  be  drunk  on  the  premise  s,  shall  b?  guilty  of 
keeping  a  tippling-housu  and  lined  -$60.  ill., 
§  3.)  For  keeping  a  tippling  house  three  months 
he  shall  be  liable  in  $M0.  (Id.,  p.  46;),  «  4.) 
Twice  selling  in  the  same  house  shall  be  evi 
dence  of  keephig  a  tippling-house.  (Id.,  i?  5.) 
Any  person  retailing  without  authorily  shall 
be  fined  A30.  (Id.,j{6.)  No  person  shall  vend 
or  buy  liquor  within  a  mile  of  any  place  of 
pablic  worship  during  service,  except  in  au- 
thorized houses,  upon  pain  of  $10  fine.  (Id., 
^1.)  It  is  unlawful  to  s  I'll  within  one  mile  of  any 
lock  or  dam  where  the  g;.'neral  Government  is 
improving  a  stream,  under  penalty  of  $50  to 
$100.  This  does  not  apply  to  incorporated 
places  or  to  Henry,  Anderson  and  McLean 
Counties.     (G.  S  ,  1887,  p.  461.) 

Any  person  selling  to  an  '•  infant"  under  21 
years  of  age,  without  special  direction  of  the 
father  or  guardian,  shall  be  fined  $50,  but  if  to  a 
person  over  18  years,  the  seller  shall  not  be 
deemed  guilty  if  he  had  reason  to  believe  him 
21.     (Id.,  g  9.) 

Selling  on  Sunday,  or  keeping  a  bar  or  store 
for  the  sale  of  liquor  on  Sunday,  is  unlawful 
and  subject  to  a  fine  of  $2  to  *50,  and  the  third 
ofEense  forfeits  licen.se.  (G.  S..  1887.  pp.  436-7.) 

No  liquors  shall  be  sold  in  any  room  where  a 
billiard,  pigeon-hole  or  pool-table  is  kept,  upon 
penalty  of    -^60.     (G.  S.,  1887,  p.  1052,  g  21.) 

Distilled  spirits  are  taxed  as  other  property 
for  State  and  county  purposes.  (G.  S.,  1887, 
pp.  1092-6.) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
obtained  only  through  the  action  of  a  Consti- 
tutional Convention,  provision  for  calling  such 
Convention  to  be  made  by  vote  of  a  majority  of 
the. two  Houses  during  the  first  20  days  of  any 
regular  session,  and  to  be  concurred  in  by  a  ma- 
jority vote  of  the  electors  at  the  next  general 
election  for  Representatives. 

Louisiana. 

Early  Provisions. — An  undated  law,  at  p.  41  of 
the  Laws  of  Louisiana  Territory  (St.  Louis,  1809), 
gave  the  Courts  of  Quarter  Sessions  the  right  to 
grant  licenses  ;  selling  without  license  was  fined 
$10  per  day;  $10  to  $30  was  charged  for  li- 
cense, and  sales  by  unlicensed  persons  were 
fined  $5.  But  the  act  of  1805,  at  the  second 
session  of  the  Legislative  Council  of  the  Ter- 
ritory, gave  the  County  Judge  the  licensing 
power.  The  licensee  was  to  pay  a  tax  of  $80 
and  give  a  bond  in  §500  to  obey  the  law.  Sell- 
ing without  license  was  fined  $49.  The  act  did 
not  apply  to  New  Orleans.  (2  Martin's  Dig.,  p. 
429.)  An  act  of  1803  required  the  applicant  for 
an  inn-license  to  be  recommended  by  two  free- 
holders. No  one  was  to  si  11  or  give  liquor  to  a 
slave  without  consent  of  his  master,  or  to  any 
Indian  under  penalty  of  $20  and  forfeitur.^  of 
license.  Merchants  or  shopkeepers  might  sell 
in  quantities  over  two  quarts.  Selling  to  United 
States  soldiers  without  permi.ssion  of  tlieir 
commandant,  and  allowing  gaming,  were  fined 
$20  (half  to  the  informer).     (Id.,  p.  430.) 

The  act  of  1812  punished  selling  to  Indians  by 
fine  of  $200  (half  to  the  informer),  besides 
making  the  .seller  liable  for  any  damages  arising 
from  the  Indian's  intoxication.     (Id.,   p.  438.) 


Under  the  Black  Code  (passed  in  1803),  selling 
liquor  to  a  slave  without  the  master's  written 
permission  was  fined  St2(>  to  $100  and  rendered 
the  sjller  liable  to  the  master  for  any  damages 
suffered.     (1  Id.,  p.  622.) 

The  act  of  1822  repealed  the  license  tax,  gave 
the  police  juries  of  parishes  power  to  tax 
liquor-sellers  as  they  thought  proper  and  gave 
to  the  Mayor  and  Council  of  incorporated  towns 
full  power  !\j  regulate  them,  the  tax  to  be  levied 
not  to  excc'cd  the  State  tax,  except  in  New  Or- 
leans.    (Dig.  Laws,  1828,  p.  566.) 

By  the  Laws  of  1848,  No.  95,  anyone  selling 
or  giving  liquor  to  a  slave  forfeited  his  license, 
disqualified  himself  ever  after  to  be  licensed 
and  was  fined  $200  to  $400,  and  for  the  second 
offense  $400  to  $800.  The  owners  or  superin- 
tendents of  slaves  were  excepted  from  this  act. 

Selling  within  two  miles  of  Plea.sant  Hill 
Academy  was  prohibited  by  Laws  of  1850,  No. 
286 ;  but  this  did  not  apply  to  the  regular  deal- 
ers of  the  district. 

Local  Option  Law  of  1852. — By  Laws  of 
1852,  No.  105,  the  police  juries  of  the  parishes, 
the  Selectmen  of  towns  and  Mayor  and  Alder- 
men of  cities  were  given  exclusive  power  to 
make  such  laws  and  regulations  for  the  sale  or 
prohibition  of  the  sale  of  liquor  as  they  should 
deem  advisable,  and  to  grantor  withhold  license 
for  sale  thereof  as  the  majority  of  the  voters 
of  any  ward,  parish,  town  or  city  might  deter 
mine  by  ballot.  The  State  relinquished  all 
right  to  grant  such  license  but  held  the  right 
to  collect  the  State  tax  from  such  licensed 
drinking-houses  and  shops.  This  was  re  enacted 
with  provision  that  the  police  juries  and  munic 
ipal  authorities  should  adopt  rules  and  regula- 
tions for  the  annual  elections  upon  the  subject, 
and  that  the  act  should  be  given  in  charge  to  the 
Grand  Juries.     (Laws,  1854,  No.  221. ) 

Legislation  of  1859-79. — Licensing  of  free 
negroes  to  keep  coffee-houses,  billiard-tables  or 
retail  stores  where  spirituous  liquors  were  sold, 
was  forbidden.     (Laws,  1859,  No.  16.) 

By  the  Revenue  act  of  1869  (Laws,  No,  114, 
§  3),  every  person  selling  wines  or  liquors  by 
the  drink  was  taxed  $150,  to  go  to  the  State.  By 
the  Election  law  of  1870  (c.  100,  gS  41-44),  drink- 
ing-saloons  within  two  miles  of  any  polling- 
place  were  to  be  closed,  and  officers  refusing  to 
obey  the  election  officers  and  close  them  were 
imprisoned  three  to  six  months  and  fined  $100 
to  $500.  Peace  officers  might  issue  warrant  to 
any  police  officer  or  constable  to  close  such 
places,  and  such  functionary  should  seize  the 
liquors,  and  the  vessels,  tents  or  booths  contain- 
ing them,  and  hold  them  until  24  hours  after 
the  election,  releasing  them  on  payment  of  $10, 

In  1 877  keepers  of  liquor  places  were  prohi- 
bited selling  liquor  to  a  minor  without  an  order 
si<j:ned  by  liis  father,  niother  or  tutor,  (Laws, 
1877,  c,  116.)  Licenses  to  sell  liquor  to  be 
drunk  on  the  premises  but  not  otherwise,  were 
required  to  be  obtained  of  the  State  Tax  Col- 
lector. Then  followed  elaborate  provisions  for 
the  use  by  each  dealer  of  a  barroom  register  or 
"Moffatt  Register,"  to  register  every  drink  sold 
by  turning  a  crank  and  striking  a  bell  once  for 
each  five  cents  paid  by  the  customer,  a  tax  of 
one-fourth  of  one  cent  being  levied  on  each  five 
cents  of    receipts.     Every  violation  of  the  act 


Legislation.] 


305 


[Legislation. 


was  fined  not  over  $100  (one-third  to  the  in- 
former), with  forfeiUire  of  license  and  disquali- 
fication to  held  one  therealter  for  one  j-ear. 
(Laws,  1878,  No.  26.)  This  law  was  repealed 
by  Laws  of  1879,  No.  27,  which  imposed  an 
occupation  tax  of  885  on  sellers  by  the  drink 
and.><15  on  those  selling  less  than  a  gallon  but 
not  less  than  a  bottle,  not  to  be  drunk  on  the 
l>remises. 

T,>e  Law  as  It  Exishd  in  1889.— The  regula- 
tion of  the  sale  of  alcoholic  or  sp  rituous  liquors 
is  declared  a  police  regulation,  and  the  General 
A.ssembly  may  enact  laws  governing  the  side 
and  use.  (Coasl,  art.  170.)  The  G.-neral  As- 
sembly shall  by  law  forbid  the  giving  or  selling 
of  intoxicating  drinks  on  the  day  of  election 
within  one  mile  of  precincts  at  any  election 
held  within  this  State.  (Const.,  art.  190.)  The 
General  Assembly  may  levy  a  license  tax,  and 
in  such  case  shall  graduate  the  amount  of  such 
tax  to  be  collected  from  the  jjersons  pursuing 
the  several  trades,  professions,  vocations  and 
callings.  .  .  .  No  j^olitical  corporation  shall 
impose  a  greater  tax  than  is  imposed  by  the 
General  Assembly  for  State  purposes.  (Const., 
art.  2m.) 

The  police  juries  of  tlie  several  parishes,  and 
the  mur-icipal  authorities  of  the  towns  and 
cities,  shall  have  exclusive  power  to  make  such 
laws  and  regulations  for  the  sale  or  prohibition 
of  the  sale  of  liquor  as  they  may  deem  ad- 
visable, and  to  grant  or  withold  licenses  from 
drinking-hou^  es  and  shops  within  the  limits  of 
any  city  ward  of  a  parish  or  town,  as  the  ma- 
jority of  the  voters  thereof  may  determine  by 
ballot  ;  and  the  said  ballot  shall  be  taken  when- 
ever deemed  necessary  by  the  above-named  au- 
thorities, not  oftener  than  once  a  year.  (R.  L  , 
1881,  i;  1211.)  The  State  relinquishes  all  right 
to  grant  licenses  in  any  town,  city  or  parish  in 
whicli  it  is  not  gi'anted  by  the  authorities. 
When-^ver  any  licenses  may  b;  granted.  theState 
shall  have  power  to  collect  the  tax  coming  to 
the  State  for  such  licensed  drinking-houses  or 
shops.     (Id.,  §1213.) 

It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Judges  of  the 
s  -veral  District  Courts  of  this  State,  an<l  the 
Judge  of  the  Criminal  Court  of  the  parish  of 
Orleans,  to  call  the  attention  of  the  Grand 
Jury  to  the  laws  regulating  the  sale  of  liquors, 
at  each  jury  term.  (Id.,  j;  1213.)  It  shall  be  the 
duty  of  the  police  juries  of  the  .several  parishes 
and  the  municipal  authorities  afore.said.  to  adopt 
such  regulations  as  may  be  necessary  to  carry 
out  this  act.    (Id.,  §1214.) 

Kec^pers  of  any  disorderly  inn,  tavern,  ale- 
house, tippling-house,  etc.,  shall  be  fined  or 
imprisoned,  or  both,  at  the  disci'etion  of  the 
Court,  and  forfeit  their  licenses.  (Id.,  ij  908) 
Whoever  shall  keep  a  grog  or  tippling-.shop,  or 
retail  liquors  without  license,  shall  be  fined  $100 
to  $500.  (Id.,  §  910;  amended  by  Laws  of 
1886,  No.  83,  by  making  defense  of  .sale  on  pre- 
scription good  only  in  case  of  good  faith.) 

Selling  to  minors  is  prohibited  as  in  Laws  of 
1877,  c.  116,  cited  above. 

By  the  Revenue  law  of  1886  (Laws,  No.  101, 
p.  181 K  licenses  to  retailliquor  were  placed  at 
from  $50  for  those  doing  a  business  of  less  than 
$2,000  annually  to  $750  for  those  receiving  over 
$50,000  annually,  in  nine  classes.     Distilling, 


rectifying  and  brewing  are  taxed  from  $15  to 
;p,500  in  20  classes  according  to  annual  re- 
ceipts. (Id.,  p.  176.)  The  same  act,  from  p.  184 
on,  provides  ways  of  enforcing  and  collecting 
licenses  which  are  purely  revenue  rules  rather 
than  liquor  or  restrictive  regulations. 

There  is  a  law  requiring  scientific,  temper- 
ance instruction  in  the  public  schools.  (Laws, 
1888,  No.  40  ) 

L-i^i!^'r/e.s.— Louisiana  at  this  time  (1890)  en- 
joys the  distinction  of  being  the  only  State  that 
sanctions  lotteries.  The  Constitution  (art.  167) 
provides  that  the  General  Assembly  has  author- 
ity to  grant  lottery  charters  or  privileges,  for 
not  less  than  S40,0()0,  to  be  paid  annually  into 
the  State  Treasury.  All  such  charters  shall 
(CISC  Jan.  1,  1895.  from  which  time  all  lotteries, 
are  prohibited.  The  charter  of  the  Louisiana 
State  Lottery  Company  is  recognized  as  a  con- 
tract binding  upon  the  State  imtil  that  period, 
except  its  monopoly  clause,  which  is  abrogated. 

At  the  legi.slative  session  of  1890,  an  act  w.as 
pas-ed  submitting  a  proposed  Constitutional 
Amendment  for  re-chartering  the  Lottery 
Company. 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be- 
proposed  by  vote  of  two-thirds  of  all  the  mem- 
bers of  the  two  Houses,  at  one  session  ;  popular- 
vote  to  be  taken  at  the  next  general  election  for 
Representatives,    three    months'    notice  to  be. 
given.     A  majority  carries  it. 

Maine. 

Early  Provisvms. — Chapter  133  of  the  Public  ■ 
Laws  of  1821  was  the  first  license  act.  It  pro- 
vided that  no  one  should  presume  to.be  a  com- 
mon victualler,  innholder,  or  seller  of  wine, 
beer,  ale,  cider,  brandy,  rum  or  any  strong  liq- 
uors by  retail,  or  in  a  less  quantity  than 
28  gallons  delivered  at  one  time,  except  he  was 
duly  licensed,  on  pain  of  forfeiting  ?r'59;  and  if 
any  per.^on  sold  spirituous  liquors  or  mixed  liq- 
uors any  part  of  which  was  spirituous,  withi 
out  licenise,  he  should  forfeit  $10.  (P.  L.,  1821. 
c.  133.  ?5  1.)  The  Selectmen,  Treasurer  and 
Clerk  of  each  town  were  to  meet  on  the  second 
Monday  in  September,  after  posting  notice 
thereof  seven  days,  to  license  any  persons  of 
sober  life  and  conversation  qualified  for  the  em- 
ployment. Each  person  so  licensed  was  to  pay, 
for  the  use  of  the  town,  $6.  and  25  cents  to  the 
Clerk.  And  at  any  other  time  license  might  be 
granted  on  payment  of  $1,  and  50  cents  per 
month  thereafter.  (Id  ,  §  2.)  No  such  license 
was  to  allow  billiards  or  gaming,  on  penalty  of 
^10,  the  person  playing  forfeiting  $5.  (Id.,t5  4.) 
Nor  was  he  to  suffer  revelling  or  disorderly 
conduct,  on  penalty  of  $5.  the  reveller  to  pay 
$2  And  no  retailer  was  allowed  to  suffer  any 
one  to  drink  to  excess  upon  his  premises,  or 
suffer  minors  or  s'Tvants  to  sit  drinking  there, 
without  permission  of  parents,  guardians  or 
masters  respectively,  on  penalty  of  $5.  (Id., 
t;  5. )  The  Selectmen  were  to  post  up,  in  all  liq- 
uor-places, the  names  of  all  persons  reputed  to 
be  common  drunkards,  tipplers  or  gamesters, 
after  which  such  persons  could  not  be  sold 
drink  on  penalty  of  $5.  (Id.,  5?  6.)  Lijuor- 
sellers  were  not  to  entertain  any  persons,  lodgers 
excepted,  drinking  or  spending  their  time 
Sa.tui-day  or  Sunday  evenings,  on  penalty  of  $3. 


Legislation.] 


306 


[Legislation. 


(Id.,  c.  9,  §  5.)  The  act  of  1824,  c.  278,  forbade 
licensed  persons  to  sell  in  more  tliau  one  place; 
and  if  any  licensed  person  violated  the  law  his 
license  could  not  be  renewed  for  two  years. 
The  Laws  of  1829,  c.  4i8.  prohibited  sales  to 
soldiers  of  the  United  States  Army,  without 
permission  of  the  commandant,  if  such  com- 
manding officer  posted  in  the  office  of  the  Town 
Clerk  a  list  of  those  belonging  to  his  corps. 

Rudimentary  Local  Option  (1829). — Chapter 
436  of  the  same  year  separated  licenses  to  victual- 
ers  and  innholders  from  those  to  retailers  of 
liquors,  prohibiting  the  former  classes  of  li- 
■censees  to  sell  liquors  to  be  drunk  on  the 
premises.  And  licenses  to  retail  liquor  to  be 
drunk  on  the  premises  were  only  allowed  alter 
a  vote  at  annual  town  meeting  in  favor  of  grant- 
ing such  licenses.  This  act  provided  that  the 
Licensing  Board  might  i-evoke  licenses  for 
violations  of  the  law. 

Chapter  482  of  the  Laws  of  1830  simply  con- 
solidated the  former  licensing  sections  and  re- 
duceil  the  licenses  of  those  not  .'■elling liquors  to 
$3.  It,  however,  added  a  penalty  of  !$10  for 
selling  to  Indians,  unless  under  direction  of  a 
physician.  It  was  provided  that  those  aggrieved 
by  any  refusal  to  grant  license  or  by  any  revo- 
cation of  license,  might  appeal  to  the  County 
Commissioners,  who  might  grant  the  person  a 
license  in  case  of  the  improper  withholding  or 
revoking  of  license.    (Laws,  18o3,  c.  77.) 

Annual  License  Fee,%l  (1834).— The  act  of 
1834  (Laws,  c.  141),  repealed  all  former  acts  and 
provided  that  license  should  be  granted  for  $1, 
but  exacted  a  bond  in  $^300,  the  i;)enalty  of  which 
was  forfeited  for  disobeying  the  law.  The 
special  prohibiliocs  iind  penalties  were  the 
same  as  in  the  first  act  in  1821. 

Chapter  84  of  laws  of  1844  gave  the  Selectmen 
of  towns  power  to  license  inns  and  common 
victuallers,  restricting  and  prohibiting  them 
from  selling  wine  or  any  strong  liquors  by  re- 
tail or  in  less  quantity  than  28  gallons  at  a  time. 

The  Prohibitory  Laio  of  1848.-  By  c.  205,  Laws 
of  1846  (Aug.  7,  1846),  the  Selectmen  at  an  an- 
nual meeting(of  which  seven  days'  notice  had 
been  given)  might  license  one  person  in  every 
town  of  less  than  1,000  inhabitants  two  in  any 
having  over  1,000,  and  three  to  live  in  any  hav 
ing  over  3,000,  to  be  sellers  of  wines  and  strong 
liquors  for  medical  and  mechanical  purposes 
only.  All  other  selling  was  prohibited.  The 
pjnalty  for  selling  in  viclation  of  these 
])rovisions  was  |1  to  $^20.  On  conviction  for  a 
Fecond  offense  the  offender  was  fined  ^o  to  ^20 
and  was  to  give  bond  in  $50  not  to  violate  the 
iict  for  six  months.  And  on  breach  of  such 
bond  license  was  to  be  revoked.  Provisions 
d?nying  right  of  action  on  obligations  to  pay 
fer  liquor  sold  in  violation  of  the  law,  and  for 
recovering  payments  made  for  such  liquor,  were 
add(  d. 

In  1848,  by  Laws,  c.  67,  the  above-mentioned 
law  was  amended  by  adding  the  word  '•  intoxi- 
cating "  so  as  to  provide  for  the  jirohibition  of 
wine  or  spirituous  or  intoxicating  liquors. 

Selling  liquor  within  two  miles  of  cattle- 
shows  was  prohibited  to  tho.se  not  licensed  by 
Laws  of  1849,  No.  147. 

Being  a  common  seller  of  liquor  without  li- 
cense was  punished  by  forfeiture  of  $20  to  $300 


or  by  imprisonment  80  days  to  six  months. 

(Laws,  1850,  c.  202.) 

The  Maine  Law  of  1851.— The  Prohibitory 
law  which  was  the  type  and  example  of  such 
laws  passed  since  and  called  "Maine  laws" 
Avherever  adopted,  was  passccTjune  2,  1851,  as 
c.  211  of  the  laws  of  that  year.  It  prohibited 
any  one  to  manufaciuie  or  sell  any  intoxicating 
liquors,  except  as  thereinafter  provided.  It 
empowered  towns  and  cities  to  apjioint  agents 
for  the  sale  of  liquor  for  medicinal  and  mechani- 
cal purposes  only.  It  punished  selling  in  viola- 
tion of  the  act,  for  the  first  conviction  $10, 
second  |20,  third  $20,  with  imprisonment  three 
to  six  months.  Clerks  and  agents  were  made 
equally  guilty  with  principals.  If  any  one  of 
the  Selectmen  or  Mayor  and  Aldermen  indorsed 
his  apjjroval  of  the  writ,  the  defendant  was  to 
recover  costs.  It  was  made  the  duly  of  these 
officers  to  prosecute  violations  of  the  law  on  be 
ing  informed  of  them. 

If  the  defendant  prosecuted  an  appeal  he  was 
to  give  bond  not  to  violate  any  of  the  provi- 
sions of  the  act  pending  the  appeal,  and  in  the 
event  of  final  conviction  the  defendant  was  to 
suffer  doul)le  the  punisliment  first  awarded 
against  him. 

This  last  paragraph  was  declared  unconstitu- 
tional for  increasing  the  penalty  on  account  of 
taking  out  an  appeal  (State  v.  Gurney,  37  Me., 
156),  and  for  requiring  a  bond  before  appeal 
was  allowed.  (Saev  v.  Wentworth,  37  Me,,  165.) 

The  municipal  authorities  were  to  revoke  the 
appointment  of  A  gent  upon  complaint  and  hear- 
ing thereupon,  and  prosecute  his  bond.  Manu- 
facturing and  being  a  common  .'^eller  without 
such  appointment  were  punished  in  §100  1\  rthe 
first  conviction,  $200  for  the  second,  and  ;"200 
with  four  months'  imprisonment  for  third. 
Persons  engaged  in  the  uulawiul  traffic  in  in- 
toxicating liquors  were  declared  incompetent 
to  sit  upon  any  jury  in  any  case  under  the  act. 

Search  warrants,  seizure  and  destruction  of 
liqueu"  were  authorized  upon  complaint  of  tliree 
inhabitants.  And  liquor  was  again  made  void 
consideration  for  any  promise  to  pay  or  pay- 
ment made. 

Definition  of  the  Term  "Maine  T^air." — A 
"Maine  Law,"  then,  is  one  prohibiting  the 
manufacture  and  sale  of  intoxicating  liquor  ex- 
cept by  specially  appointed  or  permitted  agents 
who  may  sell  for  excepted  purposes  only,  with 
]"rovision  for  search,  seizure  and  forfeiture  of 
liquors  kept  for  illegal  sale.  Nuisance  and  civil 
damage  clauses  were  seldom  inserted  in  such 
laws  until  they  ceased  being  called  Maine  laws 
and  were  simply  called  Prohibitory  liquor  laws. 
Both  of  such  last-named  provisions  may  be 
found  in  stringent  license  laws,  as  well  as  search 
and  seizure  clauses. 

By  c.  48,  Laws  of  1853,  the  search,  seizure 
and  forfeiture  provisions  of  the  law  were  greatly 
e'laborated  and  provisions  to  meet  cases  of  de- 
stroying liquois  to  prevent  seizure  were  includ- 
ed. Liquors  used  by  any  chemist,  artist  or  man- 
ufacturer in  his  trade,  and  the  manufacture  of 
cider  and  the  sale  thereof  by  the  manufacturer, 
were  exemipted  from  the  provisions  of  the  law. 

Agents  were  prohibited  selling  to  minors  with- 
out order  of  parent,  and  to  intemperate  persons. 

Adulteration  was  prohibited  and  becoming 


Xjegislation] 


307 


[Legislation. 


intoxicated  was  punished  by  30  days'  imprison- 
ment, which  might  be  remitted  whenever  the 
Judge  was  satisfied  the  objects  of  the  law  and 
the  good  of  the  public  would  be  advanced  there- 
by- 

The  penalties  were  made  $20  for  first  convic- 
tion, *30  and  30  days'  imprisonment  for  second. 
$20  and  60  days  for  third,  and  8'20  and  four 
months  for  fourrh  and  subsequent  ones. 

The  law  was  eniirely  re-enacted  in  a  very 
elaborate  shap,-  in  1855  (Laws,  c.  166).  Every- 
thing was  wrought  out  in  detail,  especially  in 
the  search,  seizure  and  forfeiture  clauses.  Ex- 
ceptions in  irregular  and  additional  cases  that 
had  arisen  or  miuht  arise  in  practice  were  sought 
to  be  provided  for  within  the  very  words  of  the 
law.  Not  all  of  this  elaboration  has  been  pre- 
served, for  the  law  has  been  re-enacted  and  re- 
vised since.  In  the  .same  year  (lcS55)  penalties 
were  again  increased,  selling  unlawfully  being 
punished  by  fine  of  §30  and  imprisonment  30 
days  for  the  first  conviction  up  to  $200  and  six 
months  for  fourth  and  subsequent  convictions. 
The  first  offense  of  unlawfully  manufacturing 
carried  §200  fine  with  .six  mouths'  imprisonment. 
Common  carriers  and  druggists  were  closely 
regulated  by  this  act. 

^The  Repeal  of  1856. — All  this  legislation  was 
swept  away  by  Laws  of  1856.  c.  255,  which  was 
a  license  law  allowing  innkeepers  to  sell  as  such 
to  guests  and  lodgers  provided  no  bar  were 
maintained,  authorizing  one  or  two  persons  to 
be  licensed  in  each  town  and  for  each  3.000  in- 
habitants, not  to  sell  to  be  drunk  on  the  prem- 
ises, and  prohibiting  keeping  drinking-houses 
or  tippling  sliops.  The  penalties  were  not  ex- 
ceeding $20  for  the  first  conviction  of  selling  to 
not  exceeding  §100  for  the  third,  with  alter- 
native imprisonment  not  exceeding  six  months. 

In  1858  the  question  was  submitted  to  the 
people  whether  they  would  have  the  "  License 
law  of  1856  or  the  Prohibition  law  of  1858." 
They  voted  for  the  Prohibition  law.  The  .sub- 
mission was  marie  by  c.  50  of  the  Laws  of  1858. 
Th3  law  chosen  was  c.  33,  which  was  com- 
paratively short  and  moderate.  It  carried  a  pen- 
alty of  only  $10  for  the  first  conviction  of  un- 
lawful selling,  rising  to  $20  and  imprisonment 
three  months  for  thethird.  An  act  of  the  same 
year  (c.  54)  declared  houses  for  the  illegal  sale 
of  liquor  common  nuisances,  puni.shed  the 
keeper  by  a  tine  of  not  over  $1,000  or  imprison- 
ment not  over  one  year,  and  made  his  lease 
void,  if  a  tenant;  and  the  owner  was  subjected 
to  the  above  penalty  if  he  knowingly  permitted 
his  tenant's  nuisance. 

A  State  Commissioner  to  furnish  liquor  to 
Town  Agents  who  were  prohibited  buying  else- 
where, was  established  by  La\."s  of  1862.  c.  ISO. 
By  the  Laws  of  1867,  c.  133,  the  question  was 
submitted  to  the  vote  of  the  people  whether 
chapter  131  of  that  year,  making  an  addition  to 
the  penalty  formerly  provided  of  30  days'  im- 
prisonment on  the  first  conviction  and  60  days 
on  second,  and  imprisonment  corresponding  to 
every  other  penalty  which  was  without  them, 
should  be  permitted  to  stand. 

Civil  damages  were  awarded  by  Laws  of  1872, 
c.  63.  The  Laws  of  1873,  c.  150,  repealed  that 
part  of  the  Laws  of  1872  (c.  63)  which  added 
wine  and  cider  to  the  list  of  intoxicating  liquors, 


and  which  prohibited  selling  cider  and  domestic 
wines  by  any  but  the  manufacturer. 

The  L'onstitational  Amendment — The  resolves 
of  1883  (c.  93)  submitted  a  Prohibitory  Amend- 
ment which  was  adopted  in  1884. 

The  Law  as  It  E.visted  in  1889. — The  manu- 
facture and  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  not  in- 
cluding cider,  and  the  .sale  and  keeping  for  sale 
of  intoxicating  liquors,  are  and  shall  be  forever 
prohibited.  Except,  however,  that  the  sale  and 
keeping  for  sale  of  such  liquors  for  medicinal 
and  mechanical  purpos  -s  and  the  arts,  and  the 
sale  and  keeping  of  cider,  may  be  permitted 
under  such  rules  as  the  Legi-slature  may  provide. 
(Const,  in  force  Jan.  1,  1885.) 

Innholders  and  victuallers  (who  are  not  al- 
lowed to  sell  liciuors)  give  bond  among  other 
things  not  to  violate  the  laws  relatin,":  tliereto. 
(R.  8.,  1883,  c.  37,  i^  2.)  They  are  also  prohibited 
suffering  any  revelling  or  disorderly  conduct  in 
their  houses  or  any  drunkenness  or  excess 
therein.     (Id.,  §  12.) 

The  Governor  and  Council  shall  appoint  a 
Commissioner  to  furnish  municipal  officers  in 
this  State  and  duly  authorized  agents  of  other 
States,  with  pure  intoxicating  liquors  to  b^  kept 
and  sold  for  medicinal,  mechanical  and  manu- 
facturing purposes.  He  shall  so  sell  no  liquors 
until  tested  by  a  competent  assayer  and  found 
pure.  He  shall  sell  at  not  over  6  per  cent,  above 
cost.  (Id.,  S 15;  amended  by  Laws  of  1887,  c.  140, 
§  1. )  Municipal  officers  shall  buy  liquors  of  such 
Commissioner  or  of  other  such  officers  who 
have  bought  of  him  only.  (R.  S.,  1887,  c.  27, 
§  16.)  If  such  officers  buy  of  any  other  persons, 
or  offer  for  sale  liquors  that  have  been  forfeited 
or  adulterated,  or  sell  adulterated  liquor,  they 
are  fined  $20  to  $100.  (Id.,  g  17.)  ISaid  Com- 
missioner  shall  keep  a  record  of  the  names  of 
the  towns  to  which  liquors  are  sold  and  of  the 
persons  buying  therefor,  the  kind,  quantity  and 
price  of  liquor,  and  make  annual  report  to  the 
Governor.  And  he  .shall  mail  such  a  statement 
quarterly  to  each  town  that  purchases  of  him. 
(Id,  §18.)  Each  Town  Agent  is  to  keep  a  record 
in  a  book  of  the  liquor  purchased  by  him  and 
of  each  sale  made,  which  record  shall  be  open 
for  inspection  on  penalty  of  .f  10  to  $20.  Know- 
ingly misrepresenting  to  such  Agent  the  purpo.se 
for  which  liquor  is  wanted  is  fined  $20.  (Id., 
§  19.)  The  Selectmen  of  any  town  and  the 
Mayor  and  Aldermen  of  cities  may  each  year 
buy  liquor  and  appoint  an  Agent  to  sell  it 
for  medicinal,  mechanical  and  manufacturing 
purposes  only.  Such  Agent  .shall  have  no  in- 
terest in  the  sale  of  sucii  liquors,  and  be  paid  as 
the  board  appointing  him  provides.  (Id.,  ^  21; 
amended  by  Laws  of  1881,  c.  140,  ^  11.)  Such 
Agent  shall  receive  a  certificate  of  his  appoint- 
ment and  give  bond  in  $600  to  sell  for  the  ex- 
cepted purposes  onlv  and  in  accordance  with  law. 
(R.  S.,  1883.  c.  27,'§  22.)  He  may  not  sell  to 
minors  without  the  written  direction  of  parent, 
master  or  guardian,  to  any  Indian,  soldier, 
drunkard,  intoxicated  person,  or  to  any  person 
liable  to  guardian.ship  knowingly,  or  to  any  in- 
temperate person  of  whose  habits  he  has  been 
notified  by  relatives  or  by  the  Aldermen,  Select- 
m  u  or  Assessors  of  any  municipality.  (Id., 
c.  27,  i^  23.)  Whenever  such  municipal  oflacers 
are  informed  by  the  relatives  of  any  person  of 


Legislation] 


308 


[Legislation. 


hia  intemperate  habits,  they  shall  give  notice 
thereof  to  all  persons  authorized  to  sell  liquors 
in  their  towns  and  such  adjoining  places  as  they 
deem  expedient.  (Id.,  t?  24.)  Any  such  Agent 
selling  unlawfully  shall  be  fined  |20,  and  his 
bond  be  sued  and  his  authority  revoked,  and 
the  municipal  authorities  shall  revoke  such 
authority  when  they  are  satisfied  of  a  violation. 
(Id.,  §  25.) 

All  liquors  owned  by  municipalities  must  be 
conspicuously  marked  with  the  name  of  the 
town  or  of  the  Agent,  and  if  liquors  so  marked 
are  not  so  owned,  that  is  conclusive  evidence 
of  keeping  for  illegal  .sale.     (Id.,  i^  26.) 

If  an  Agent  is  convicted  of  an  illegal  sale  he 
i.s  forever  disqualified  from  holding  such  office. 

Whoever  manufactures  for  sale  any  intoxi- 
cating liquor  except  cider,  and  w^hoever  sells 
atiy  such  liquor  so  manufactured  by  him  in  this 
8t;ite,  except  cider,  shall  be  imprisoned  two 
months  and  fined  $1,000.  (Id  ,  t^  28.)  This 
chapter  does  not  apply  to  the  sale  of  unadulter- 
ated cider  unless  the  same  is  sold  to  be  used  as  a 
beverage  or  for  tippling  purposes.  (Id.,  g29; 
amended  by  Laws  of  1887,  ^  2.) 

Peddlers  carrying  around  or  obtaining  orders 
for  liquor  are 'fined  ?20  to  $500  (half  to  the 
complainant),  and  in  default  of  payment  they 
shall  be  imprisoned  two  to  six  months.  (R.  S., 
1883,  c  27,  §  30;  amended  by  Laws  of  1885,  c. 
366,^1.) 

Railway  or  express  companies  transporting 
liqtior  from  place  to  place  to  sell  unlawfully,  or 
agents  removing  liquors  from  cars  anywhere 
but  at  established  stations,  shall  be  fined  $50. 
All  liquors  intended  for  unlawful  sale  may  be 
seized  while  in  transit.  (R.  S.,  1883,  c  27,  g  31  ; 
amended  by  Laws  of  1887,  c.  140,  S3.) 

Municipal  and  police  Judges  and  trial  Justices 
have  concurrent  jurisdiction  with  the  Supreme 
Judicial  Courts  in  offenses  under  this  law.  (R. 
8.,  1883,  c.  27,  §32  ) 

No  person  except  as  authorized  shall  ."^ell  any 
intoxicating  liquor.  Wine,  ale,  porter,  strong 
beer,  lager  beer  and  all  other  malt  li(]uors  and 
cider,  when  kept  or  deposited  with  intent  to 
sell  the  same  for  tippling  purposes,  or  as  bev- 
erages, as  well  as  all  distilled spiiits,  are  declared 
intoxicating  within  the  meaning  of  the  chapter  ; 
but  this  enumeration  shall  not  permit  any 
other  pure  or  mixed  liquors  from  being  con- 
sidered intoxicating.  (R.  S.,  1883,  c  27,  §33; 
amended  by  Laws  of  1887.  c.  140,  ^4.) 

Whoever  sells  intoxicating  liquor  in  violation 
of  law  shall  pay  a  fine  of  #50  and  be  imprisoned 
30  days  ;  on  subsequent  convictions  he  shall  be 
fined  $200  and  imprisoned  six  months.  Any 
clerk,  servant  or  agent  assisting  in  violation  of 
law  is  equally  guilty  and  shall  suffer  like  pen- 
alties. (R.  S.,  1883,  c  27,  ij  34;  amended  by 
Lawsof  1887,  c.  140,  §  5.)  Whoever  is  a  common 
seller  of  liquor  shall  be  fined  $100  and  impri,son- 
ed  SO  days,  and  on  every  subsequent  conviction 
1200  and  four  months.  (R.  S  ,  1883,  c.  27,  §  35  ; 
amended  by  Laws  of  1887,  c.  140,  §  6 )  But 
persons  selling  as  Town  Agents  are  not  common 
8«mers.  (R.  S.,  1883,  c.  27,  §  35.^  No  person 
shall  keep  a  drinking-hou.«e  or  tippling-shop. 
Whoever  sells  liquor  in  any  building  or  boat 
contrary  to  law,  and  if  the  same  is  there  drank,  is 


guilty  of  keeping  a  drinking-house  or  tippling- 
shop  and  shall  be  fined  $100  and  imprisoned  00 
days,  and  on  subsequent  convictions  $200  and 
six  months.  (R  S.,  18N3.  c.  27,  §  37;  amended 
by  Laws  of  1887.  c.  140,  §  7.) 

No  person  shall  deposit  or  have  in  his  pos- 
session liquors  with  intent  to  unlawfully  sell 
the  .same.  (R.  S. ,  1883,  c.  27,  §  38.)  Liquors  so 
kept  or  deposited,  intended  for  unlawful  sale  in 
the  State,  are  contraband  and  forfeited  to  the 
municipalities  where  they  are  when  seized. 
Any  officer  may  seize  liquor  without  a  warrant 
and  keep  the  j-ame  safely  until  he  can  procure 
one.     (Id.,  §39.) 

If  any  person  competent  to  be  a  witness  in 
civil  suits  makes  sworn  complaint  before  a 
police  or  municipal  Judge  rr  trial  Justice  that 
he  believes  liquor  is  kept  m  anyplace  for  illegal 
sale,  such  magistrate  shall  issue  his  warrant  to 
seize  the  liquor  and  vessels  containing  it. 
The  name  of  the  person  so  keeping  the  liquor, 
if  known,  shall  be  designated  in  the  complaint 
and  warrant.  If  the  officer  finds  the  liquors, 
or  believes  that  such  individual  has  theni  con- 
cealed about  his  person,  he  shall  arrest  h'm  and 
bring  him  before  the  magistrate.  If  the  Court 
is  of  the  opinion  that  the  liquor  was  so  kept, 
the  keeper  shall  be  fined  $100  or  imprisoned  six 
mouths.  On  every  .■-ub.stquent  conviction  he 
shall  be  fined  $100  and  suchimj  risonmeut.  The 
payment  of  a  U.  S.  special  tax  as  a  liquor  .'■eller 
or  notice  of  any  kind  in  any  place  of  public 
resort  that  liquors  are  there  sold,  shall  be  prima 
facie  evidence  of  common  selling  (R.  S  ,  lr83, 
c.  27,  i<  40  ;  amended  by  Laws  of  1887,  c.  140, 
§  8.)  When  liquors  are  so  seized  the  officer 
shall  immediately  file  a  libel  against  them  and 
issue  notice  to  all  interested,  citing  them  to  ap- 
pear and  show  cause  whv  they  should  not  be 
forfeited.  (R.  S.,  1883,'  c.  27,  §  41.)  If  no 
claimant  appears,  on  proof  of  such  notice  they 
shall  be  declared  forfeited.  If  any  one  does  so 
appear  he  shall  file  his  claim,  and  if  the  magis- 
trate decides  the  liquor  was  not  for  unlaw- 
ful sale  they  shall  be  restored,  otherwisedecl;tred 
forfeited.  (Id.,  §42)  No  warrant  shall  issue 
to  so  Starch  a  dwelling-house  unless  the  magis- 
trate is  satisfied  by  evidence  that  liquor  is  kept 
there  in  violation  of  law.     (Id.,  §  43.) 

All  liquors  declared  forfeited  shall  be  destroy- 
ed by  pouring  them  upon  the  ground  and 
breaking  the  vessels.     (Id.,  §  44.) 

If  complaint  is  made  to  any  magistrate 
against  any  claimant  that  the  lirpier  was  kept 
for  unlawful  sale,  said  claimant  slu.;l  be  arrest- 
ed and  on  conviction  fined  $50  or  iin|  risoned 
three  months,  and  on  a  second  conviction  both. 
(Id.,  §45.) 

If  an  officer  with  a  warrant  is  jirevented  from 
seizing  liquor  by  its  being  destroyed  he  shall 
arrest  the  owner  and  bring  him  before  the 
magistrate,  and  the  offender  shall  be  punished  as 
if  the  liquor  had  been  seized.  All  appliances 
for  concealing,  disguising  or  destroying  liquor 
shall  be  seized.  (R.  S.,  1883,  c.  27,  §  46; 
amended  by  Laws  of  18i5.  c.  366.  §  5.) 

Any  person  found  intoxicated  on  any  high- 
way, and  any  one  intoxicated  in  his  own  house 
or  in  any  place  and  becoming  quarrelsome,  dis- 
turbing the  peace  of  the  public  or  of  his  own 
family,  may  be  arrested  by  any  officer  until  a 


Legislation.] 


309 


Legislation. 


■warrant  may  be  made.  If  found  guilty  he 
shall  be  imprisoned  five  to  oO  days ;  for  the  sec- 
ond offense,  10  to  90  days.  But  any  portion  of 
such  punishment  may  be  remitted  if  the  prison- 
er gives  information  where  he  procured  the 
b'quor.  (R.  8.,  18^3,  c.  27,  §  48 ;  amended  by 
Laws  of  1885,  c.  366,  J^  6.) 

Every  wife,  child,  parent,  guardian,  husband 
or  other  person  injured  in  perion,  property  or 
means  of  support  or  otherwise  by  any  intoxi- 
cated person  by  reason  of  such  intoxication,  has 
an  action  against  any  one  who  sold  liquor  con- 
tribuling  to  such  intoxication  The  owner  of 
premises  upon  which  such  sales  were  made  to 
his  knowledge  is  jointly  and  separately  liable 
also     (K.  8,  1883,  c.  £7,  §49.) 

Liquors  seized  as  herein  provided  shall  not  be 
taken  from  the  custody  of  the  officer  by  writ  of 
replevin  while  the  proceedings  are  pending. 
(ld.,>;50.) 

Pro^ecutions  for  manufacturing,  or  keeping 
drin king-houses  and  tippling-shops,  and  for 
being  common  sellers,  shall  be  by  indictment ; 
in  all  otliers,  municipal  Courts  and  IrialJustices 
have  concurrent  jurisdiction.  Such  magistrates 
may  examine  and  hold  to  bail  in  the  other 
casLS.  (Id.,  §51.)  Every  magistrate  or  County 
Attorney  having  knowledge  of  a  previous  con- 
viction shall  allege  the  same  on  penalty  of  $100. 
(Id.,  §52.)  In  appeals  the  proceedings  .shall  be 
the  same  in  the  higher  as  in  the  lower  Court, 
and  shall  be  conducted  by  the  attorney  for  the 
State.  No  portion  of  Ihe  penalty  of  any  re- 
cognizance shall  be  remitted.    (Id.,  §  54.) 

Custom-house  certificates  of  imporlation  and 
jjroofs  of  marks  on  packages  corresponding 
thereto  shall  not  be  received  as  evidence  that  the 
identic  \\  liquors  contained  in  the  package  were 
actually  imported  therein.     (Id.,  S  55.) 

No  action  shall  be  maintained  on  any  obliga- 
tion contracted  for  liquor  sold  in  violation  of 
(his  chapter.     (Id.,§5r).) 

Whenever  an  unlawful  sale  is  alleged,  delivery 
is  sufficient  evidence  of  sale  A  partner  is  li- 
able for  the  unlawful  selling  or  keeping  of  his 
C()-parlner.  A  principal  and  his  agent  may  be 
included  in  the  same  complaint.  The  munic- 
ipal authoiities  shall  cause  suit  to  be  commenced 
hereunder  on  any  bond  in  which  his  town  or 
city  is  interested.  Mayor  and  Aldermen, 
Selectmen,  Assessors  and  Constables  shall  make 
complaint  and  prosecute  hereunder  and  enforce 
the  law  against  drinking-houses.  If  any  mu- 
nicipal officer  on  notice  of  a  violation  of  this 
law,  signed  by  two  persons,  wilfully  neglects 
to  institute  proceedings,  he  shall  be  fined  $20  to 
$50.    (Id,  §57.) 

Persons  engaged  in  unlawful  traffic  in  liquors 
are  not  competent  to  sit  on  juries  in  cases  here- 
under.    (Id,  §58.) 

Proceedings  under  this  chapter  are  not  barred 
within  six  j-cars.     (Id.    g  59.) 

Sheriffs  shall  inquire  iato  all  violations  of 
this  law  and  institute  proceedings  therefor  or 
furnish  the  County  Attorney  promptly  with  the 
names  of  offenders  and  witnesses.  (Id.,  §  60.) 
County  Attorneys  shall  cause  all  such  witnesses 
to  be  summoned  before  the  Grand  Jury,  and  di- 
rect inquiries  into  violations  of  the  law  and 
prosecute  offenders.  Whenever  the  Governor 
is  satisfied  any  County   Attorney  has  wilfully 


neglected  such  duty,  he  shall  remove  him  and 
appoint  another  in  his  place.  (Id.,i;61.)  Upon 
petition  of  30  tax-payers  in  any  county  that  this 
chapter  is  not  enforced  in  the  county,  the  Gov- 
ernor shall  appoint  two  or  more  constables  with 
powers  and  duties  of  Sheriffs  for  such  county. 
(Id.,  45  G2;  amended  by  Laws  of  1885,  c.  366, 

%^.)' 

Whoever  advertises  or  gives  notice  of  the 
sale  or  keeping  of  liquors,  or  publishes  any 
newspaper  in  which  such  notices  are  given,  shall 
be  fined  $20  (one-half  to  the  complainant). 
(Laws,  1885,  c.  366,  4=8.) 

It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Clerk  of 
Courts,  within  30  days  after  adjournment  of 
any  superior  or  supreme  judicial  Court,  to  pub- 
lisn  in  some  newspaper  of  the  county  the  dis 
position  of  each  appealed  case  and  indictment 
uneler  the  liquor  laws.     (Laws,  1887,  c.  44.) 

Supplying  liquor  to  any  prisoner,  or  having 
liquor  in  one's  possession  within  any  place  of 
confinement  with  intent  to  deliver  the  same  to 
any  person  confined  therein,  unless  under  di- 
rection of  the  physician  appointed  to  attend 
such  prisoner  or  of  the  officer  in  charge,  is  fined 
not  exceeding  $20  or  by  imprison  ment  not  exceed- 
ing 30  days.     (Laws,  1889,  c.  157.) 

There  is  a  law  reciuiring  scientific  temperance 
instruction  in  the  public  schools.  (Laws,  1885, 
c.  267.) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposeel  by  vote  of  two-thirds  of  all  the  mem- 
bers of  the  two  Houses,  at  one  session  ;  popular 
vote  to  be  taken  at  the  next  general  election  for 
Representatives.     A  majority  carries  it. 

Maryland. 

Colonial  Provisions.— In  1642  it  was  provided 
that  drunkenness  should  be  fined  10(3  lbs.  of 
tobacco,  or  if  the  ofl'ender  was  a  servant  and 
not  able  to  pay,  he  was  imprisoned  or  set  in  the 
billios,  being  compelled  to  fast  fur  24  hours. 
(Acts  A.ssembly,  vol.  1,  p.  159.)  Bj^  the  Laws 
of  1658  (Id  ,  p  375).  drunkenness  was  punislied 
by  confinement  in  the  stocks  six  hours,  or  fine 
of  100  lbs.  of  tobacco  (half  to  the  informer); 
for  the  second  offense,  by  public  whipping  or 
fine  of  300  lbs.  of  tobacco  ;  for  the  third  the 
offender  was  adjudged  infamous  and  dis- 
franchised three  years. 

The  act  of  1662  (Id.,  p.  447)  was  to  encourage 
honest  per.-^ons  to  set  up  ordinaries,  by  giving 
them  an  easy  way  to  collect  their  bills.  But  by 
tha*  of  1666  (2  Id.,  p.  149)  their  charges  were 
com]:)lained  of  and  regulated. 

In  1715  carrying  liquor  to  Indian  towns  was 
fined  5,000  lbs.  of  tobacco,  and  selling  over  A 
gallon  of  spirits  in  a  day  to  an  Indian  was  fined 
3,000  lbs.     (Laws,  1759,  p.  34.) 

A  law  of  1746  provided  that  licenses  were  to 
be  granted  by  the  Justices  of  each  county  for 
50s;  in  Annapolis,  £5.  Disorder  was  not  lo  be 
suffered,  nor  were  poor  persons  to  be  suffered  to 
tipple  or  game  e  r  run  up  bills  over  5*.  S(  Uing 
without  license  was  fined  £5  (half  to  the  in- 
former).    (Id.,  p.  161.) 

A  later  act  provided  that  the  Justices  of  each 
county  in  Court  sitting  were  empowered  to 
grant  licenses  to  keep  ordinaries,  to  persons  of 
gooel  repute  in  such  and  so  many  places  as  need- 
ed them,  for  the  ease  and  convenience  of  the 


liegislation.] 


310 


[Legislation. 


inhabitants,  travelers  and  strangers;  license  fee, 
£6.  Such  ordinaries  might  be  su])presstd  by 
the  Justices  for  disorder  until  the  next  Court, 
when  it  should  be  determined  whether  to  per- 
mit continuance.  For  selling  without  license, 
the  penalty  was  600  lbs.  of  tobacco.  Ordinary- 
keepers  entered  into  recognizance  in  600  lbs.  of 
tobacco  to  keep  good  rules  and  orders,  and  not 
allow  loose,  idle  or  disorderly  persons  to  tipple, 
gaiiie  or  commit  any  disorder.  (Killy's  Laws, 
1780,  c.  24.) 

Early  t^tate  Provisions. — Subsequently  the 
penalty  for  selling  without  license  was  placed 
at  £6  (Id.,  1784,  cc.  7,  87).  and  appropriated  to 
the  University.  The  recognizance  was  made 
£100.  Merchants  selling  over  10  gallons  were 
excepted  from  the  law,  and  selling  on  Sunday 
•was  fined  40s.  Licenses  were  allowed  to  be 
granted  in  vacation  of  Court  by  Laws  of  1791. 
c.  58.  By  Laws  of  1806,  c.  31,  the  Justices  of 
the  Peace,  upon  information  of  unlicensed  sell- 
ing, were  to  issue  warrant  for  the  arrest  of  such 
persons  and  bind  them  over  in  £6  to  appear  at 
the  next  County  Court.  Constables  were  to 
make  inquiry  to  the  same  puipose.  By  Laws  of 
1816,  c.  193,  gt^  14,  15,  the  Court  was  given  dis- 
cretion to  grant  or  refuse  licenses,  and  selling 
without  license  in  Baltimore  was  fined  $24 
(half  to  the  informer). 

By  Laws  of  1827,  c.  117,  licenses  to  retail 
liquor  were  to  be  issued  by  the  Clerk  of  each 
County  Court  on  payment  of  $12,  and  in  Balti- 
more $4  additional.  But  if  the  Grand  Jury 
signified  an  opinion  that  the  license  ought  not 
to  be  granted,  it  could  not  be. 

By  Laws  of  1845.  c.  140,  ^  3,  no  person  was  to 
sell  spirituous  liquors  in  less  quantities  than  a 
pint  without  first  obtaining  license  as  an  ordi- 
nary-keeper, under  penalty  of  f  50. 

Beginning  of  Local  Option  and  Local  Prohibi- 
tion (1846).— The  Clerk  of  Montgomery  County 
was  not  to  issue  license  to  sell  liquor  within 
*hree  miles  of  the  District  of  Columbia  line,  or 
on  or  near  the  roads  leading  from  Georgetown 
to  Brookville,  Frederick  or  Seneca  Mills,  with- 
out an  order  issued  by  one  of  the  Judges  of  the 
Court  on  his  being  satisfied  from  the  representa- 
tions in  wTiting  of  respectable  inhabitants  of  the 
neighborhood  of  the  necessity  and  propriety  of 
grantingsuchlicen.se.  (Laws,  1846  e.  90. )  By 
c.  283  of  Laws  of  1854,  the  C'ommissiouers  of  the 
town  of  East  Newmarket  were  given  power  to 
restrict  license.  From  this  time  on  local  acts 
prohibiting  sales,  submitting  Prohibition  to 
vote  of  districts,  towns  and  counties,  and  all 
kinds  of  local  license  acts  multiplied  and  be- 
<-ame  the  leading  features  of  the  laws,  leaving 
the  general  license  laws  much  less  developed 
than  in  any  other  State.  These  local  laws,  as 
they  at  present  stand,  are  re-stated  under  the 
alphabetical  order  of  names  of  localities,  includ- 
ing counties,  in  the  Public  Local  Laws  of  1888. 

The  Law  fl.9  It  Existed  in  1889. — When  any 
person  intends  to  sell  spirituous  or  fermented 
liquors  or  lager  beer  in  quantities  less  than  a 
pint,  he  shall  apply  to  the  Clerk  of  the  Circuit 
Courts  or  of  the  Common  Pleas  of  Baltimore 
for  a  license  therefor.  (P  Q.  L.,  1888,  p.  9;'.0, 
5;  55  [enacted  1858].)  Upon  such  application  he 
shall  state  on  oath  the  amount  of  his  stock  on 
hand,  or  if  not  previously  engaged  in  that  busi- 


ness, the  amount  he  expects  to  keep.  (Id.,  §  56.) 
If  that  amount  does  not  exceed  S500  he  shall  pay 
$18;  if  from  $500  to  $1,0U0,  |35;  *1,000  to 
$2,000,  150;  $2,000  to  $4,000,  $75;  $4,000  to 
$6,000,  $100;  $6.C00  to  >  10.000,  $120 ;  $lb,000to 
$20,000.  $130  ;  $20,000  to  $30,000,  $140;  more 
than  $30  000,  $150.  (Id.,  §.^  57-65.)  No  such 
license  shall  be  granted  for  less  than  $18  unless 
the  person  obtains  a  license  to  sell  goods,  paying 
a  license  therefor  according  to  the  amount  of 
his  .stock  in  trade.  (Id..  5$  68  )  If  any  person 
intends  to  keep  an  ordinary  and  sell  liquor  by 
retail,  he  shall  apply  to  the  Clerk  lor  u  license. 
(Id.,  ]\  932,  §  67.)  He  .shall  pay  according  to  the 
rental  value  of  his  place  $25  to  *450.  (Id.,  i^s^ 
69-81. )  If  any  person  intends  to  keep  an  oyster- 
house,  cook-shop,  victualling-house  or  lager 
beer-saloon,  and  retail  liquor  there,  he  shall  ap- 
ply to  such  Clerk  and  pay  $50  for  each  license. 
(Id.,  p.  934.  §.^82-83.) 

Persons  selling  liquor  without  license  are 
fined  $50  to  SlOO.     (Id.,  t;  84  ) 

Persons  taking  out  ordinary  licenses  without 
hotel  accommodations  as  required,  or  any  per- 
sons selling  licjuor  to  a  minor  or  to  any  one  to 
be  drunk  by  a  minor,  or  any  person  having  a 
license  selling  to  a  minor  or  allowing  a  minor 
upon  his  premises,  shall  be  fined  $50  to  •  200, 
with  suppression  of  license.    (Id.,  p  9c5  c;  86.) 

Ti;e  Clerk  .shall  not  without  the  special  order 
of  the  Judge  grant  a  license  to  any  peison  to 
sell  liquor  from  whom  the  Grand  Jury  has 
recommended  a  license  to  be  withheld,  or  to  a 
person  whose  license  has  been  suppres.sed  by 
the  Court.  (Id.,  p.  936,  §87.)  Any  peison  carry- 
ing on  a  shad,  herring  or  alewife  fishery  may 
obtain  a  license  to  sell  liquors  during  the  fishing 
season,  of  the  Clerk,  for  3f6.  (Id.,  p.  924,  t~  25.) 
Licenses  may  be  granted  to  sell  at  hone-races 
for  $4.  (Id.,  5^  26.)  No  license  to  sell  liquors 
shall  be  issued  by  any  Clerk  toa  married  woman 
or  minor  without  special  order  of  the  Judge. 
No  Judge  shall  give  such  special  order  without 
the  recommendation  of  at  least  10  respectable 
freeholders  of  the  ward  or  district.  (Id.,  p.  927, 
§86.) 

Section  36,  page  926.  probably  authorizes  the 
licensing  of  traders  in  goods  to  sell  liquors  by 
whole  ale  in  quantities  not  less  than  a  i)iut,  and 
thev  aie  prohibited  to  so  sell  without  a  license 
upon  penalty  of  $20  to  $100  by  Id.,  p.  985,  §  85. 

In  prosecutions  for  violations  of  this  law  re- 
lating to  liquf  rs,  one-half  of  the  fine  goes  to  the 
informer,     (Id.,  5<  88.) 

No  peddler  .--hall  traffic  in  spirituous  liquors 
in  any  manner.     (Id  ,  p.  926.  §  38.) 

There  is  a  law  requiring  scientific  temperance 
iu.struction  in  the  public  schools.  (Laws,  1886, 
c.  495.) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  vote  of  three-fifths  of  all  the  mem- 
bers of  the  two  Houses,  at  one  session  :  popular 
vote  to  be  taken  at  the  next  general  election  for 
Representatives,  three  months'  notice  to  be  given. 
A  majority  carries  it. 

MassacJm  setts. 

The  first  general  regulation  of  the  liquor 
traflic  was  made  in  an  order  of  the  General 
Court  that  no  penson  should  sell  either  wine  or 
strong  water  without  leave  from  the  Governor  oi 


\ 


Legislation.] 


311 


[Legislation. 


Deputy  Governor,  and  that  no  one,  except  in  the 
ordinary  course  of  trading,  should  sell  or  give 
liquor  to  Indians.  (1  Records  of  Mass.,  p.  106 
[1633].)  In  16^7  ordinary-keepers  were  or.iered 
not  to  sell  either  sack  or  stron'i-  water.  (Id., 
p.  20.).)  Beer-selling  was  rei^ulated,  tippling  by 
townspeople  in  inns  was  forbidden,  and  brewers 
were  required  to  be  licensed.  (Id.,  p.  313  [1637|.) 
In  1638  one  person  in  each  of  11  named  towns 
was  authorized  to  retail  sack  and  strong  water. 
(Id.,  p.  221.)  In  1639  retailers  of  wine  were 
ordered  not  to  allow  it  to  be  drunk  in  their 
houses  (Id.,  p.  258),  and  drinking  healths  was 
prohibited,  uuder  pain  of  12i     (Id.,  p.  271.) 

Licenses  were  to  be  allowed  by  the  quarter 
Courts;  and  suffering  tippling  or  excessive 
drinking  was  punished,  both  the  keeper  of  the 
house  and  th;;  drinker  being  fined  from  5s  to  10s. 
(3  Id.,  p.  100  [1645].) 

In  1647  It  was  provided  that  County  Courts 
were  to  grant  licenses.  (Id.,  p.  188.)  Games 
were  prohibited  at  licensed  places.  (Id  ,  p.  195.) 
Concealii!g  drunken  men  about  licensed  premise.s 
was  fined  £5.  (Id.,  p.  257  [1648].)  Youths, 
servants,  apprentices  and  scholars  were  not  to 
be  allowed  to  spend  their  time  in  ordinaries, 
upon  penaUy  of  40.y.     (3  Id.,  p.  242  [1651].) 

In  1654  allowing  tippling  and  excessive  drink- 
ing was  fined  20s,  and  forfeiture  of  license  for 
the  second  offense.     (Id.,  p.  359.) 

In  1657  selling  liquor  to  Indians  was  abso- 
lutely prohibited,  under  penalty  of  40s.  (Id., 
p.  425.)  Unlicensed  retailing  was  fined  £5. 
(4  Id.,  pt.  2  p.  37  1 1661]  )  The  Selectmen  were 
to  post  drunkards  in  public  houses  and  prohibit 
sales  to  them,  and  prohibit  their  frequenting 
such  places,  upon  penalty  of  20s  and  5s,  re- 
spectively. (Id  .  p  463  [1670].)  Selling  liquor 
at  trainings  and  other  gatherings  of  the  people 
was  prohibited  under  penaltv  of  £5  (half  to  the 
informer).     (5  Id.,  p.  211  [1679].) 

Province  Laws,  c.  20  1 1692),  was  a  re-enact- 
ment of  license  provisions. 

Frequent  acts  were  passed  after  1700,  but  they 
were  Excise  acts  and  added  no  new  license 
restrictions,  but  only  provided  for  collection  of 
the  revenue. 

The  act  of  1751  (c.  5,  Prov.  Laws)  included  a 
prohibition  to  sell  to  any  "  negro,  Indian  or 
mulatto  slave,"  which  was  repealed.  In  1761 
the  Justices  were  allowed  to  grant  a  license  to  a 
representati\  e  of  any  deceased  licensee.  (Prov. 
Laws,  1761,  c.  14.) 

Eiirlfi  State  Provisions. — In  1787  (Laws,  Mass., 
1780-1807,  vol.  1,  p.  374)  was  passed  a  longer  act 
than  any  previous  one  for  the  regulation  of 
licensed  iiouses.  It  punished  selling  without 
licen-e  £20.  charged  £2  to  £6  for  licenses,  pro- 
vided for  a  bond  in  £20  to  observe  the  law,  and 
prohibited  giving  a  credit  for  drink  of  over  \0s 
on  pain  of  closing  the  luace.  It  included  most 
of  the  former  provisions. 

Persons  not  in  any  incorporated  town  were 
allowed  to  be  licensed  by  tlae  Licensing  Court 
of  General  Sessions.     (2  Id.,  p.  556  [1792].) 

Those  aggrieved  by  the  refusal  of  the  Select- 
men to  approve  their  applications  for  license 
might  appeal  to  the  Licensing  Court,  giving  the 
Selectmen  notice.  (4  Id.,  p.  38  [1808].)  Con- 
fectioners and  victuallers  in  Boston  were  put 


upon  the  footing  of  innkeepers.  (Id.,  p.  680 
[1816].) 

Chapter  136  of  the  Laws  of  1831  made  the 
penalty  for  common  seliing  f30,  for  single 
offenses  $10.  Licenses  were  put  at  $5  or  $1  for 
the  "soft"  liquors.  Chapter  165  of  the  Laws 
of  1832  repealed  all  former  statutes,  included 
most  of  the  common  clauses  and  imposed  pen- 
alties of  $100  for  being  an  uidicensed  common 
seller,  >10  to  $20  for  e.ich  offense.  The  County 
Commissioner  and  Mayor  and  Aldermen  of 
Bo.iton  mif/Iit  grant  licenses  to  as  many  as  they 
decided  the  public  g.iod  required.  No  license 
fee  was  required.  In  1837  it  was  enacted  that 
nothing  in  the  last  law  required  the  County 
Commissioners  to  grant  any  licenses  when  in 
their  opinion  the  public  good  did  not  require 
them.  (Laws,  1.S37,  c.  242)  By  Laws  of  1838, 
c.  157,  no  licensed  dealer  might  sell  in  les.3 
quantities  than  15  gallons  to  be  carried  away  all 
at  one  time,  upon  penalty  of  $10  to  $20;  but 
apothecaries  and  practising  physicians  might  be 
licensed  to  retail  for  me  liciual  purposes  oidy. 

The  act  of  1838  was  repealed  by  Laws 
of  1840.  c.  1.  By  Laws  of  1-44,  c.  102,  the  de- 
fendant was  presumed  not  licensed.  The  word 
"  spirituous  "  in  the  liquor  laws  was  replaced  by 
"  intoxicating  "  by  Laws  of  1850,  c.  232,  §  1. 
By  the  same  act  the  C^ounty  Commissioners, 
upon  the  recommendations  of  municipal  author- 
ities, were  authorized  to  license  as  many  persons 
as  might  be  desirable  for  the  public  good,  to  sell 
by  retail  to  be  delivered  and  carried  away,  for 
medicinal  and  mechanical  purposes  only.  (Id., 
§  2.) 

T/ie  Mcune  Lfor  of  1852. — A  regular  Prohibi- 
tory or  Maine  law  was  passed  in  1852  (c.  323). 
It  provided  for  penalties  of  .^10  and  the  giving 
a  bond  in  $1,000  not  to  unlawfully  sell  within 
one  year  for  the  first  convicticm  ;  s20  and  sama 
bond  for  second,  and  $20  and  three  to  six 
mouths'  imprisonment  for  the  third.  Giving 
liquor  to  prisoners  was  prohibited  by  Laws  of 
1854.  c.  93.  Sheriffs,  Constables,  Coroners,  ex- 
ecutors, administrators  and  as.signees  were  ren- 
dered not  liable  under  the  law  for  their  legal 
sales  of  liquor  at  auction  only.  (Laws,  1854,  c. 
100. )  Several  laws  in  1855  regulated  various 
single  points  of  procedure.  Chapter  356  pro- 
hibited adulteration,  and  c.  470  provided  for  the 
appointment  of  a  State  Agent  in  Boston  to  pur- 
chase liquor  and  sell  to  town  and  city  Agents  ; 
records  of  purchases  and  sales  to  be  kept  and 
rejiorts  thereof  to  be  made. 

The  act  of  1855,  c.  215  took  the  place  of  that 
of  1852.  very  much  elaborating  it.  The  penal- 
ties were  changed  to  $10  fine  and  imprisonment 
30  to  30  days  for  first  conviction,  $20  and 
30  to  60  days  for  .second  and  $50  and  three  to 
si.Y  months  for  third.  For  manufacturing  and 
being  a  common  seller  the  first  conviction  was 
punished  by  fine  of  $50  with  three  to  six  months 
in  prison. 

The  act  in  relation  to  single  offenses  of  drunk- 
enness was  repealed  by  Laws  of  1861,  c.  13o  §  1. 

Civil  damages  were  provided  for  by  J5  4  of 
that  act. 

The  Repeal  of  1868  —This  Prohibition  policy 
was  reversed  in  1868.  (Laws,  c.  141.)  A  new 
act  provided  for  County  Commissioners'  licenses 


Legislation.] 


OIO 


[Legislation, 


in  four  classes :  Licenses  to  sell  liquor  to  be 
drunk  on  the  premises  were  put  at  *100; 
grocers'  and  druggists"  license  (not  to  be  drunk 
on  the  premises;  at  $50. and  sixth  class  brewers' 
and  distillers'  license  (for  export)  at  $100.  Un- 
lawful sales  were  punished  by  fine  not  exceed- 
ing ^500  aul  imprisonment  not  exceeding  six 
months.  Cities  and  towns  were  to  vote  annually 
on  the  question  of  license.  This  act  contained 
adulteration  and  civil  damage  clauses.  By  J^  22 
all  licensed  vendors  were  required  to  keep  an 
account  of  all  liquor  purchased  by  them,  and 
sellers  of  liquor  to  be  drunk  on  the  premis.  s 
were  taxed  2  percent,  on  such  liquors  ;  brewers 
and  dealers  in  malt  liquor  were  taxed  '60  cents 
per  barrel,  and  other  licensed  persons  were 
taxed  1  per  cent. 

ProJubitory  Law  of  1869-75. — By  c.  131  of 
Laws  of  1869,  all  licenses  to  sell  liquor  were  to 
have  no  force  after  April  30,  and  by  c  415  of 
that  year  the  Prohibition  law  was  re-enacted 
with  penalties  for  unlawful  sales  beginning  with 
a  fine  of  -$10  and  imprisonment  20  to  80  days 
for  the  first  offense.  This  act  provided  for 
-license  to  manufacture  for  export  only,  and  for 
a  State  Assayer.  In  1870  the  act  was  amended 
so  as  to  allow  any  one  to  manufacture  and  sell 
ale,  porter,  strong  beer  and  lager  beer.  (Laws, 
1870,  c.  389.) 

By  Ac's  1871,  c.  334,  ale,  porter  and  beer  were 
restored  to  the  prohibition  of  the  law.  but  cities 
and  towns  were  to  note  annually  on  the  licens- 
ing of  the  sale  thereof.  Chapter  42  of  the  laws 
of  1873  repealed  the  provisions  for  submitting 
the  question  of  the  sale  of  beer  and  left  its  sale 
prohibited. 

Licenm  Act  of  1875. — A  license  law  was 
adopted  in  1875  by  c.  99  of  tbe  laws  of  that 
year.  It  ]irovided  for  licenses  in  classes  with  a 
license  fee  of  ;?100  to  $1,000  for  retailing  liquor 
to  be  drunk  on  the  premises.  It  was  a  compara- 
tively short  act,  and  the  usual  provisions  of  a 
strict  license  law  were  added  by  separate  laws 
during  the  years  ensuing,  until  "the  law  was  re- 
vised in  1882,  and  subsequently  by  amendments 
of  the  Public  Statutes  of  1883  and  further  laws 
added  to  the  laws  then  existing. 

A  State  Constabulary  was  constituted  in  1871 
by  c.  394,  and  it  was  popularly  connected  with 
thr?  liquor  law  and  its  enforcement,  though  the 
purview  of  the  Con.stabulary  act  was  not  con- 
fined to  liquor  law  enforcement,  and  indeed  the 
liquor  laws  were  not  mentioned  in  it.  This 
Constabulary  act  also  was  repealed  in  1875. 
(C.  15,  tj  14.) 

The  present  Local  Option  law  of  Massa- 
chusetts, providing  for  annual  votes  on  the 
license  question  by  cities  and  towns,  was  passed 
in  1881.    (Laws,  c.  54  ) 

tMbfnission  of  C<mstitutional  Prohibition. — 
A  Con.stitutional  Amendment  prohibiting  the 
manufacture  and  sale  of  intoxicating  liquor  as 
a  beverage  was  proposed  in  1888  (Laws,  p.  566). 
passed  by  the  next  Legislature,  submitted  and 
defeated  by  the  people  in  1889. 

The  Law  as  Lt  Existed  in  1889— No  person 
shall  sell  liquor  except  as  authorized,  except 
that  nothing  herein  applies  to  sales  by  a  person 
under  a  law  requiring  him  to  sell  personal 
property,  or  to  sales  of  cider  and  of  native 


win?s  by  the  makers  thereof,  not  to  be  drunk  on 
the  i)remises.     (P.  S.,  1883.  c.  100,  g  1.) 

Druggists'  licenses  may  be  granted.  One  or 
mor^>  annually  may  be  granted.  Such  licensees 
may  sell  on  Sunday  upon  prescription.  (Laws, 
1887,  c.  431,  ^  1.)  Sales  by  them  for  medicinal, 
mechanical  or  chemical  purposes  only  shall  be 
made  only  upon  the  certificate  of  the  purchaser, 
stating  the  use  for  which  tlie  liquor  is  wanted, 
whiclj  certificate  mu.-t  be  cancelled  at  the  time 
of  sa'e.  (Id.,  g  3.)  A  book  must  be  kept  of  the 
particulars  of  each  sale,  with  the  purchaser's 
signature  to  the  entry ;  and  if  on  prescription, 
also  the  name  of  the  physician  must  be  entered. 
(Id.,  f$  3.)  The  said  book  shall  always  be  open 
to  inspection  of  officers.  (Id..  §  4.)  Persons 
making  a  false  cei'tificate  or  prescription  shall 
be  fined  $10,  and  a  druggist  violating  this  law 
forfeits  his  license.     (Id.,  i^  5  ) 

Importers  into  the  United  States  holding  and 
sjlliiig  in  the  orij-inal  i  ackage  are  exempted 
from  the  law.     (P.  S.,  1882,  c.  100,  i^  4. ) 

In  cilies  and  town-;  which  at  their  annual 
elections  vote  for  license,  licenses  may  be 
granted  by  the  municipal  authorities.  The 
Boards  of  Aid  1  men  and  Selectmen  respectively 
shall  insert  the  question  of  license  in  the  war- 
rant for  the  town  or  cit}'  meeting,  and  the  vote 
shall  be  by  separate  ballot.  The  City  or  Town 
Clerk  shall  transmit  a  statement  of  the  vote  to 
the  Scv-retary  of  State,  and  also  in  November 
a  statement  of  licenses  granted  and  revoked. 
(Id.,i5  5.) 

No  more  licenses  than  one  for  every  1,000  of 
population,  or  in  Boston  one  for  every  500,  can 
be  granted.  ( Laws,  1888,  c.  340. )  No  license 
shall  l)e  granted  within  490  feet  of  a  public 
school.     (Laws,  1882,  c.  220.) 

Full  notice  of  application  for  license  must  be 
made,  at  tbe  expense  of  the  applicant ;  and  if 
license  be  granted  without  tlie  required  publica- 
tion, any  citizen  may  make  complaint  and  have 
it  revoked.  (P.  S.,  1882,  c.  iOO,  g  6.)  The 
owner  of  any  real  e-tate  v,  ithin  25  feet  of  pro- 
posed licensed  premises  may  notify  the  Licens- 
ing Board  in  writing  of  his  objection  and  no 
license  shall  be  granted,  or  if  granted  may  be 
revoked.  (  P.  S.,  1883.  c.  100,  ti  7  ;  amended  by 
Laws  of  1887,  c.  323  )  Licenses  may  be  refused 
to  unfit  pensons,  and  nothing  in  the  law  is  to 
compol  the  Licensing  Boards  to  grant  licenses. 
(P  S.,  1882,  c.  100,  §8.) 

Each  license  shall  express  that  it  is  subject  to 
the  following  conditions :  (1)  That  the  provi- 
sions in  regard  to  the  nature  of  the  license  and 
building  shall  be  strictly  adhered  to.  (2)  That 
no  sales  .shall  be  made  betwaen  11  at  night  and 
6  in  the  morning  (1885,  c.  90),  or  on  Sunday, 
except  to  guests  of  an  inn.  (3i  That  none  but 
good  standard  liquor  free  from  adulteralion 
shall  be  sold.  (4)  That  no  sale  or  delivery  .shall 
be  madj  to  a  known  drunkard,  or  to  an  intoxi- 
cated person,  or  to  one  known  to  have  been 
drunk  within  six  months,  or  to  a  minor  for  his 
own  or  any  other's  use,  or  to  one  helped  by  pub- 
lic charity  within  a  year  (18S4,  c.  158).  (5)  That 
there  shall  be  no  disorder,  prostitution  or  illegal 
gaming  on  the  premises,  or  on  any  communicat- 
ing premises  Licenses  to  sell  light  wines, 
cidiT  or  malt  liquors  shall  be  conditioiied  not  to 
sell  spirituous  liquors ;  those  to  sell  to  be  drunk 


Legislation.] 


313 


[Legislation. 


OH  the  premises,  that  no  public  bar  will  1k'  kept, 
aud  that  the  licensee  must  be  licensed  a.;  an  inn- 
keeper or  commou  victualler,  and  shall  specify 
the  room  or  rooms  in  which  said  liquors  may 
be  kept  by  a  common  victualler.  No  person 
licensed  as  aforesaid  and  not  licensed  as  an  inn- 
holder  shall  keep  or  sell  any  liquors  in  any 
room  not  specified  as  aforesaid.  (6)  That  the 
license  shall  be  posted  ia  a  conspicuous  position 
on  tlie  premises,  where  it  may  be  easily  read. 
(7)  That  the  license  is  forfeited  for  breach  of  its 
conditions,  and  on  conviction  thereof  in  any 
Court.  An  added  condition  of  license  is  that 
no  liquor  shall  be  sold  election  day  (Laws, 
1888,  c.  262 ;  Laws,  1889,  c.  361.)  And  no  com- 
mon victualler  may  sell  on  any  holiday,  nor 
may  innkeepers  so  sell  except  to  guests.  (Laws, 
1888,  c.  254.) 

No  licnse,  except  a  druggist's  shall  be  grouted 
to  be  exercis  d  in  any  dwelling-house  or  store 
having  an  interior  connection  with  a  dwelling  or 
tenement,  and  such  connection  makes  a  license 
void.    (Laws,  18S8,  c  139.) 

Common  victuallers  must  close  between  mid- 
niglit  and  5  in  the  morning.  (Laws,  1882.  c  242.) 

Lici'nscs  shall  be  of  the  following  classes  : 
(1)  To  sell  liquors  of  any  kind,  to  he  drunk 
on  the  premises.  (2)  To  sell  malt  liquors,  cider 
and  light  wines  containing  less  than  1,5  percent, 
of  alcohol,  to  be  drunk  on  the  premises.  (3)  To 
sell  malt  liquor  and  rider,  to  be  drunk  on  the 
premises.  i4i  To  sell  liquors  of  any  kind,  not 
to  be  drunk  on  the  premises.  (5)  To  sell  malt 
liquors,  cider  and  light  wines  as  aforesaid,  not 
to  be  drunk  on  the  premises  (6)  Druggists' 
liceus;'S  as  above  (P.  S.,1882.c  100,  ;^  10),  which 
shall  only  be  granted  to  registered  pharmacists 
engaged  in  business  on  their  own  account. 
(Laws  1889.  c.  270.) 

The  fees  for  licenses  shall  be  a  ?  follows  :  1st 
class,  not  less  than  |1,000;  2d  or  3d  classes,  not 
less  than  ^250  ;  4th  class,  not  less  than  ^'SOQ:  5th 
class,  not  less  than  $150;  6th  class.  $1.  (P.S., 
1882,  c.  100,  g  11 ;  amended  by  Laws  of  1888,  c. 
341.) 

The  Licensing  Board  may  require  that  no  en- 
trances to  the  premises  except  fromtiie  street  be 
allowed,  and  that  no  screens  or  other  ol)struc- 
tions  to  a  view  of  the  interior  of  the  premises  be 
maintained,  and  that  no  licensee  shall  expose  to 
view  in  any  window  any  bottle  or  cask  or  vessel 
containing  liquor  to  so  obstruct  a  view  of  the 
business.     ( P.  S. ,  1882.  c.  100,  i?  12  ) 

No  license  shall  issue  until  the  fee  is  paid 
and  a  bond  in  $1,000  given,  conditioned  to  pay 
all  costs,  damages  and  fees  incurred  by  viola- 
ftions  of  law,  such  bond  to  be  approved  bv  the 
Town  or  City  Clerk.  (P.  S.,  1882,  c.  100, "g  13; 
amended  by  Laws  of  1888,  c.  283.) 

The  Treasurer  of  a  city  or  town  shall  pay  to 
the  Treasurer  of  the  State  one-fourth  of  all 
license  moneys  received  by  him  within  a  month. 
(P.  S.,1882,  c.  100.  t5  14.) 

The  Mayor  and  Aldermen  of  a  city,  or  the 
-•Selectmen  of  a  town,  or  any  police  officer  or 
constable  specially  aul^orized  by  either  of  them, 
may  enter  the  premises  of  any  licensee  to  ascer- 
tain how  he  conducts  his  business  and  to  pre- 
serve order.  And  such  police  otflcer  may  at 
any  time  take  samples  for  analysis,  which  shall 


be  sealed  in  ve.sseis  until  placed  in  the  analyst's 
hands.     (P.  S.,  1882,  c.  100,  §  15  ) 

Th?  ?iIayor  and  Aldermen  of  a  city  or  Select- 
men of  a  town  may,  after  notice  and  hearing, 
revoke  a  license.  This  disqualifies  a  licensee  to 
be  again  licensed  for  a  year.  (P.  S.,  1882,  c.  100, 
g  16.) 

A  conviction  under  any  of  these  provisions 
makes  the  license  void.     (Laws.  1887,  c.  392.) 

No  person  shall  bring  into  a  town  in  which 
license-t  (except  drugoists')  are  not  granted,  any 
liquor  1 1  be  sold  in  violation  of  law.  This  sec- 
tion does  not  apply  to  transportation  through  a 
town  to  a  place  beyond.  (P.  S.,  1882,  c.  100. 
§17.) 

Whoever  violates  any  provision  of  his  license 
or  of  this  chapter  shall  be  punished  by  fine  of 
§50  to  $500  and  imprisonment  one  to  six 
months,  and  forfeit  his  license  if  licensed.  (  P. 
S.,  1882,  c.  100,  s;  18  ;  amended  by  Laws,  1889, 
c.  114.)  When  a  person  holding  a  license  is 
convicted  thus,  the  Court  or  magistrate  convict- 
ing him  .shall  send  a  certificate  thereof  to  the 
Board  which  issued  the  license.  (P.  S.,  1882. 
c.  100,  ?;  19.)  Such  Court  or  mau;istrate  shall 
also  serve  a  w-iitten  notice  of  such  conviction 
on  the  owner  of  the  building  used  bv  the  de- 
fendant.   !ld.,  §20.) 

Every  hu.sband  wife,  child,  parent,  guardian, 
employer  or  other  person  injured  in  person, 
property  or  means  of  support  by  an  intoxicated 
person  in  consequence  of  .such  intoxication, 
shall  have  action  in  damages  against  those  who 
by  selling  liquor  contributed  to  or  caused  such 
intoxication,  and  the  owner  of  the  building  who 
knowingly  permits  an  unlicensed  tenant  to  so 
sell.  (Id..  i<  21.)  And  such  owner  may  recover 
money  so  paid,  of  his  tenant.  (Id.,  i;  22.)  A 
judgment  under  s  21  revokes  licenses  until  the 
judgment  is  paid.     (Id.,  §23.) 

Whoever  sells  liquor  to  a  minor  for  his  own 
or  any  other's  use.  or  allows  a  minor  to  loiter 
upon  his  premises  where  liquor  is  sold  shall 
forfeit  $100  to  the  parent  or  guardian  of  .such 
minor.  (P.  S  ,  1S82.  c.  100,  §'24  :  amended  by 
Laws,  1889,  c.  390.) 

The  husband,  wife,  parent,  child  guardian  or 
employer  of  a  person  habitually  drinking  liquor 
to  excess  may  give  notice  in  writing  to  any 
person,  requesting  him  not  to  sell  to  such 
habitual  drinker  and  if  he  does,  may  recover 
$150  to  $500.  This  applies  to  druggists  selling 
except  upon  physicians' prescriptions.  And  the 
Mayor  of  a  city  or  any  one  of  the  Selectmen  of 
a  town  may  give  the  notice  and  sue  for  the 
benefit  of^the  injured  party.  (P.  S.,  1882,  c. 
100,  §  25  :  amended  by  Laws,  1885,  c.  282.) 

The  delivery  of  liquor  from  any  buildinii, 
booth  or  other  place  except  a  private  dweUing- 
house.  or  from  such  when  a  part  thereof  is  used 
as  a  place  of  common  resort  (such  delivery  being 
to  a  person  not  a  resident  therein),  nhallhs  prima 
farie  evidence  that  such  delivery  is  a  sale.  (P 
S.,  1882,  c.  100.  §  26.) 

Signs,  placards  and  advertisements,  except  in 
drug-stores,  announcing  the  keeping  of  liquor, 
and  a  United  States  tax-receipt  as  a  dealer  in 
liquors,  shall  be  prima  facie  evidence  that  such 
liquors  are  there  kept  for  sale.  (Laws,  1887, 
c.  414.) 


Legislation.] 


314 


[Legislation. 


Ale,  porter,  beer,  cider,  wine  aod  any  bev- 
erage containins;  more  than  1  per  cent,  of  alcohol 
by  volume  at  60°  F.,  as  well  as  distilled  spirits, 
shall  be  deemed  intoxicating,  (P.  8.,  1883.  c. 
100,  §27;  amended  by  Laws  of  1888,  c  219.) 

The  powers  of  Mayor  and  Aldermen  in  cities 
shall  be  exercised  in  Boston  by  the  Board  of 
Police  Commissioners,  and  in  any  other  city  the 
Council  may  determine  that  a  Board  of  three 
License  Commissioners,  appointed  by  the  Mayor 
and  Council,  shall  perform  such  duties.  (P.  S., 
1882,  c.  100,  §28.) 

The  Governor  and  Council  may  appoint  an 
Inspector  and  Assayer  of  liquors,  at  a  salarv  of 
$1,000  yearly  (payable  monthly >,  who  shall 
analyze  liquors  sent  to  him  by  officers  and  whose 
certificate  is  evidence.  The  Court  may  order 
analysis  by  other  chemists.  (P.  S.,  1883,  c  100. 
§  29;  Laws,  1882,  c.  221 ;  Laws,  1885,  c.  224; 
Laws,  1887,  c.  232.) 

If  two  persons  make  complaint  on  oath  be- 
fore a  magistrate  that  they  believe  liquor  is 
keptat  a  ]>iace  by  a  person  named,  for  illegal 
sale,  the  magistrate  (if  he  believes  the  complaint 
true)  shall  issue  a  search-warrant  to  seize  such 
liquor  and  the  vessels  containing  it  and  imple- 
ments of  sale.  (P.  S.,  1882.  c.  100,  §  30  ; 
amended  by  Laws,  1887,  c.  297.)  No  warrant 
shall  issue  to  search  a  dwelling-house  (unless  a 
place  of  pul)lic  resort  is  kept  therein),  unless 
one  of  the  complainants  makes  affidavit  that  he 
has  reason  to  believe  licjuor  has  been 
unlawfully  sold  there  within  a  month, 
stating  facts  and  circumstances.  (P.  S., 
1882,  c.  100,  §  ?1.)  The  place  or  build- 
ing to  be  searched  shall  be  particularly  desig- 
nated. (Id  ,  S  33.)  The  officer  sh;dl  search  the 
premises  and  seize  the  liquor  described,  the  ves- 
sels containing  it,  and  furniture  of  sale.  (Id., 
§  33 ;  amended  by  Laws  of  1887,  c.  406  ;  Laws. 
1888,  c.  397.)  Notice  of  hearing  shall  be  given, 
and  trial  by  the  magistrate  issuing  the  search- 
warrant,  if  the  liquor  is  under  $50  in  value  ;  by 
the  Superior  Court  if  of  more  than  that  value. 
The  liquor  and  other  things  seized  are  forfeited 
and  sold  or  returned  to  the  claimant  thereof  ac- 
cording to  the  result  of  the  trial.  (P.  S.,  1882, 
c.  100,  ij§  34-43;  Laws,  1887,  c.  53;  Laws,  1888, 
c  397  and  c.  277.) 

An  officer  may  arrest  without  warrant  any 
one  found  in  The  act  of  illegally  selling,  trans- 
porting or  delivering  liquor,  and  may  seize  the 
liquor  and  put  the  culprit  in  a  safe  place  xmtil 
warrant  can  be  procured.  tP.  8.,  1882.  c.  100. 
§43.) 

All  liquor  kept  for  illegal  sale  is  a  common 
nuisance.     (Id.,  §  4^  ) 

In  any  No-License  town  or  city,  clubs  for 
selling  or  distributing  liquors  among  members 
are  common  nuisances,  and  the  maintainers  are 
liable  to  $50  to  $100  and  imprii-onnK  nt  three  to 
12  months.  (Id.,  JJ  45.)  But  in  othrr  towns  and 
cities  such  clubs  may  be  licensed  for  $50  to 
$500,  if  deemed  proper  organizations.  (Laws, 
1887.  c.  206.) 

The  Mayor  or  Selectmen  may  prohibit  the 
sale  of  liquors  in  cases  of  great  public  excite- 
ment.    (Laws,  1887,  c.  365^ 

Licensing  Boards  may  permit  the  transfer  of 
licenses  upon  the  same  notice,  etc.,  as  in  grant- 


ing licenses  without  new  fee.  (Laws,  1889,  c. 
344.) 

There  is  a  Metropolitan  Police  law  for  the  city 
of  Boston,  providing  that  the  Governor  shall 
appoint  a  Board  of  three  Police  Commissioner.s, 
appointees  to  be  chosen  from  the  two  principal 
political  parties  and  to  serve  for  four  years. 
(Laws,  1885,  c.  323.) 

There  is  a  law  requiring  scientific  temperance 
instruction  in  tlie  public  schools.  (Laws,  1885, 
c.  332.) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  iiy  a  majority  of  the  Senators  and  two- 
thirds  of  the  Representatives  present  and  voting; 
the  proposal  to  he  agreed  to  in  the  same  way  by 
the  next  Legislature,  and  the  Amendment  to  be 
ratified  by  a  majority  of  the  electors  when  sub- 
mitted. 

Michigan. 

Earliest  Prorisions. — No  person  was  permitted 
to  keep  a  tavern  or  retail  liquor  without  a  license 
from  three  Justices  of  the  district  and  paying 
$10  to  $25  therefor.  Disorder  and  drunken- 
ness on  licensed  premises  were  prohibited. 
(Terr.  Laws,  vol.  1,  p.  43  [1805].)  But  the 
deputy  of  the  Marshal  who  kept  the  jail  might 
obtain  such  license  for  $1.     (Id  ,  p.  91  [1805J.) 

Persons  .selling  liquor  to  Indians  were  fined 
$5  to  $100.  with  forfeiture  of  the  article  the 
Indian  gave  for  such  liquor.  (Terr.  Laws,  vol. 
1,  p.  180  [passed  1813].) 

Permiuting  disorder  by  a  retailer  was  fined 
not  exceeding  $300  (Id..  ])  195  [1816]),  retail- 
ing without  license,  not  exceeding  $100.     (Id.) 

The  tax  was  raised  to  $38  where  a  billiarr'- 
taljle  was  kept ;  where  one  was  not,  $10  in  De- 
troit and  ?5  outside.     (Id.,  p.  200  ) 

No  person  was  to  retail  without  license  from 
three  Justices  on  recommendation  of  13  re- 
spectable freeholders  of  the  vicinity.  .'Celling 
without  license  was  fined  $10.  (Id.)  Liquois 
were  not  to  be  given  minors  or  apprentices  with- 
out written  permission  of  parent,  guaidiau  or 
master,  or  to  any  soldier  without  consent  of  his 
commanding  officer,  or  to  any  Indian  without 
consent  of  the  Superintendent  of  Indian 
Affairs,  or  to  any  person  (travelers  and  lodgers 
excepted)  on  Sunday,  on  penalty  of  $10.  (Id  , 
p  301.)  In  1833  Detroit  was  given  power  to  tax 
and  regulate  retailers  of  liquor  who  were  not 
innkeepers.     (Id  ,  p.  354.) 

In  1819  was  passed  a  comparatively  full  li- 
cense law,  vesting  the  granting  of  license  in 
the  County  Courts  practically  at  discretion,  and 
making  debts  for  liquors  void.  (Id,p.  407. ) 
Prisoners  were  not  allowed  liquor  except  in 
case  of  sickness.    (Id..  471.) 

In  1833  another  license  law  was  enacted  put- 
ting the  licensing   authority  in   the   hands  of 
Township  Boards,  to  be  granted  only  where  tav 
erns  were  necessary  for  travelers  ;  there  were 
no  other  new  provisions.     (Id  ,  vol.  2,  p  1172.) 

Local  Ojjtion  (1845)  a7id  Constiivtional  Anti- 
License  (1850).— By  No.  46  of  the  Laws  of  1845, 
at  every  annual  township  and  charter  election 
the  question  of  license  or  no-license  was  sub- 
mitted to  vote. 

"  The  Legislature  shall  not  pass  any  act 
authorizing  the  grant  of  license  for  the  sale  of 


Leg^islation.] 


315 


[Legislation. 


ardent  spirits  or  other  intoxicating   liquors." 
(Coast.,  1850,  art.  4,  i?  47.) 

Th3  act  of  18.51  (No.  178)  provided  that  any 
person  who  might  retail  any  liquor  without 
first  giving  bond  as  required  should  forfeit  $'J5  to 
$100.  A  bond  in  *50J  to  81,000  was  required  of 
any  who  shouhi  retail  liquor,  conditioue  1  to  pay 
any  penalties  and  forfeitures  incurred  by  reason 
of  violating  any  provisions  of  law  regulating 
the  retail  of  liquor.  Those  who  should  sell 
without  tirst  giving  bond  as  required  forfeited 
$25  to  SIOO.  Civil  damages  were  provided. 
This  act  was  upheld  as  not  contrary  to  the  above 
Constitutional  provision,  which  it  was  said  pro- 
hibited granting  licenses  as  a  means  of  revenua 
but  did  not  interfere  with  th:;  right  of  theLeg's- 
lature  to  prohibit  under  heavy  penalties  the 
tra.tiic  in  ardent  spirits  when  c<)nducted  Ij  such 
manner  as  sliould  corrujjt  public  morals.  The 
statute  was  said  not  to  be  an  euabling  statute, 
or  to  authorize  the  traffic  by  granting  liceuse. 
(Langley  v.  Ergansinger,  3  Mich.,  314.) 

The  act  of  1833  (No.  (56)  .submitted  to  vote  of 

the  people  a  regular  Prohibitory  or  Maine  law. 

-The  Court  was  equ  illy  divided  as  to  the  s  ib- 

mission  clauses  of  this  act,  an  1  it  was  therefore 

upheld.     (Pe  iple  v.  (Collins,  3  Mich.,  343.) 

Miiine  La^c  of  1855. — A  regular  Prohibitory 
law  was  detiiiitely  enacted  in  1855  (Laws.  No. 
17),  with  nuisance  but  not  civil  damage  clauses. 
The  penalties  for  selling  were  :  first  conviction, 
$10;  second,  $20;  third,  $100  and  imprison- 
ment three  to  si.x  mouths  ;  common  sellers  and 
manufacturers  were  punished  by  double  these 
penalties. 

Manufacturing  alcohol,  80  per  cent,  pure  or 
over,  to  sell  out  of  the  State,  ami  making  cider 
and  wine,  and  the  sale  of  the  same  in  quantities 
of  one  gallon  or  over,  and  manufacturing  beer 
and  the  sale  thereof  in  quantities  of  five  gallons 
or  over,  not  to  be  drunic  on  the  premises,  were 
excepted  from  the  Prohibitory  law.  (Laws, 
1861,  No.  226.) 

By  Laws.  1871.  No.  71,  Justices  were  given 
jurisdiction  under  the  lii^uor  law  ;  and  No  196 
slightly  increased  the  pjualties  for  unlawful 
selling  and  gave  civil  damages.  The  Laws  of 
1873  (No.  131)  provided  that  females  selling  un- 
lawfully were  to  be  imprisoned  the  same  as 
males.  The  owner  or  occupant  of  any  house  in 
which  liquors  were  sold  or  bought  or  obtained 
for  money  or  otherwise,  by  means  of  any 
wheel,  drawer,  or  other  device  to  evade  the  law, 
was  deemed  an  illegal  seller  of  liquor.  (Laws, 
1873,  No.  150.) 

Repeal  (1875). — The  Prohibitory  laws  were 
repealed  by  Laws  of  1875,  c.  228,  j^  18.  That 
act  taxed  the  business  of  retailing  all  intoxicat- 
ing liquors  $150,  of  retailing  malt  liquors  $50; 
and  persons  selling  at  both  whole.sale  and  retail 
were  taxed  $300  if  they  d  'alt  in  whiskey,  and 
$100  if  they  dealt  exclusively  in  malt  liquors. 
Adultei-ation  was  prohibited  by  Act  No.  225  of 
the  same  year.  Act  No.  231  made  various  pro- 
hibitions of  sale  to  minors,  etc  ,  and  gave  civil 
damages.  And  Joint  Re.'^olution  No.  21  of  that 
year  (Laws,  p.  305)  provided  for  repealing  the 
Constitutional  provision  against  license,  which 
was  carried  by  the  people. 
Act  No.    197,  Laws  of   1877,  amended  and 


elaborated  the  Tax  law,  but  in  revenue-collect- 
ing matters  alone. 

The  two  last-mentioned  laws  were  amended 
with  an  increase  in  tax  of  $50,  by  Laws,  1879, 
No.  268. 

Sub inissi >n  of  Constitutional  Prohibition  (1887). 
— The  Legislature  submitted  a  Prohibitory 
Amendment  to  the  Constitution  to  vote  of  the 
people,  by  Laws  of  1887,  p.  466.  It  did  not 
carr}'. 

At  the  same  session,  by  Laws,  No.  197,  under 
title,  •'  An  act  to  regulate  the  manufacture  and 
.«ale  of  malt,  brewed  or  fermented,  spirituous 
and  vinous  liquors  in  the  several  counties  of  this 
State,"  was  enacted  a  regular  County  Local 
Option  law ;  but  the  Supreme  Court  decided 
that  the  title  of  the  ac^  did  not  constitutionally 
expre-s  the  nature  of  it.  It  therefore  became 
inoperative.     {Re  Hanck,  38  N.  W.  Rep.,  269.) 

The  Law  as  It  Existed  in  1889.— The  liquor 
tax  rate^  are:  for  those  m  mufacturing  and  sell- 
ing their  product  at  wholesale,  $1,000  per  year  ; 
man u fact lUVTS  of  malt  liquors  only,  5;500; 
wholesalers,  $500;  retailers,  .>500;  perons  sell- 
ing all  kinds  of  liquors  at  both  wholesale  and 
retail,  $1,000.  (Law.s,  1889,  No.  213,  §  1.-  Re- 
tail dealers  are  those  selling  three  gallons  or  one 
dozen  quart  bottles  or  less;  wholesalers,  those 
selling  over  that.  No  tax  is  required  of  any 
person  selling  any  wine  or  cider  m:ide  from 
fruits  grown  or  gathered  in  the  State,  unless 
sold  by  the  driuk.     (Id.,  J^  2.) 

Druggists  who  sell  liquor  for  chemical,  scien- 
tific, medieinal,  mechanical  or  sacramental  pur- 
poses only,  are  excepted  ;  but  they  must  keep 
records  of  persons  applying  for  liquor,  and 
must  give  bond  in  82,000  not  to  sell  unlawfully. 
Dri-.ggists  violating  the  law  are  fined  $100  to 
$500  or  imprisoned  90  days  to  a  year,  or  both. 
(IJ.,  {^  3.) 

Dfealers  must  annually,  on  May  1,  make  and 
file  statements  concerning  their  places  and 
businesse.s,  and  pay  their  taxe.s.  (Id..  §  4) 
Those  beginning  business  after  that  date  mu.st 
pay  pro  rata,  but  not  less  than  one-half  of  llie 
yearly  tax.  (Id  ,^5  5. )  The  tax-receipt  serves 
as  a  license,  and  must  be  poste  1  as  such  in  the 
place  of  business.  (Id.,  t^  6  )  Persons  violating 
any  of  the  provisions  of  this  law  are  punished 
by  fine  of  $50  to  $200,  or  imprisonment  10  to  90 
days,  or  both.     (Id.,  4^  7. ) 

Those  engaged  in  the  business  must  give  bonds 
in  $4,000  to  $6,000,  to  be  approved  by  the 
Municipal  Council,  not  to  violate  the  law,  and 
to  pay  all  damages  arising  from  selling.  (Id., 
§8.) 

Half  the  moneys  received  goes  to  the  munic- 
ipality, the  rest  to  the  county  fund  except 
that  in  the  Upper  Peninsula  all  goes  to  the 
municipility.     (Id., 8  9-) 

It  is  the  duty  of  officers  and  all  persons  to 
notify  the  County  Attorney,  who  shall  prosecute 
violations  of  the  act.  (Id.,  §  10.)  Any  officer 
neglecting  his  duty  under  this  act  is  fined  $100, 
and  the  Governor  may  appoint  another  to  do 
the  duties  of  his  office.     (Id.,  i?  12.) 

It  is  unlawful  for.^xny  one  to  furnish  liquor  to 
any  minor,  intoxicated  person  or  one  in  the 
habit  of  getting  so,  to  any  Indian  or  to  any  per- 
son when  forbidden  in   writing  by  husband, 


Legislation.] 


316 


[Legislation. 


wife  parent,  child,  guardian  or  employer, 
Director  or  Superintendent  of  the  Poor.  The 
fact  of  so  selling-  or  furnishing  is  evidence  of 
intended  violation  of  law.  (Id.,t5l3.)  Dealers 
must  not  allow  minors  or  students  to  play  cards, 
dice  or  billiards  in  saloons,  or  sell  students  liquor 
except  whea  prescribe  1  lor  medical  purposes. 
Minors  are  not  to  be  allowed  to  visit  saloons  ex- 
cept when  accompanied  by  parent  or  guardian. 
(Id.,  §  14  )  Lifjuor  may  not  be  furnished  in 
any  concert  hall,  show,  theatre,  etc.  (Id.,  ^  15  ) 
Saloons  shall  bj  clo-^ed  on  Sunday,  election  iiays 
and  legal  holidays  and  after  9  o  clock  p.  m.  and 
until  7  o'clock  the  following  morning,  except 
that  municipal  authorities  by  ordinance  may 
allow  saloons  to  open  at  6  a.  m.  and  remain 
open  not  later  than  U  p  m.  (Id.,  5^16.)  Upon 
complaint  that  any  person  is  found  intoxi- 
cated or  has  been  intoxicated  in  a 
public  place,  a  magistrate  shall  issue  his  warrant 
for  such  person,  take  his  disclosure  and 
issue  his  warrant  for  the  person  disclosed  as  the 
seller  of  the  liquor  if  the  sale  was  illegal.  (Id., 
§17.)  Persons  selling  to  a  minor  are  liable  to 
damages  not  less  than  $50,  and  general  civil 
damages  are  also  given.  (Id.,  ^§  18,  20.)  Mar- 
shals and  Chiefs  of  Police,  or  some  officer  ap- 
pointed by  them,  shall  visit  all  saloons  once 
every  weelv  to  see  how  they  are  conducted  and 
whether  the  law  is  b/iug  violated,  tid.,  g  21.) 
When  complaint  is  made  under  this  law  security 
for  co.sts  shall  not  be  demanded.    (Id.,  g  22.) 

Clubs  selling  or  distributing  liquor  to  mem- 
bers are  liable  to  the  tax,  and  the  members  and 
employees  arc  liable  to  the  penalties  of  this  act. 
(Id..  §  23.) 

Adulteration  of  liquor  with  deleterious  sub- 
stances, and  selling  such  liquor,  are  prohibited 
under  penalty  of  ^50  to  ^500  or  imprisonment 
10  days  to  six  months,  or  both.     (Id.,  g  25. ) 

Provision  is  made  for  the  branding  of  barrels 
which  are  tilled  with  liquor     (Id.,  j^^  23-29.) 

Liquors  may  be  compounded  by  the  users  or 
sellers  for  medicinal  and  mechanical  purposes. 
(Id..  §  30.) 

Screens  or  obstructions  to  a  view  from  the 
street  shall  be  removed  from  .saloons  during  the 
time  when  they  are  required  to  be  closed.  (Id., 
§31.) 

In  addition  to  the  branches  now  required  by 
law,  instruction  shall  be  given  in  physiology  and 
hygiene  with  a  special  reference  to  the  nature  of 
alcohol  and  narcotics  and  their  effect  upon  the 
human  sy.'-tem.  (Laws,  1887,  No.  165  [passed 
1881J.) 

The  act  of  1885  (Laws,  No.  217)  taxes  the 
business  of  slling  liquors  made  in  the  State  to 
be  shipped  out  of  the  State. 

It  is  unlawful  t  manufacture,  sell  or  keep  for 
sale  any  intoxicating  liquors  after  Prohibition  as 
provided  m  this  act;  but  this  does  not  apply  to 
druggists  selling  under  the  general  law  of  the 
State.  (Laws,  1889,  No  207,  §  1.)  And  the 
general  law  as  to  taxation  of  the  liquor  business 
is  suspended  thereafter.     (Id.,  i^j  2.) 

To  ascertain  tlie  will  of  the  electors  in  regard 
to  such  Prohibition,  upon  petition  of  one  fourth 
of  the  voters  of  the  county  to  the  Clerk,  he 
shall  call  a  meeting  of  the  Board  of  Supervisors. 
(Id.,  §3.)  To  the  petition  must  be  attached 
certihed  poll-lisis  of  the  last  preceding  election. 


(Id.,  §  4.)  At  the  meeting  of  such  Board  of 
Supervisors  it  shall  be  finally  decided  whether 
the  petition  is  sufficient ;  and  if  so,  the  elec- 
tion shall  be  ordered — not  to  be  on  the  day  of  a 
general  election.  (Id.,  g  6.)  The  eleetion  shall 
be  conducted  as  a  general  election,  but  the  pro- 
position shall  not  be  submitted  oftener  than 
once  in  two  years.  (Id.,  §  9.)  When  there- 
suit  of  the  vote  is  for  Prohibition,  the  Board  of 
Supervisors  may  then,  by  a  majority  of  all  the 
members  elected,  vote  to  so  prohibit.  (Id.,  j^  13.) 
And  the  Prohibition  provisions  of  this  act 
shall  after  the  first  day  of  May  following  be  in 
force  in  the  county.  (Id.,  §  15.)  The  finst 
violation  of  this  act  shall  be  puui.shed  by  fine  of 
$50  to  $200,  or  imprisonment  20  days  to  six 
months,  and  subsequent  offences  by  splOO  to 
|500  tine,  and  imprisonment  six  months  to  two 
years.  _  ild  ,  g  16.) 

Civil  damages  are  allowed  in  case  of  intoxi- 
cation by  liquor  sold  in  violation  ol  the  law. 
(Id.,  §  19.) 

No  Board  of  Registration  shall  hold  sessions 
in  or  near  places  where  liquors  are  sold.  (Laws, 
1889,  No.  23.)  No  election  shall  be  held  in  such 
place.  (Id.,  No.  263,  §28. 1  Nor  shall  liquors 
be  brought  into  the  building  where  such  elec- 
tion is  being  held,  or  drunk  therein  by  the 
election  officers     (Id  ,  §  29.) 

There  is  a  law  requiring  scientific  temperance 
instruction  in  the  public  schools.  (Laws,  1883 
No.  93;  amended  by  Laws,  1887,  No.  65  ) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  vote  of  two-thirds  of  all  the  mem- 
bers of  the  two  Houses,  at  one  session ;  popular 
vote  to  be  taken  at  the  next  spi'ing  or  autumn 
election.     A  majority  carries  it. 

Ilinncsota. 

Earliest  Provisions. — The  first  session  of  the 
Legislature  provided  for  granting  grocery 
licenses  to  retail  liquor,  by  the  County  Commis- 
sioners, at  i^lOO  to  >  200  on  delivery  of  a  bond  in 
$500  not  to  permit  disorderly  conduct  or  violate 
the  law.  Selling  without  license  was  fined  $100 
to  %;200,  and  keeping  open  Sunday  810  to  $25. 
(Laws,  1849,  c.  8.)  By  c.  7,  Laws  of  1851.  the 
license  fee  was  put  down  to  $20  to  $50,  and  the 
penalty  for  selling  without  license  to  $50  to  $100. 

A  regular  Prohibitory  or  Maine  law  was  sub- 
mitted to  vote  of  the  people  by  Laws  of  1852, 
c.  8.  This  apparently  failed,  for  it  did  not  be- 
come a  part  of  the  statutes.  The  proposed  law 
prohibited  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  spirituous 
and  intoxicating  liquors  and  prescribed  penalties 
of  $10  for  the  first  conviction,  $20  for  second, 
and  $20  and  three  to  six  months'  imprisonment 
for  the  third. 

ProJnbition  in  tJis  Sioux  Za«<f«(  1854).— Manu- 
facturing, selling  or  introducing  liquor  west  of 
the  Mississippi  within  the  limits  of  lands  lately 
purchased  under  the  Sioux  treaties  was  pro- 
hibited. (Laws,  1854,  c.  31.)  Outside  the  said 
Sioux  lands,  the  County  Commissioners  were  to 
grant  licenses  as  deemed  expedient  at  $75  to 
$200,  on  the  giving  of  a  bond  in  $.1,000  not  to 
violate  the  license.  Selling  without  licen.se  was 
fined  $25  to  $150,  or  punished  by  imprisonment 
not  exceeding  six  mouths.     (Laws,  ls55,  c.  48  ) 

Another  general  license  law  reducing  the 
license  to  $50  to  $100,  but  providing  for  towiy 


Liegislation] 


oil 


[Legislation. 


ship  Local  Option  on  petition  of  10  voters,  was 
enacted  in  1858.     (Laws,  c.  74. ) 

Sellitig;  to  minors,  wards,  servants  and  habitual 
drunkards,  was  regulated  by  cc.  53  and  54, 
Laws  of  186L  Selling  on  election  days  was 
prohibited  by  c.  55,  Laws  of  1865. 

The  law  has  not  been  materially  altered  .«ince, 
except  by  the  High  License  act  of  1887,  which  is 
incorporated  in  the  General  Statutes  and  the 
Laws  of  1889. 

The  Law  as  It  Existed  in  1889. — No  one  may 
sell  liquor  directly  or  indirectly,  in  any  quantity 
or  for  any  purpose,  to  any  minor  or  to  any 
student  or  pupil,  or  to  any  habitual  drunkard, 
or  to  any  intemperate  drinker,  or  to  any  iuto.xi- 
cated  person,  on  penalty  of  $25  to  $1 00  or  30  to 
90  days'  imprisonment.  Any  employer  or  rela- 
tive of  any  habitual  drunkard  or  intemperate 
drinker,  or  anyone  injured  or  annoyed  by  his  con- 
tinued intoxication,  or  any  relative  or  employer 
of  any  minor,  may  give  notice  in  writing  to  any 
person  not  to  sell  to  such  minor  or  drunkard  ; 
and  if  he  does  so  sell  he  shall  be  fined  ^50  to 
8100  and  imprisoned  30  to  90  days.  Persons 
procuring  liquor  for  such  minors  or  drunkards 
shall  be  fined  §25  to  $100  or  imprisoned  20  to 
90  days.  No  person  may  sell  liquor  oc  Sunday 
or  election  days,  and  licensed  places  must  be 
closed  on  those  days,  on  penalty  of  $30  to 
$100  and  10  to  30  days  in  prison.  (G.  S.,  1888, 
Supp  ,  c.  16,  i^  10.) 

In  pro<^ecutions  it  shall  not  be  necessary  to 
prove  the  kind  of  liquors  sold.  Finding  liquors 
on  the  premises  in  question  is  j9nma/a«V  evi- 
dence of  their  sale  thereon  ;  proof  that  the 
accused  has  paid  the  United  States  revenue  tax 
and  has  a  receipt  therefor  posted  up  is  also 
2mina  facie  evidence  that  he  has  sold  such 
liquor,  but  this  does  not  apply  to  druggists; 
and  in  the  prosecution  of  the  keeper  of  a  place 
for  violating  tj  10,  proof  of  furnishing  liquor  to 
any  minor  is  sufficient  proof  of  the  defendant's 
knowledge  of  and  liability  unless  disproved  by 
two  witnesses.  (Id.,  g  11;  amended  by  Laws  of 
1889,  c.  105. )  In  all  cases  of  selling  to  a  minor 
or  drunkard,  after  notice,  the  license  of  the 
seller  is  void.     iG.  S.,  1888,  Supp.,  c.  16,  g  12.) 

Gaming  tables  in  saloons  are  prohibited,  but 
not  billiard  and  pool-tables,  on  penalty  of  #10  to 
$50.     (Id.,  §  24.) 

Licenses  must  be  posted  in  the  room  where 
the  business  is  done.  (Id.,  g  25.)  Licenses  shall 
contain  a  description  of  the  premises,  and  sales 
elsewhere  are  sales  without  license,    ild.,  ^  26.) 

When  any  person  is  convicted  hereunder,  the 
Court  shall  send  a  certificate  thereof  to  the 
Licensing  Board  of  the  district.  (Id.,  t^  27.) 
Any  Licensing  Board  may  revoke  any  license 
granted  by  it  on  proof  satisfactory  to  it  of  a 
violation  of  law,  and  the  party  shall  be  dis- 
qualified to  receive  license  for  a  year,  or,  if  the 
conviction  is  of  a  sale  to  a  minor  or  drunkard, 
for  five  years;  and  if  the  licensee  is  tlie  owner 
of  the  premises  licensed  no  license  shall  be 
granted  thereon  for  one  year.  (Id.,  t<  28.)  All 
applications  for  license  shall  be  signed  by  the 
applicant  and  state  the  place  where  the  business 
is  to  be  carried  on.  The  Clerk  of  the  munici- 
pality or  the  County  Auditor  shall  cause  notice 
thereof  to  be  published  in  the  official  newspaper 
two  weeks  before  the  hearing.      Any  person 


may  appear  and  object  to  the  granting  of  the 
license,  and  if  it  appear  that  the  applicant  has 
violated  the  law  within  a  year,  or  sold  to  a 
minor  or  drunkard  after  notice  within  five 
years,  the  license  sh;dl  be  refused.     (Id.,  t^  29.) 

In  cities  of  10  000  inhabitants  or  more  the 
license  fee  shall  be  not  less  than  $1,000.  (Id., 
ij  30  )  In  other  cities  license  fee  shall  be  not 
less  than  $500.  (Id  ,  §  31  )  In  all  other  places 
it  shall  be  not  le.ss  than  $500.  (Id.  ,^^2.)  The 
term  of  the  license  shall  be  one  year,  or  for  a 
period  not  beyond  20  daj's  after  the  next  annual 
election.  (Id  )  Bond  in  $2,000,  conditioned  to 
sell  lawfully  and  keep  a  quiet,  orderly  house, 
shall  be  given  before  license  issues.  No  person 
may  be  surety  on  such  bond  who  is  surety  on 
any  other  such  bond.  (Id.,  J^  34.)  No  license 
shall  be  issued  to  any  member  of  any  Board  of 
County  Commissioners,  City  Council  or  munici- 
pal corporation  who  shall  take  any  part  in  issu- 
ing such  license  upon  penalty  of  $100  to  $500 
and  forfeiture  of  the  license.  (Id.,  §  35.)  If 
any  officer  neglects  or  refuses  to  do  his  duty 
imder  this  law,  he  shall  be  liable  on  his  bond 
in  $100  to  >-500.  (Id.,  i<  36.)  Selling  without 
license  is  punished  by  fine  of  $50  to  $100  and 
imprisonment  30  to  90  days,  except  druggists' 
sales  on  prescription.s.  (Id.,  §  37.)  This  act 
applies  to  all  municipalities,  anything  in  their 
charters  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding.  (Id., 
^38.) 

"  Intoxicating  liquors "  means  spirituous, 
vinous,  fermented  and  malt  liquors,  or  either  of 
them.     (Id.,i:;40.) 

Evading  the  laws  by  means  of  any  artifice 
known  as  '•  Blind  Pig  "  or  •  Hole  in  the  Wall," 
or  other  device  concealing  the  identity  of  the 
person  selling,  shall  be  fined  $25  to  $100  or 
punished  by  imprisonment  10  days  to  three 
months,  or  both,     (.d.,  g  41  ) 

It  is  the  duty  of  all  officers  to  arrest  any 
persons  found  offending  against  this  law  and 
make  complaint  against  them,  on  penalty  of 
removal.     (Id.,  i^  43.) 

Pharmacists  duly  registered  may  lawfully  sell 
lic^uors  upon  a  physician's  preseription  without 
a  license.  (Id. .t?44.  i  Any  pharmacist  violat- 
ing the  law  is  guilty  of  selling  witb.out  license, 
and  if  he  p.  rraits  liquors  sold  to  be  drunk  on 
hi-^  premises  he  shall  be  fined  $25  to  $100.  (Id  , 
4;  45.)  Ph)rsicians  giving  prescriptions  to  evade 
the  law  shiill  be  punished  as  for  selling  without 
license.     (Id.,  ?5  46.) 

All  persons  licensed  to  sell  intoxicating  liquors 
in  this  State  are  required  to  close  their  places 
of  bu.siness  (except  hotels)  at  11  at  night  and 
keep  them  clo.se(i  until  5  in  the  morning,  and 
not  to  sell  liquor  during  that  time.  ( G.  S. ,  1888, 
c.  16,  i^  19;  amended  by  Laws  of  1889,  c.  87.) 

In  cities  of  10,000  inhabitants  or  more,  no 
election  shall  be  held  in  any  saloon  or  barroom, 
or  in  any  place  adjoining,  and  no  liquor  shall 
be  iutroduc  d  into  a  polling  place;  nor  .shall 
any  licensed  saloon  be  open.d  from  5  in  the 
morning  until  8  in  the  evening  of  such  days. 
(Laws,  1889,  c.  3,  t;i5  37.  38.)  Selling  witlun 
half-a-mile  of  the  State  Fair  Groimds  during 
the  fair  is  prohibited  on  penaltv  of  $100  to 
$250  for  first  offense,  and  $500  to  >1,000  or  im- 
prisonment 30  days  to  six  months,  or  both,  for 
subsequent  offenses.    (Laws,  1889,  c.  21.) 


Legislation.] 


318 


[Legislation. 


No  one  shall  make  or  offer  for  sale  any  adul- 
terated liquor,  on  penalty  of  ^25  to  $100  for 
first  offense  and  $50  to  -SI  00  or  imprisonment  80 
to  90  days  for  subsequent  offenses.  (Laws, 
1889,  c.  7,  §  13.) 

Whoever  becomes  intoxicated  by  voluntarily 
drinking  intoxicating  liquors  shall  be  punished 
for  the  first  offense  $10  to  $40,  or  by  imprison- 
ment 10  to  40  days,  for  the  second  by  im- 
prisonment 80  to  60  tlays  or  a  fine  of  $20  to  $50, 
and  for  third  and  subsequent  offense-^  imprison- 
ment 60  to  90  days.    (Laws,  1889,  c.  13. ) 

There  is  a  law  requiring  scientific  temperance 
instruction  in  the  public  schools.  (G.  S.,  1889, 
Supp.,  c.  36,  ij  179;  passed  in  1887,  c.  133. ) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Consitution  may  be 
proposed  by  a  majority  of  the  two  Plouses,  at 
one  session,  such  amendment  to  be  published 
with  the  laws  of  the  session  and  submitted 
to  the  people,  a  majority  of  the  popular  vote 
being  requisite  to  its  adoption. 

Mississippi. 

Earliest  Provisions. — Every  person  recom- 
mended by  six  reputable  freeholders  to  the 
County  Court  was  entitled  to  receive  license 
from  said  Court  to  keep  a  tavern,  on  payment 
of  $20  and  entering  into  bond  in  $300  to  keep 
tavern  accommodations  and  observe  the  law. 
He  was  not  to  suffer  gaming  or  cock-fighting 
on  his  premises  upon  pain  of  $8.  Retailing 
liquor  without  license  was  fined  $10;  for  the 
second  offense,  $20.  Merchants  might  sell  above 
a  quart,  not  to  be  drunk  on  the  premises.  Sell- 
ing or  giving  liquor  to  a  servant  or  slave  with- 
out consent  of  his  master  was  fined  the  same; 
to  United  States  troops  without  permission  of 
officer,  $20  ;  to  Indians,  $10  ;  selling  adulterated 
liquor,  $20.  Drunkenness  on  the  part  of  the 
licensee  forfeited  his  license.  (Act  1803,  re 
vised  1807  ;  Toul.  Dig.,  p.  357.) 

By  the  Laws  of  1812,  p.  5,  the  Clerks  of  the 
County  Courts  were  to  make  lists  of  licenses 
granted  for  the  Grand  Jury.  And  the  fine  for 
selling  without  license  was  made  not  exceeding 
$100.  By  the  Laws  of  1814,  p.  9,  licenses  out- 
side of  towns  and  villages  were  reduced  to  $10 
and  it  was  made  the  duty  of  the  Assessors,  Tax 
Collectors  and  Sheriffs  to  give  information  to 
the  Attorney-General  of  unlicensed  sellers. 

These  acts  were  consolidated  in  1822  (Laws, 
p.  168),  and  the  Courts  were  enjoined  against 
licensing  taverns  not  necessary  for  travellers,  and 
were  required  to  prevent  them  from  being  kept 
ff)r  the  encouragement  of  gaming,  tippling, 
drunkenness  and  other  vices.  License  was  put 
at  $15  to  $40.  Selling  witliout  license  was  fined 
$20  to  $100.  It  was  made  the  duty  of  the  Court 
to  revoke  licenses  under  which  the  law  had 
been  violated.  Credit  for  liquor  above  $5  was 
not  collectible. 

A  law  of  1831  provided  that  licensed  dealers 
in  liquors  were  not  to  sell  to  slaves  except  by 
the  consent,  verbal  or  written,  of  the  masters. 
(Laws,  18"?4-31,  p.  349.)  This  was  repealed  in 
1833.     (Id.,  p.  439.) 

The  State  Prohibitory  Law  of  1839,  Against 
Sales  in  Quantities  Less  than  One  Gallon. — In 
1839,  the  liquor  laws  were  all  repealed,  and 
liquor  was  forbidden  to  be  sold  in  less  quan- 
tities than  one  gallon  (not  to  be  drunk  on  the 


premises).  Tavern-keepers  were  not  to  offer 
their  guests  liquor  in  any  less  quantities,  and 
candidates  for  office  were  not  to  be.'-tow  liquor 
on  any  one.  The  jienalty  was  fixed  at  $250 
and  imprisonment  from  one  week  to  one  month, 
and  for  second  offenses  $500  and  one  to  three 
months  in  prison.  Liquor  was  not  to  be  sold 
in  any  quantities  to  Indians  or  negroes.  Tavern- 
keepers  were  put  under  bond  in  $1,000  not  to 
violate  the  act.     (Laws.  1839,  c   20.) 

A  License  Fee  of  $200  to  $1,000,  tcith  Severe 
Penalties  (1842).— By  the  act  of  1842,  c.  10,  the 
corpoiate  authorities  of  places  having  2,000 
inhabitants  or  over  might  grant  license  to  retail 
liquor  for  $200  to  iJl,000  license  fee.  Outside 
of  such  towns  the  license  fee  was  $50  to  $1,000. 
The  penalty  for  selling  without  license  was  $500 
and  30  days'  imprisonment.  The  recommenda- 
tion of  five  freeholders  of  the  neighborhood  was 
required  before  license  could  be  granted. 

The  Era  of  Local  Jjcqislation. — In  1850  began 
the  long  series  of  local  acts  regulating  the  sale 
of  liquor,  being  in  character  all  the  way  from 
reducing  the  license  fee  for  a  locality  to  abso- 
lute Prohibition,  the  great  majority  l)eing  Pro- 
hibitory. The  law  of"l854  (erroneously  alluded 
to  in  .some  lists  of  early  Prohibitory  laws  as  a 
Prohibitory  law)  amounted  to  Local  Option. 
(Laws,  1854,  c.  42.) 

War  I^efiislation. — Distillation  of  liquor  from 
grain,  sugar  or  molasses  was  prohibited  under 
penalty  of  not  exceeding  $5,000  and  imprison- 
ment not  exceeding  six  months.  (Laws,  1862, 
c.  24.)  In  1864  distillation  from  grain,  sugar 
or  molasses,  fruits  and  vegetables  of  any  kind, 
was  prohibited.  Distilleries  were  declared 
nuisances  abatable  by  any  white  person  or 
officers  of  the  State  and  Confederate  armies. 
All  license  to  sell  liquor  was  suspended  during 
the  war,  and  such  places  were  declared  nuis- 
ances, but  County  Agents  were  to  be  appointed 
to  sell  liquor  for  meuicinal  puipo.'-.es  only,  and 
two  distilleries  were  taken  by  the  State  to  be 
run  to  supply  such  Agents.  All  money  from 
the  sale  of  liquor  belonged  to  the  State.  (Laws, 
1864,  c.  34.)  All  ofliicers  and  employees  of  the 
State  distilleries  were  required  to  give  bonds 
by  Laws,  1865,  c.  24. 

Since  the  War. — The  Laws  of  1874,  c.  24, 
provided  that  no  licenses  were  to  be  aranted 
without  petition  of  a  majority  of  the  male 
citizens  over  21  years  old,  and  of  the  female 
citizens  over  18,  resident  in  the  Supervisor's 
district  or  town  or  city ;  and  if  a  counter  peti- 
tion of  such  majority  was  made  against  the 
license,  it  should  not  be  granted  for  two  years. 
(Laws,  1874,  c.  24. )  If  a  majority  of  the  voters 
of  a  Supervisor's  district  or  town  or  city  peti- 
tioned against  the  granting  of  license  therein, 
none  s!i<ould  be  so  granted  for  three  months. 
(Laws,  1874,  c.  44.)  These  acts  were  repealed 
in  1876.     (Laws,  c.  81  and  c.  40,  respectively.) 

In  1875  the  fees  for  license  were  placed  at 
$200,  $400,  $700  and  $1,000,  with  reference  to 
advantage  of  situation.    ( Laws,  1875,  c.  28. ) 

The  Law  as  It  Existed  in  1889. — It  shall  not 
be  lawful  for  any  person  to  sell  vinous  or  spirit- 
uous liquor  in  a  less  quantity  than  one  gallon 
without  license,  although  a  retail  license  per- 
mits selling  in  a  greater  quantity  than  one  gallon. 
(Code,  1880,  §  1097;  amended  by  Laws  of  1883, 


liegislation] 


319 


[Legislation. 


c.  6.)  No  person  can  sell  in  quantities  of  one 
gallon  or  more  without  paying  the  tax  and  get- 
ting the  license  required  by  the  revenue  law. 
But  any  person  may  sell  wiue  made  of  grapes 
grown  by  himself,  in  any  quantity  not  less  than 
one  pint,  without  license  or  tax. 

If  any  Supervisors'  district  or  incorporated 
town  shall  by  a  majority  of  voters  petition 
against  it,  license  to  retail  liquor  therein  shall 
not  be  granted  for  a  year.  (Code,  1880,  ;;  1098 ; 
amende  1  by  Laws  of  1882,  c.  6.) 

The  Board  of  Supervisors  may  grant  license 
to  retail  within  the  county,  but  not  within  any 
incorporated  town  or  city,  for  from  *200  to 
*1  000,  to  go  to  the  School  Fund.  (Code  1880. 
^  1099.)  The  corporate  authorities  of  any  city 
or  town  may  so  grant  liccn.se,  except  that  in 
(owns  of  1.000  inhabitants  or  more  it  .shall  not 
be  for  less  than  $300.  (Id.,  §i^  1100,  HOI.)  No 
county,  city  or  town  tax  exceeding  100  per  cent, 
of  the  State  tax  shall  be  imposed  upon  the 
privilege  of  selling  liquors,  but  the  tax  herein 
provided  for  sliall  exempt  the  licensee  from  all 
other  taxes,  provided  that  the  stock  may  be 
taxed  as  other  property.     {Id.,  §  1102.) 

No  license  shall  be  Issued  without  a  petition 
therefor  signed  by  a  majority  of  the  legal  voters 
in  the  Supervisors'  district,  city  or  town.  After 
such  petition  is  filed,  the  matter  is  to  lie  over 
one  month  and  the  petition  with  its  signatures 
is  to  be  published  three  weeks.  A  petition  of 
a  majority  of  such  voters  against  the  license 
defeats  it  for  a  year.  (Id.,  §  1103  )  Before 
licenss  shall  be  issued  a  bond  must  be  given  in 
$2,000,  conditioned  that  the  licensee  will  keep 
a  quiet  house  and  obey  the  law.  On  recovery 
for  breach  of  such  bond  the  informer  shall  have 
half.     (Id.,  g  1104.) 

No  license  shall  be  granted  for  more  or  less 
than  one  year.  It  shall  not  be  transferable.  It 
shall  designate  the  particular  house  in  which 
the  liquors  may  be  sold,  and  sales  shall  be  juade 
in  no  other;  but  for  sufficient  reason  the  licens- 
ing authority  may  allow  a  change  of  such  place, 
and  when  the  licensee  dies  his  business  may  be 
continued  by  his  personal  representative  until 
his  license  expires.  (Id.,  ij  1105.)  The  Licens- 
ing Board  may  revoke  a  license  for  violation  of 
law  by  the  licensee,  or  on  account  of  his  unfit- 
ness, on  five  days'  notice  to  him,  (Id.,  i;  1106.) 
This  act  shall  extend  to  all  itinerant  vendors  of 
liquors  and  to  all  steamboats  and  water-craft, 
but  not  to  places  where  the  sale  of  liquor  is 
prohibited  by  law  or  regulated  by  special  enact- 
ment.    (Id.,  §1107.) 

Any  licensee  trusting  a  person  for  liquors 
retailed  shall  lose  the  debt.     (Id.,  §  1108.) 

Merchants  and  others  carrying  on  any  busi- 
ness who  sell  or  give  away  liquors  in  less  quan- 
tities than  one  gallon  shall  be  subject  to  the 
tax  on  retailers.     (Id.,  g  1109.) 

Every  magistrate  and  officer  is  enjoined  to 
cause  this  act  to  be  strictly  enforced.  (Id., 
t$1110.) 

In  case  of  the  breach  of  any  bond  it  is  the 
duty  of  the  District  Attorney  to  bring  suit  on 
it,  but  such  suit  may  be  brought  by  private 
counsel.     (Id.,  i^  1111.) 

Anyone  selling  liquor  without  license  or  con- 
trary to  law,  or  any  person  owning  or  having 
any  interest  in  liquor  sold  contrary  to  law,  shall 


be  fined  §25  1o  #500  or  imprisoned  from  a  week 
to  a  month,  or  both.  (Id.,  Jj  1112.)  This  does 
not  affect  selling  native  wines.  (Laws,  1886, 
c.  80.) 

No  one  licen.sed  may  keep  open  or  sell  on 
Sunday.     (Code,  1880,  tj  1113.) 

No  indictment  hereunder  shall  be  quashed  for 
want  of  form,  and  it  shall  not  be  necessary  to 
aver  the  kind  of  liquor  sold.     (Id.,  tj  1114.) 

If  any  person  sell  liquor  to  anv  minor  he  shall 
be  fined  flOO  to  $1,000.  (Id.,  §"1115  ;  amended 
by  Laws  of  1882.  c.  6,  s  3.) 

If  any  cancHdate  shall  treat  or  bestow  any 
liquor  on  a  voter  to  influence  his  vote  he  shall 
be  fine  I  |25.     (Code,  1880,  i^  1116.) 

The  owner  or  controller  of  any  house  permit- 
ting anyone  to  .sell  liquor  unlawfully  therein 
may  be  fined  not  over  .$500  and  imprisoned  not 
more  than  a  month.     (Id  ,  ^  1117.) 

No  liquor  shall  be  sold  within  any  prison  or 
broughi  into  it  for  any  prisoner,  except  upon  a 
permit  signed  by  the  physician  of  the  prison 
for  the  health  of  the  prisoner.  Persons  selling 
and  prison  officers  suffering  such  sales  contrary 
to  law  shall  be  imprisoned  not  over  a  year  or 
fined  not  exceeding  $300,  or  both,  and  the  officer 
forfeits  his  office.  (Id.,  ij  1118. ) 
_  If  any  person  adulterate  liquor  or  sell  such 
liquor  lie  shall  be  imprisoned  from  one  to  five 
yeans.     (Id.,  s  1119.) 

The  County  Tax  Collectors  and  Mayors  of 
cities  and  towns  shall  on  the  first  day  of  the 
Circuit  Court  furnish  the  Grand  Jury  or  District 
Attorney  with  a  list  of  licen.secs  for  the  past 
year,  which  shall  be  evidence  of  the  granting  or 
not  of  license.     ( Id  ,  «$  1120.) 

If  any  seller  of  liquor  permits  card-playing  or 
other  games  of  chance  upon  his  premises  he 
shall  be  fined  .$500  or  imprisoned  not  more  than 
six  months,  or  both.     (Id  ,  §  1121.) 

Licensed  dealers,  or  any  person  who  shall 
sell  liquor  on  election  day,  shall  be  fined  not  ex- 
ceeding $500  or  immisuned  not  exceeding  six 
months  or  both.     (Id  ,  ^  1122  ) 

By  the  revenue  chapter  of  the  Code  and  the 
revenue  laws  of  each  session  of  the  Legislature, 
privilege  tax  is  laid  on  liquor-.selling.  which  is 
usually  $200  or  thereabouts:  this  seems  hard  to 
account  for,  considering  the  above  declaration 
in  the  Code  that  such  licenses  are  not  otherwise 
taxable  than  as  above. 

Dealers  in  liquor  in  quantities  of  one  to  five 
gallons  must  comply  with  JJiJ  1103  and  1104  of 
the  Code.     (Laws,  1884,  c.  181.) 

Appeals  from  the  granting  or  refusal  of 
licenses  by  the  Licensing  Boards  are  provided 
for  by  c.  16,  Laws  of  1888. 

Procuring  liquor  for  minors  is  punished  by 
fine  of  $50  to  $500  and  imprisonment  10  days  to 
six  months.    (Laws,  1888,  c.  56) 

Upon  petition  of  one-tenth  of  the  voters  in 
any  county,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Board  of 
Supervisors  to  submit  the  question  of  Prohibi- 
tion to  the  voters  at  a  special  election  held  not 
within  two  months  of  a  general  election.  An- 
other such  election  shall  not  be  held  for  two 
years.  Selling  after  Prohibition  passes  shall  be 
punished  by  fine  not  exceeding  $50  and  im- 
prisonment not  over  60  days  for  first  offense, 
$100  and  60  days  for  second,  and  $100  and  im- 
prisonment four  months  for  third.   Such  selling 


LiCgislation.] 


320 


[Legislation. 


is  also  a  nuisance  and  may  be  abati  d  in  Chan- 
cery Court.  All  private  acts  or  acts  of  local  ap- 
plication shall  be  in  force  until  the  election  herein 
])rovided  for.  and  in  no  case  shall  this  act  be 
construed  to  repeal  any  laws  j^rohibiting  liquors 
at  Oxford,  Starkvillc,  Clinton  or  at  any  other 
place  where  there  may  be  any  institution  of 
learning  chartered  by  legislative  enactment 
where  such  sale  is  now  prohibited.  (Laws,  1886, 
c.  14) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  vote  of  two- thirds  of  all  the  members 
of  the  two  Houses  at  one  session  ;  popular  vote 
to  be  taken  at  the  next  general  election  for 
Representatives ,  three  months'  notice  to  be 
given.     A  majority  vote  carries  it. 

Missouri. 

Earliest  Legisladrm.  —  SeWmg  liquor  to  In- 
dians except  by  permission  of  the  agents  of  the 
United  States  was  prohibited  upon  penalty  of 
^HO  to  ^-iSO  or  imprisonment  10  to  80  days,  or 
both.  (Dig.  Laws,  Mo.,  1825,  p.  439  [passed 
1824].) 

A  general  license  law  providing  a  license  fee  of 
$5  to  $30  for  six  months,  with  a  penalty  of  $^100 
for  celling  without  licensL%  was  enacted  in  1825. 
(Id.,  p.  660.)  This  law  prohibited  selling  to 
slaves,  withovit  written  permit  from  the  owner, 
under  the  above  penalty,  with  forfeiture  of 
license.  The  older  act  of  1806  had  required  a 
tavern  license  with  a  fee  of  ,$10  lo  $^0  per  year, 
upon  penalty  of  $10  per  day  while  keeping  with- 
cut  licenye  ;  and  it  also  prohibited  sales  to  .slaves 
and  United  States  soldiers  without  license  ob- 
tained from  the  master  or  commanding  officer, 
respectively.    (Id  ,  p.  761.) 

In  1885  the  license  was  called  a  grocer's 
license,  and  the  fee  was  made  .$5  to  $100  for  six 
months.     (R.  S.,  p.  291.) 

The  law  was  slightly  enlarged  and  the  fee 
was  changed  to  $10  to  $50  for  six  months  by 
Laws  of  1840,  p.  82,  and  slaves  were  prohibited 
selling  on  pain  of  89  la.shes. 

Byan  act  of  1847,  p  59,  persons  could  not 
sell  liquors  by  virtue  of  a  tavern  licen,se.  This 
was  repealed  by  Laws  of  1849,  p.  56,  and  license 
charges  of  $20,  and  $4  p;  r  $1,000  upwards, 
were  assessed  on  property  invested  above  the 
value  of  $5,000.  County,  city  and  town 
authorities  were  authorized  to  levy  no  greater 
amounts  than  these  for  their  respective  purposes. 
(Id.,  pp.  56-7.1 

Local  Option  Laip  (f  1851. — In  1851  (Laws, 
p.  216),  whenever  a  majority  of  the  taxable  in- 
habitants of  any  city,  town  or  municipal  town- 
ship votetl  against  the  granting  of  any 
license  therein,  noi:e  sl;ould  be  grantid 
for  a  year.  This  virtual  Local  Option 
has  continued  until  now,  except  that  it  was 
changed  after  a  while  to  provide  that  such  a 
majority  .should  be  obtained  in  a  smaller  division 
on  every  petition  for  license.  From  this  time 
forward  local  acts  of  a  varied  nature,  prohibit- 
ing sales  in  v.arious  places,  were  passed ;  but 
not  so  extensively  as  in  States  farther  south. 

By  an  act  of  1872  (Laws.  p.  48),  a  special 
license  was  created,  called  the  wine  and  beer 
license,  which  cost  -*10  to  $25  per  year.  It  was 
granted  only  on  petition  of  a  majority  of  lax- 


paying  citizens,  as  other  licenses  were.     It  was 
repealed  by  Laws  of  1885,  p.  161. 

TIte  Law  as  Lt  Existed  in  1889. — A  dramshop- 
keeper  is  a  person  permitted  by  law,  being 
licensed  to  sell  intoxicating  liquors  in  quantities 
not  exceeding  10  gallons.  '  (R.  S.,  1879,  ^5  5435.) 
No  person  may  so  sell  without  such  license. 
(Id.,  i^  5436.)  Dramshop-keepers  shall  keep  but 
one  place.  The  licen,se  is  unassignable,  and 
sales  on  credit  are  void.     (Id..  ^  5487.) 

On  application  for  a  license,  the  County 
Court,  if  of  the  opinion  that  the  applicant  is  of 
good  character  and  the  petition  being  sutttcient, 
shall  grant  the  license.  (Id.,  5^  5438;  amended  by 
Laws  of  1883,  p.  87,  t^  1. )  Apphcants  shall  give 
a  statement  of  their  stock,  upon  which  the  same 
ad  Dalorcm  tax  paid  by  merchants  is  paid. 
(R.  S.,  1879,  t<  5439.)  Bond  in  $2,000  to  keep  an 
orderly  house  and  not  to  sell  to  minors  or  vio- 
late (his  law,  and  to  pay  fines,  etc  .  is  required. 
(Id.,  §  5440  ;  amended  by  Laws  of  1888,  p.  87, 
§  2.)  Upon  every  license  shall  be  levied,  for 
every  six  months,  $25  to  $200  for  State  purposes, 
and  $250  to  $400  for  county  purposes,  the 
amount  to  be  determined  by  the  Court  in  each 
case.  (Id.,  i5441  ;  amended  by  Laws  of  1887, 
pp.  178-9.) 

No  County  Court  may  grant  a  license  in  any 
place  of  2.r,00  inhabitants  or  more,  until  a  ma- 
jority of  the  tax-paying  citizens  of  the  block  or 
square  petition  therefor  ;  in  smaller  places,  un- 
til the  majority  of  .such  citizens  of  the  place  sign 
such  a  peliition.  (Id.,  J;  5442;  amended  by  Laws 
of  1883.  p.  87,  i?  4.) 

No  license  shall  be  delivered  until  the  appli- 
cant produces  the  receipt  of  the  Collector  show- 
ing all  taxes  paid.  (Id.,  ^  5445.)  The  Clerk  of 
the  Court  may  .«o  grant  such  licenses  in  vaca- 
tion of  the  Court.  (Id.,  ij  5446.)  Persons  vio- 
lating this  chapter  are  lined  $40  to  $2U0.  (Id., 
t;  5449.) 

The  Grand  Jury  shall  be  charged  with  this 
act ;  officers  shall  give  information  to  the  Grand 
Jury  and  County  Attorneys  shall  take  special 
care  to  prosecute  hereunder  and  shall  abo  prose- 
cute officers  failing  in  their  duty.  (Id.,  ^j;  5450-2  ) 

The  authorities  of  incorporated  towns  or 
cities  may  tax  dramshop  licenses.     (Id.,  5^  5453.) 

Selling  to  minors  without  permission  of 
parent  or  guardian  shall  forfeit  $50  to  such 
parents  or  guardians.  (Id.,  *:?  5454.)  Sales  to 
minors  and  habitual  drunkards  by  clerks  or 
agents  shall  be  considered  acts  of  employers. 
(Id.,  fj  5455.) 

Dramshop-keepers  keeping  open  on  Sunday  or 
election  day,  or  selling  on  such  days,  are  fined 
$50  to  $200  and  forfeit  their  licenses  and  may 
not  again  be  licensed  for  two  years.  (Id., 
§  5156;  amended  by  Laws  cf  1883.  p.  88,  ^  5.) 

Whenever  it  is  shown  to  the  County  Court, 
iipon  the  application  of  any  person,  that  a  dram- 
shop keeper  has  not  at  all  times  kept  an  orderly 
house,  the  license  shall  be  revoked.  (Id.,t^  5457.) 
And  one  whose  license  has  been  revoked  or 
who  has  been  convicted  of  violating  the  law, 
shall  not  be  licensed  by  any  Court.  (Id., 
g  54.18  ) 

Liquor  may  be  sold  where  made,  but  not  in 
less  quantity  than  a  quart  and  not  to  be  drunk 
on  the  premises.  (Id.,  g  5459.)  Wine-growers 
may  dispose  of  their  wine  in  any  quantity  except 


Legislation.] 


321 


[Legislation. 


to  minors  or  to  habitual  drunkards,  witliout 
consent  or  after  notice,  respectively.  (Id.,  5it30  ) 
Dramshop-keepers  selling  to  habitual  drunkards 
after  notice  not  to  are  liable  in  $.50  to  $500  to  the 
relative  giving  the  notice.  (Id.,  §5463;  amended 
by  Laws  of  1883,  p.  88,  ??  6.) 

A  Local  Option  election  shall  be  called  in  any 
county  outsiiie  of  places  having  2, .500  inhabitants 
or  more,  and  in  such  places  upon  petition  of 
one-tenth  of  the  voters  therein,  such  petition  to 
be  made  to  the  County  Court  or  the  legislative 
assembly  of  the  place,  respectively.  (Laws,  1887, 
p.  180,  §i5  1,  2. )  The  question  shall  not  be  re- 
submitted for  four  years.  (Id  ,  §  7.)  Violating 
the  act  is  punislicd  by  fine  of  $300  to  $1,000  or 
imprisonment  six  to  12  months,  or  both.    (Id., 

Using  any  substitute  for  hops  in  the  manu- 
facture of  beer  or  ale  is  punished  by  fine  of 
^500  to  §■'5,000  or  imprisonment  one  to  six 
months,  or  both.     (Laws,  1887,  p.  170.) 

Phvsicians  giving  prescriptions  for  liquor,  ex- 
cept for  medicinal  purposes,  shall  be  lined  $40 
to  $200.     (Laws,  1887,  p.  214.) 

No  merchant's  license  authorizes  selling  less 
than  five  gallons  of  liquor  nor  does  it  authorize 
sales  <  f  liquor  to  be  drunk  on  the  premises,  upon 
penalty  of  $100  to  $.500  or  imprisonment  three  to 
six  months,  or  both.     (Laws,  1887,  p.  217.) 

Music,  billiards,  ten-pins,  sparring,  cock- 
fights, cards  and  all  gaming  and  amusements 
ave  forbidden  in  dramshops,  under  penalty  of 
$10  to  $50  and  forfeiture  of  license  and  disqual- 
ification 10  years.     (Laws.  1889,  p.  104.) 

There  is  a  law  requiring  scientitic  temperance 
instruction  in  the  public  schools.  (R.  iS.,  1889, 
§  8023  ;  passed  in  1885,  Laws,  p.  243.) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  vote  of  a  majority  of  all  the  mem- 
bers of  the  two  Houses,  at  one  session  ;  publica- 
tion of  such  Amendment  to  be  made  in  the 
session  laws;  popular  vote  to  be  taken  at  the 
next  general  election  for  Representatives,  four 
weeks'  notice  to  be  given.   A  majority  carries  it. 

Montana. 

Early  Provisions. — At  the  first  session  of  the 
Legislature  selling  liquor  to  soldiers  and  Indians 
was  prohibited.  (Laws,  1861,  pp.  344.  347.)  Tlie 
next  session  provided  a  general  license  law,  in- 
cluding all  occupations,  requirmg  $30  per 
quarter  for  retailers  of  liquors  or  $10  per 
quarter  if  not  within  two  miles  of  any  town  or 
city.     (Laws,  1866,  c.  4,  §  7.) 

The  amount  of  license  was  gradually  in- 
creised  by  the  revenue  laws.  The  other  present 
regulations  and  prohibitions  were  added  by 
separate  laws,  and  the  present  High  License 
and  Local  Option  acts  were  passed  in  1S87. 

The  Law  as  It  Existed  in  1889.— All  persons 
who  deal  in  liquors  by  retail  shall  p:iy  as  fol- 
lows: In  cities,  towns,  villages  or  camps  which 
contain  a  population  of  3,500  or  more,  $500  per 
year;  in  those  containing  1,000  to  3,500,  $320; 
in  those  containing  300  to  1.000,  $240,  and  in 
those  containing  less  than  300  people,  $100.  (C. 
8.,  1887.  p   1020,  §1346.) 

Applications  to  sell  such  liquors  shall  be  made 
to  the  County  Clerk,  stating  the  place  of  busi- 
ness, and  shall  be  accompanied  by  a  petition 
therefor  signed  by  10  resident  freeholders  of  the 


town,  ward  or  vicinity;  and  such  Clerk  shall 
give  the  applicant  a  certificate  to  the  County 
Treasurer  showing  that  the  provisions  of  law 
have  been  complied  with.  (Id.,  §  1347.)  The 
County  Commissioners  may  revoke  any  such 
license  for  violation  of  law.     (Id.) 

Any  licensee  selling  to  any  minor,  Indian,  in- 
sane or  idiotic  person,  or  habitual  drunkard,  or 
keeping  a  disorderly  house,  shall  ])ay  $50  (half 
to  the  informer)  and  forfeit  his  license.  (Id.) 
Every  person  so  licensed  selling  adulteratetl 
liquor  shall  pay  $2.50.     (Id.,  §  1348.) 

Every  distiller,  manui'acturer  or  rectifier  of 
spirituous  liquor  shall  pay  a  license  of  $600  per 
year.  (Id. )  Dealers  in  ciuantities  greater  than 
one  gallon  in  towns  of  over  3,500  inhabitants 
shall  pay  $200.  in  other  pla'^es  $125.  Such  per- 
sons shall  not  allow  liquor  to  be  drunk  on  their 
premises,  upon  penalty  of  550  (half  to  the  in- 
former) and  forft  iture  of  licenses.  (Id  )  Brewers 
sliall  j)aj  from  $5  to  $20  ]ier  month,  according 
to  volume  of  business.     (Id..  §  1349  ) 

Doing  business  without  license  is  fined  $10  to 
$100.     (Id,  p.  1027,  §  1366) 

Upon  application  by  petition  signed  by  one- 
third  of  the  voters  in  any  county,  the  County 
Commi.ssioncrs  shall  hold  an  election  to  deter- 
mine whether  intoxicating  liquors  shall  be  sold 
therein.  Such  election  shall  not  be  within  any 
month  of  a  general  election.  (Id  ,  p.  1036, 
§  1395.)  After  four  weeks'  notice  of  the  result 
of  the  election,  the  act  shall  take  effect  if  the 
vote  is  against  the  s:ile.  A  contest  of  the  elec- 
tion is  provided  for  on  petition  of  one-tenth  of 
the  voters  voting  at  the  election,  if  made  within 
20  days.  (Id.,  S  J398  )  No  such  election  shall 
be  held  oftener  than  once  in  two  years.  (Id.. 
§  1399  )  Nothing  in  this  act  shall  prevent  th« 
manufacture,  sale  and  us,;  of  domestic  wines  or 
cider,  or  wines  for  sacramental  uses,  provided 
such  wine  or  cider  is  not  sold  in  barrooms  at 
retail ;  nor  shall  it  preveiit  druggists  from  sell- 
ing pure  alcohol  for  medicinal,  art,  scientific  and 
mechanical  uses.  (Id.,  §  1402.)  Selling  con- 
trary to  this  a' t  is  puni.shed  by  fine  not  over 
$500  or  imprisonment  not  exceeding  .six  months, 
or  both.     (Id.,  §  1404  ) 

Every  person  who  shall  erect  or  keep  a  booth 
or  other  contrivance  to  sell  liquor  within  one 
mile  of  any  camp  or  field-meeting  during  the 
hoMing  thereof,  shall  be  fined  not  exceeding 
$500.    (C.  S.,  1887,  p.  541,  §152.) 

Selling  liquor  to  Indians  or  half-breeds  shall 
be  punished  by  fine  of  $100  to  $500  (half  to  the 
informer)  and  by  imprisonment  not  exceeding 
three  years.  OtUcers  may  seize  wagons,  horses 
and  otlier  property  used  to  transport  or  sell  such 
liquor  to  such  Indians  which  is  forfeited  upon 
conviction  (half  to  the  informer). 

Selling  liquor  to  .soldiers  of  the  United  States 
subjects  the  seller  to  imprisonment  not  to  ex- 
ceed one  year  and  a  fine  of  $500  (Id  ,  p  552. 
§  188),  and  any  soldier  putting  off  his  unirorm 
to  obtain  liquor  shall  be  arrested  and  held  till 
his  commanding  officer  shall  apply  for  his  re- 
lease. (Id.,  §  li~9.)  If  a  person  accused  of  sell- 
ing to  such  soldier  can  show  that  the  liquor 
was  obtained  deceitfully,  the  soldier  not  being 
in  uniform,  he  shall  not  be  liable  to  penally. 
(Id.,  §190.) 

Saloon-keepers  permitting  minors  to  resort  to 


Legislation.] 


323 


[Legislation. 


their  places  are  fined  $10  to  f  100  or  impr'soned 
one  to  80  days,  or  both.  (Id.,  p.  573,  fs  241.) 
Anyone  furuisiiiug  liquor  to  anyone  in  the 
habit  of  becoming  drunk  or  of  drinKing  to  ex- 
cess, after  notiflcation  of  such  liabit,  or  to  any 
minor  without  consent  of  his  parent  or  guardian, 
shall  be  liable  in  damages  lo  tiiose  injured  there- 
by, and  shall  be  fined  not  exceeding  *50,  or  im- 
prisoned not  exceeding  30  days,  or  both.  (Id., 
p.  577,  ^257.) 

Selling  on  election  days  is  fined  $10  to  $100  or 
punished  by  imprisonment  not  more  than  a 
month,  or  both.     (Id  ,  j:^  258.) 

It  is  unlawful  to  sell  or  give  away  liquor  in 
any  variety  theatre,  show  or  place  where  the- 
■  atrical  performances  are  given  (Id.,  p,  578.  g  259), 
or  in  any  place  where  public  dancing  is  engaged 
in  (Id.,  §  260',  or  in  any  room  or  place  where 
women  or  minors  are  allowed  to  assemble  for 
the  purpose  of  the  business  therein  carried  on 
(Id.,  J<  261 ),  upon  penalty  of  $100  to  $300  or  im- 
prisonment 'SO  days  to  three  months,  or  both. 
(Id  ,  §  262.)  Establishing  or  maintaining  a  sa- 
loon or  place  to  sell  liquor  within  two  miles  of 
any  railroad  in  process  of  construction  is  pun- 
ished by  fine  of  $20  to  $50  for  the  first  offense, 
and  $50  to  $100  and  imprisonment  10  to  60  days 
for  subsequent  ones;  but  this  does  not  apply  to 
saloons  in  any  incorporated  town,  village,  city  or 
.  town  site  where  there  is  a  United  States  post-of- 
fice.    (Id..  J5  265.) 

Employing  a  child  under  16  in  a  saloon  is 
fined  $50  to  $100.     (Id.,  p.  589.  t^  14.) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  two-thirds  of  all  the  members  of 
•  the  two  Houses,  at  one  .session ;  popular  vote  to  be 
taken  at  the  next  general  election  for  Represent- 
atives ;  three  months'  notice  to  be  given.  A 
majority  carries  it. 

Nebraska. 

Prohibitory  La^o  of  1855. — It  was  by  the  first 
Legislature  of  the  Territory  made  unlawful  for 
any  person  to  manufacture,  SlII,  give  away  or 
dispose  of  any  intoxicating  liquor  to  be  used  as 
a  beverage.  The  places  commonly  called  dram- 
shops were  prohibited  and  declared  public 
nuisances.  Keeping  a  place  where  other  per- 
sons resorted,  even  though  their  own  liquor 
was  purchased  elsewhere,  was,  if  the  liquor 
were  drunk  in  .such  place,  made  within  the  act. 
Violating  the  act  was  fined  $10  to  $100  or  pun- 
ished by  imprisonment  not  more  than  90  days, 
or  both,  and  second  offenses  by  $100  or  im- 
prisonment not  more  than  a  year.  (Laws,  1855, 
'p.  158.) 

Fraudulently  adulterating  liquor  was  pun- 
i,shed  by  imprisonment  not  more  than  a  year  or 
fine  not  exceeding  $300.  (Id.,  p.  248.)  Selling 
liquor  to  Indians  was  punished  by  fine  not  ex- 
ceeding $200  or  imiirisonment  not  more  than 
one  year.     (Id.,  p.  250.) 

Enactment  of  License  (1858). — License  was 
authorized  to  be  granted  by  the  County  Com- 
missioners upon  petition  of  10  freeholders  of 
the  township  (bond  in  ^500  to  $5,000)  and  pay- 
ment of  ^25  to  $500  license  fee,  at  the  discretion 
of  the  Commissi' ners.  Unlicensed  .sales  were 
punished  by  tine  of  $100  to  $1,000  or  imprison- 
ment not  exceeding  one  year,  or  both.     The 


usual  special  prohibitions  and  full  civil  damage 
clauses  were  included.     (Laws,  1858,  p.  256.) 

In  1861  the  license  fee  was  reduced  to  $15  to 
$200  and  the  penalty  for  unlawful  selling  to 
$25  to  $100  or  impri.'^onment  not  exceeding  one 
month.     (Laws,  1861,  p.  144.) 

Selling  to  Indians  Avas  fined  $25  to  $500,  with 
imprisonment  20  days.     (Laws,  1864,  p.  b8.) 

Provision  was  made  that  licenses  should  be 
under  consideration  for  more  than  two  weeki 
in  the  Licensing  Boards.     (Laws,  1875,  p.  24; 

In  1881  was  passed  the  law  now  in  force. 

Submission  of  Constitutional  Prohibition  and 
License  {1889:}— The  Laws  of  1889.  c.  110,  sub- 
mitte  1  s  'parately  these  proposed  Constitutional 
Amendments:  "The  manufacture,  sale  and 
keeping  for  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  as  a 
beverage  are  forever  jirohibitf-d  in  this  State, 
and  the  Legislature  shall  provide  by  law  for  the 
enforcement  of  this  provision,"  and  ''  The 
manufacture,  sale  and  keeping  for  sale  of  in- 
toxicating liquors  as  a  beverage  shall  be  licensed 
and  regulated  by  law."     Both  were  defeated. 

The  Law  as  Lt  Existed  in  1889.— The  County 
Board  of  each  county  may  grant  license  for  tiie 
sale  of  intoxicating  liquor,  if  deemed  expedient, 
upon  application  by  petition  of  80  of  the  resident 
freeholders  of  the  town  or  precinct  and  upon 
payment  of  $500;  but  such  Board  cannot  grant  a 
license  in  or  within  two  miles  of  any  city  or  in- 
corporated village.  (C  S.,  1887,  c.  50,  S  1)  No 
action  shall  be  had  \ipon  license  applications 
until  two  weeks'  notice  of  the  filing  there- 
of has  been  given  by  publication  or  posting. 
(Id.,  t^  2.)  If  there  be  any  objection  filed  to  the 
license,  the  Board  shall  appoint  a  day  for  hear- 
ing, and  if  the  applicant  has  been  guilty  of  any 
violation  of  the  law  within  a  year,  or  if  any 
former  license  has  l)een  revoked  for  mis- 
demeanor, then  the  license  shall  be  refused. 
(Id.,  i;  3.)  On  the  hearing  of  any  such  case, 
witnesses  may  be  compelled  to  attend,  and  their, 
testimony  shall  be  put  into  writing,  and  either 
party  may  appeal  to  the  District  Court  which 
.shall  try  the  appeal  on  the  testimony  so  written 
alone.  (Id.,  t^  4.)  License  shall  not  be  trans- 
ferable, and  may  be  revoked  by  the  authority 
issuing  the  same  upon  proof  of  a  violation  of 
the  law.  (Id.,  i^  5.)  Licensees  shall  give  bond  in 
$5,000  not  to  violate  the  law  and  to  pny  fines 
and  damages  adjudged  against  them.  (Id.,  t^  6.) 
No  person  can  be  surety  on  two  such  bonds. 
(Id..>^7.) 

Every  Iicen.see  who  sell?  liquor  to  a  minor, 
apprentice  or  servant  shall  be  fined  $25.  (Id., 
g  8  )  Every  such  person  misrepresenting  his 
age  to  evade  the  above  section  is  fined  not  ex- 
ceeding $20,  or  shall  be  imprisoned  30  days,  or 
both  (Id.,  §  9.)  Any  person  selling  to  any 
Indian,  insane  person,  idiol  or  habitual  drunk- 
ard shall  forfeit  $50.  (Id.,  i?  10  )  Selling  with- 
out license  is  punished  by  fine  of  $100  to  $500, 
or  by  imprisonment  not  exceeding  one  month, 
besides  the  amount  a.«sessed  on  account  of  lia- 
bility on  the  bond.  But  persons  may  sell  w  ine 
made  from  grapes  grown  by  them,  in  quantities 
not  less  than  one  gallon.  (Id.,  t^  11.)  The 
magistrate,  upon  complaint  under  the  last  sec- 
tiori,  shall  upon  examination  bind  the  party 
over  to  the  next  term  of  the  District  Court  if  he 
believes  him  guilty.    (Id.,  §  13.) 


Legislation.] 


323 


[Legislation. 


Every  licensee  disposincr  of  adulterated  liq- 
uors intentionally  shall  forfeit  $100.    (Id.,  ?5  13.) 

Selling  ou  Sundays  or  election  days  is  fined 
$100.     (Id,  ijl4.) 

All  damai^es  the  community  or  individuals 
may  sustain  in  consequence  of  the  traffic,  in- 
cluding tlie  support  of  paupers,  widows  and 
orphans,  shall  be  paid  by  the  licensid  persons 
responsiule.     (Id.,  jj."^  15.  19.) 

The  County  Board  may  grant  permits  to 
druggists  to  sell  liquors  for  medicinal,  mechan- 
ical and  chemical  purposes  without  license  fee. 
(Id.,  4^24.) 

The  corporate  authorities  of  all  cities  and  in- 
corporated villages  have  power  to  license,  regu- 
late and  prohibit  the  sale  of  liquor,  for  a  fee  of  not 
less  than  .f^oOO  in  places  up  to  10,000  inhabitants 
and  not  less  than  ^1,000  in  larger  places.  They 
may  grant  druggists'  permits  The  petition  for 
license  must  be  signed  by  30  or  a  majority  of 
the  resident  freeholders  of  the  ward  or  village. 
(Id.,  §  25.) 

Every  druggist  having  a  permit  must  keep  an 
itemized  register  of  his  sales  showing  date,  kind, 
quantity,  purpose  and  name  of  vendor,  open  to 
the  insper-tion  of  the  public,  upon  penalty  of 
$30  to  *100  and  imprisonment  10  to  30  days. 
(Id.,  >^  26.)  Anyone  making  a  false  statement 
to  procure  liquor  of  any  person  authorized  to 
sell  the  same  shall  be  fined  .?10;  on  second 
oifense,  |20,  with  imprisonment  10  to  30  days. 
(Id.,  ^27.) 

Any  person  found  in  a  state  of  intoxication  is 
guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  shall  be  fined  $10 
or  imprisoned  not  more  tlian  30  days,  but  upon 
disclo.sing  when  and  where  he  obtained  the 
liquor  the  penalty  may  be  remitted.    (Id  ,  t^  28.) 

Saloons  shall  be  kep'  unobstructed  by 
screens,  blinds,  paint,  etc.,  upon  penalty  of  S25 
or  imprisonment  10  days,  or  both,  with  for- 
feiture of  license.  (Id.,  ^5  29.)  Treating  in 
saloons  is  prohibited  under  penalty  of  $10  or 
imprisonment  10  days,  with  $15  for  attorney 
fee^.    (Id.,  §^31-2.) 

No  person  shall  sell  liquor  within  three  miles 
of  any  assemblage  of  people  for  religious  wor- 
ship, except  at  regular  places  of  business,  upon 
penalty  of  $20  to  $100.    (id.,  ^s  33,  35.) 

In  cities  of  th?  first  class  there  shall  be  an  Ex- 
cise Board  consisting  of  the  Mayor  and  two 
members  elected  by  the  city  at  large.  (Laws, 
1889,  c.  14,  fj  13.)  Such  cities  by  ordinance  may 
restrain,  prohibit  and  suppress  unlicensed  tip- 
pling-shops.  (Id.,  J^  C7,  ^[  37.)  The  Excise 
Board  has  exclusive  control  of  the  licensing  and 
regulation  of  the  sale  of  liquor,  and  .shall  meet 
once  a  month.  It  may  license,  regulate  or  pro- 
hibit the  sale,  and  determine  the  license  fee.  not 
to  be  less  than  the  general  law  impo.ses.  Special 
permits  to  sell  liqupr  for  medical  and  mechanical 
purposes  may  ba  granted  to  druggists,  to  be  re- 
voked at  pleasure.  And  licenses  may  be  revoked 
by  such  Board  for  violations  of  law  or  ordi- 
nance. Such  Board  may  make  all  needful  rules 
and  regulations  as  ordinances,  not  inconsistent 
with  the  general  law,  and  may  compel  the  at- 
tendance of  witnesses.  The  penalty  for  selling 
without  license  is  $200.  (Id.,  ^  91  )  In  such 
cities  of  the  first  class  as  have  less  than  25  000 
inhabitants,  the  Mayor  and  Council  may 
by    ordinance    license,    restrain,    regulate    or 


prohibit  the  sale  of  liquor,  grant  permits  to 
druggists  and  revoke  licenses  and  permits.  Sell- 
ing witliout  lic?nse  therein  is  fined  $100.  (Laws, 
1»89,  c.  15.  t^  92  ) 

It  is  unlawful  to  keep  liquor  for  the  purpose 
of  sale  without  license,  and  those  found  in 
possession  of  such  liquor,  with  the  intention  of 
disposing  of  the  same  unlawfully,  sliall  be  pun- 
ished asm  s  11.  This  does  not  appl}^  to  phy- 
sicians and  druggists  holding  permits,  or  per- 
sons having  liquors  for  home  consumption. 

If  any  reputable  freeholder  of  any  county 
makes  complaint  under  oath  before  a  magistrate 
that  he  believes  liquor  (describing  it  as  nearly  as 
may  be)  is  in  any  described  place,  owned  or 
kept  by  a  named  or  described  person,  intended 
to  be  sold  unlawfully,  said  magistrate  shall 
issue  his  warrant  to  search  the  premises,  seize 
the  liquor,  arrest  the  person  and  bring  him 
before  the  magistrate ;  and  possession  is  pre- 
sumptive evidence  of  a  violation  of  law,  unless 
upon  examination  the  defendant  satisfactorily 
accounts  for  the  same.  Liquor  seized  shall  not 
be  discharged  by  reason  of  any  insufiiciency  of 
the  complaint  or  warrant,  but  the  claimant  is 
entitled  to  an  early  hearing  upon  the  merits  of 
the  case.  If  the  place  to  be  seanthed  is  a  dwell- 
ing the  complaint  must  allege  an  unlawful  sale 
there  within  30  days.  (Law.s,  1889,  c.  33.  t^  1.  to 
be  C.  L.,  c.  50,  ij  20.)  If  upon  examination  the 
accused  is  found  guilty  he  shall  be  held  for  trial 
to  the  next  District  Court,  and  the  liquor  shall 
be  destroyed,  but  defendant  may  appeal  to  the 
District  Court,  when  the  liquor  shall  abide  the 
result.  (Id  ,  S  2,  to  be  Id  ,  §  21.)  If  the  defend- 
ant is  acquitted  he  shall  be  discharged  and  the 
liquor  reuirned  to  him.  If  guilty  he  shall  pay 
$25  to  the  pro.secuting  attorney,  besides  tlie  fine 
and  costs.  If  the  defendant  is  discharged  the 
prosecuting  witness  shall  pay  the  costs,  unless 
there  was  probable  cause  for  the  complaint.  If 
no  one  is  found  in  possession  of  the  liquor,  no- 
tice shall  be  posted  upon  the  premises  fixing  a 
hearing  within  five  to  ten  day.s,  the  liquor  to 
abide  the  result  whether  any  one  claim  it  or  not. 
(Id.,  §3,  to  be  Id.,  $?  22.) 

Liquor  shall  not  be  taken  into  any  place  of 
registration  or  drank  therein,  upon  penalty  of 
f  100  to  $500.    (Laws,  1889.) 

There  is  a  law  requiring  scientific  temperance 
instruction  in  the  public  schools.  (C.  S.,  1889, 
p.  659,  s  5a;  passed  in  1885,  c.  83  ) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  vote  of  three  fifths  of  all  the  iiiem- 
l)ers  of  the  two  Houses,  at  one  session ;  popular 
vote  to  be  taken  at  the  next  general  election  for 
Representatives,  three  months'  notice  to  be 
given.  A  majority  of  all  voting  at  said  election 
carries  it. 

Nevada. 

By  the  Revenue  act  o^'  the  first  session  of  the 
Legislature,  in  1861,  the  tax  on  liquor  licenses 
was  put  substantially  as  it  has  remained  in  the 
Revenue  laws  since  passed.  The  laws  now  in 
force  have  been  enacted  at  different  times,  but 
the  policy  of  the  law  has  not  changed. 

The  Law  as  It  Existed  in  1889.— Wholesale 
licenses  obtained  of  the  Sheriff,  authorizing 
sales  of  liquors  in  quantities  of  a  quart  or  over, 
shall  cost  from  $2.50  to  $50  per  month,  in  10 


Legislation.] 


324 


[Legislation. 


classes,  according  to  volume  of  business  (G. 
S.,  1H85,  §  1139)  Retail  licenses  are  obtained 
from  the  Sheriff  also  and  cost  $10  per  month, 
but  persons  retailing  in  connection  with  the 
entertainment  of  travelers,  one  mile  or  more 
outside  the  limits  of  any  city  or  town,  pay 
quarterly  $15.  No  person  under  such  license 
can  sell  on  election  days.  (Id.,  i^  1140.)  Any 
I'.erson  selling  liquor  without  a  licence  shall  be 
fined  §23  to  ^300.     ( Id. ,  ^  4696. ) 

It  is  unlawful  to  retail  liquor  within  one-half 
n:ile  of  the  State  prison,  upon  penalty  of  $50  to 
^500  or  imprisonment  25  days  to  six  months. 
(ra.,  t5  4729.) 

Every  person  selling  liquor  to  minors  or 
mental  imbeciles  v/ithout  written  or  verbal 
order  from  parent  or  guardian  shall  be  fined 
$35  to  SlOO  or  imprisoned  not  exceeding  60 
davs.     (Id.,  45  4730.) 

Selling  to  Indians  is  subject  to  fine  of  $100  to 
$500  or  imprisonment  one  to  six  months:,  or 
both.  (Id.,  s  4732;  amended  by  Laws  of  1887, 
c.  80,  to  a  fine  not  exceeding  §1,000  or  imprison- 
ment not  exceeding  two  years,  or  both.) 

Treating  to  liquor  in  any  public  barroom  is 
punished  by  fine  of  $4  to  ^20  or  by  imprison- 
ment two  to  ten  days,  or  both.    (Id.,  45  4740. ) 

Licenses  shall  be  posted  conspicuou-.ly  in  the 
place  of  the  business,  or  $10  to  $100  be  for- 
feited.   (Id..  §4833.) 

Anyone  knowingly  selling  any  adulterated 
liquor  shall  be  fined  not  more  than  .$500  or  im- 
prisoned not  more  than  six  months.  (Id., 
J:  4677.) 

None  (hotel-keepers  excepted)  may  keep  open 
a  place  for  selling  liquor  between  13  p.  m.  and 
6  A.  M.,  upon  penalty  of  $200  to  $500  or  im- 
prisonment 30  days  to  six  months,  or  both. 
^Laws,  1889,  c.  '53.) 

There  is  a  law  requiring  scientific  temperance 
instruction  in  the  public  schools.  (Laws,  1885, 
p.  115.) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  majority  vote  of  the  two  Houses, 
to  be  concurred  in  by  majority  of  each  House 
in  the  next  Legislature;  a  majority  of  the  pop- 
ular vote  carries  it. 

Keio  Hampshire. 

Colonial  Provisions. — Permitting  inhabitants 
of  the  town  to  remain  in  public  houses  drinking 
Saturday  night  or  Sunday  was  in  1700  fined  5s, 
both  for  the  drinker  and  the  keeper  of  the 
lious3.  (Laws,  1696-172.5,  p.  7.)  In  1701  drunk- 
enness was  fined  5«.     (Id  ,  p.  14.) 

Taverners  were  not  to  allow  apprentices,  ser- 
vants or  negroes  to  sit  drinking  in  their  houses, 
nor  townsmen  after  10  o'clock,  upon  penalty  of 
10s.  nor  to  sufi'er  excessive  drinking,  upon 
penalty  cf  5s.  Tything  meuAvere  to  be  elected 
in  each  town  to  inspect  licensed  houses,  and 
t»ueh  houses  were  to  be  limited  to  .six  in  Ports- 
mouth and  smaller  numbers  in  other  places. 
(Id.,  p.  57  [1715].) 

Reputed  drunkards  were  to  be  posted  in 
taverns,  and  sales  were  not  to  be  made  to  them, 
upon  penalty  of  30s  (half  to  the  informer). 
(Id.,  p  142  I  1719].)  Selling  without  license  was 
was  fined  £5  (one-third  to  the  informer). 

Early  State  Providons  — By  the  law  of  June 
14,  1791  (Laws,  N.  H.,  Portsmouth,  17S2j,  no 


person  could  exercise  the  business  of  taverner  or 
retailer  without  license  obtained  from  the 
Selectmen  of  the  town,  and  if  he  did  so  sell 
liquor  he  forfeited  40.s.  Taverners  were  not  to 
suffer  inhabitants  of  the  town  to  tipple  in  their 
places  after  9  o'clock  in  the  evening,  or  on  the 
Sabbath,  or  suffer  any  pen  on  to  drink  to 
drunkenness,  or  any  minor  or  .servant  to  sit 
drinking  without  consent  of  his  pai  ent  or  mas- 
ter, on  penalty  of  2'Js.  They  were  not  to  allow 
gaming  either.  Retailers  weie  not  allowed  to 
sell  liquor  to  be  drunk  on  the  premises,  on 
penalty  of  40s,  nor  \.^ere  they  to  sell  in  less 
quantities  than  one  pint.  Licen.se  was  again 
placed  at  3s,  and  taverners  were  not  entitled  to 
recover  more  than  20s  on  action  for  liquor  sold 
to  be  drunk  on  their  premises. 

Chapter  86  of  the  Laws  of  1820  provided  that 
the  license  should  designate  the  particular 
house  or  store  in  which  the  business  was  to  be 
conducted,  and  that  it  should  not  avail  in  any 
other  place.  The  Selectmen  were  to  post  in 
liquor-places  the  names  of  common  tipph  rs.  and 
forbid  sales  of  liquor  to  them,  on  penalty  of 
$10.  Breaches  of  the  law  in  general  were 
placed  at  >10  instead  of  40.s'. 

The  law  of  1837,  c.  65,  punished  selliu'j:  with- 
out license  by  fine  of  $20  to.s50,  and  placed  the 
license  fee  at  $2  to  $5  for  a  taverner.  with  20 
cents  for  recording.  Lieenses  to  sell  and  mix 
wine  ar.d  spirituous  liquors  were  allowed  to 
others  than  tavern-keepers  for  $20.  The 
Selectmen  who  granted  license  might  revoke 
the  same  if  licensee  kept  a  disorderly  house 
or  violated  the  law. 

The  licenses  to  others  than  tavern-keepers 
were  not  allowed  by  the  act  of  1829,  c.  27. 

The  penalty  for  selling  without  license  was 
changed  to  $25  to  $50  by  Laws  of  1838,  c.  369. 

By  c.  530,  Laws  of  1847,  the  question  whether 
it  was  expedient  for  the  Legislature  to  pass  a 
law  prohibiting  the  sale  of  liquors  except  for 
chemical,  medicinal  and  mechanical  purposes, 
was  to  be  voted  upon  at  the  next  annual  town 
meeting. 

By  c.  846,  Laws  of  1849,  the  Selectmen  of  the 
respective  towns  were  to  license  one  or  more 
suitable  persons  to  sell  liquor  for  medicinal, 
mechanical  and  chemical  purposes  and  for  no 
other  use  or  purpose.  Selling  without  !;uch 
license  was  punished  under  existing  laws. 

Prohibitory  Act  </  1855  — The  Prohibitory 
act  of  1855  (Laws.  c.  1658)  prohibited  the 
sale  only  (not  the  manufacture).  It  is  still 
in  force.  The  law  of  1858  (c  2. .80)  added  pro- 
visions for  appointing  a  State  Agent,  which 
remain  in  force.  By  the  act  of  1878  (c.  16)  lager 
beer  was  added  to  the  list  of  tho.se  liquors  pro- 
hibited, but  the  act  was  to  be  in  force  only  in 
towns  so  deciding  by  majority  vote  The  sub- 
mission clause  was  lepealed  by  c.  102,  Laws  of 
1881. 

The  Law  as  It  Existed  in  1889  — The  Governor 
shall  appoint  one  or  more  suitable  persons  to 
furnis-h  Agents  appointed  by  towns  with  un- 
adulterated spirituous  liquors.  (G.  L.,  1878, 
c.  109,  iJ  1.)  Such  person  must  give  bond  to  the 
State  in  $10,000.  (Id.,  4^2.)  Agents  of  towns 
must  buy  of  .such  Stale  Agent  and  no  other. 
(Id.,  4^  3)  Town  Agents  mu:.t  not  adulterate 
liquors  they  keep,  and  must  not  purchase  of 


Legislation.] 


[Legislation. 


any  one  but  the  State  Agent,  upon  penalty  of 

|50.  (Id.,  §  4.)  One  or  more  Agents,  not  ex- 
ceeding' three,  shall  be  appointed  by  the  Select- 
men of  each  town  (except  such  as  have  voted 
no  such  appointment  shall  be  made)  for  the 
sale  of  spirits,  who  may  be  removed  at  pleasure 
of  the  Selectmen.  No  inn-keeper  or  keeper  of 
a.  place  of  public  eotertainment,  and  no  person 
who  has  been  convic;ed  of  violating  this  chap- 
ter, shall  be  so  appointed.  (Id.,  S  6.)  Such 
Town  Agent  may  sell  spirituous  liquor  to  be 
used  in  the  arts  and  for  medicinal,  mechanical 
and  chemical  purposes  and  wine  for  the  sacra- 
ment only.      (Id.,  i?  7.; 

Persons  buying  liquor  who  make  false  state- 
ments regarding  the  use  for  which  such  liquor 
is  intended  shall  be  tined  $10,  for  the  second 
offense  $20.     (Id.,  §  8.) 

Agents  shall  receive  such  compensation  as 
the  Selectmen  prescribe,  not  to  be  dependent  on 
the  amount  of  sales.  (Id.,f5  9. )  Agents  shall 
keep,  and  when  required,  exhibit  to  the  Select- 
men or  any  Justice  of  the  Peacj  an  accurate 
account  of  all  purchases  and  sales,  showing  in 
the  latter  case  the  name  of  the  purchaser  and 
the  use  for  which  he  said  the  liquor  was  pin- 
chased.  (Id.,??  10.)  Such  Agent  shall  sell  at 
the  rate  of  profit  determined  by  the  Selectmen 
and  make  report  to  them  annually  of  his  pur- 
chases and  sales  and  amounts  remaimng  on 
hand.  He  shall  at  any  time  exhibit  to  the 
Selectmen  or  any  Justice  of  the  Peace  his  bills, 
receipts  and  papers  of  all  kinds  relating  to  his 
dealings.  (Id.,  J^  11.)  Each  Agent  shall  receive 
a  certificate  of  his  appointment,  which  shall  be 
recorded  with  the  Town  Clerk,  and  if  he  vio- 
late the  rules  prescribed  for  him  by  the  law  or 
Selectmen  he  shall  be  fined  $50,  and  for  any 
subsequent  offense  $50  and  imprisonment  not 
exceeding  90  days.     (Id.,  tj  12.) 

If  a  person  not  a  Town  Agent  sell  or  keep  for 
sale  any  spirituous  liquor  he  shall  be  fined  $50, 
and  for  a  subsequent  offense  §100  or  be  im- 
prisoned not  exceeding  90  days,  or  both.  (Id.. 
§  13.)  If  any  such  person  be  a  common  seller 
of  such  liquor  he  shall  be  fined  $100  and  be 
imprisoned  not  more  than  six  months.  (Id  , 
J5  14. )  If  any  such  person  sell  cider  in  less 
quantities  than  ten  gallons  (except  when  sold 
by  the  manufacturer  at  the  press,  or  in  an  un- 
fermented  state,  or  lager  bt-er,  beer  or  malt 
liquors  not  already  prohibited),  he  shall  be 
fined  $10,  and  for  subsequent  offenses  $50. 
(Id.,  t?  15.)  The  delivery  of  under  ten  gallons 
of  cider  shall  bo  deemed  prima  facie  evidence  of 
sale.    (Id..S  16.) 

If  any  person  solicit  orders  for  liquor  to  be 
delivered  at  anj'  place  outside  the  State  for 
transportation  within  the  State,  to  be  sold  in 
violation  of  the  law,  he  shall  be  fined  $50  and 
upon  any  subsequent  conviction  $100  or  im- 
prisoned not  more  than  90  days.  (Id..  §18.) 
If  such  person  go  from  place  to  place  so  solicit- 
ing orders  he  shall  be  fined  $100  or  imprisoned 
not  more  than  90  days.     (Id.,  t^  19.) 

A  Justice  or  Police  Court  has  jurisdiction  to 
sentence  after  final  judgment  if  the  defendant 
plead  guilty  or  waive  his  right  of  appeal ;  othtr- 
Avise  he  mav  bind  him  over  to  the  next  term  of 
the  Suprem'e  Court.  (Id.,  t^S  20-22.)  In  any 
complaint  it  shall  be  sufficient  to  allege  the  first 


offense  only,  and  any  process  under  this  chap- 
ter may  be  amended  on  motion,     ild.,  J^  23.) 

The  delivery  of  liquor  in  any  place  used  for 
traffic  or  place  of  public  resort  is  prima  facie 
evidence  of  sale.     (Id.,  t^  24.) 

Exposing  signs  or  bottles  with  liquor  labels, 
or  United  States  spjcial  tax-receipt  as  a  liquor- 
dealer,  in  any  place  of  business,  i'i  prima  facie 
evidence  of  violation  of  the  liquor  law.  (Id., 
j^  25.)  No  clerk  or  agent  of  an  accused  person 
shall  be  excused  from  testifying  on  the  ground 
that  he  might  criminate  himself,  but  las 
evidence  shall  not  be  used  against  him.     (Id., 


g28.) 


The  Selectmen  of  every  town  shall  prosecute 
at  the  expense  of  the  town  any  person  violating 
this  law,  and  on  neglecting  to  do  so  shall  be 
fined  not  more  than  .^200.  But  this  does  not 
prevent  any  person  from  making  complaint  and 
prosecuting  such  cases ;  and  in  any  case  the 
prosecutor,  whether  town,  city  or  individual,  is 
entitled  to  half  of  every  fine  collected.  (Id., 
§37.) 

If  the  husband,  wife,  parent,  child,  brother, 
sister  or  any  near  relative,  guardian  or  em- 
ployer of  any  person  who  has  the  habit  of 
drinking  to  excess  notifies  anyone  in  writing 
not  to  sell  to  such  person,  the  one  giving  the 
notice  may  recover  $50  to  !?5C0  in  damages 
from  the  person  notified,  if  he  so  sells.  (Id. , 
§28), 

Spirituous  liquor  kept  for  unlawful  sale  may 
be  seized  upon  warrant  issued  by  a  Justice  or 
Police  Court,  and  upon  due  proceedings  ad- 
judged forfeited.  If  the  liquor  is  adjudgel 
valuable  it  will  become  the  property  of  the 
county  and  may  be  sold  to  Town  Agents  to  sell. 
(Id.,  ^  ^9-) 

Nothing  herein  shall  prevent  the  sale  of 
domestic  wine  or  cider,  except  when  sold  to  be 
drunk  on  the  premises,  nor  shall  it  prohibit 
sales  by  importers  into  the  United  States  in  the 
original  packages.     ( Id. ,  §  30  ) 

If  any  person  be  drunk  in  any  public  place  or 
in  any  private  place  disturbing  his  family,  he 
shall  be  arrested  and  detained  until  sober  and 
then  fined  not  exceeding  $10  or  be  imprisoned 
until  he  discloses  the  name  of  the  one  who  sold 
him  the  liquor.  (Id  ,  §  31  )  Parties  selling  liq- 
our  are  responsible  for  injuries  resulting  there- 
from. (Id  ,  §  33  )  Persons  permitting  their 
premises  to  be  occupied  for  illegal  selling  shall 
be  fined  not  more  than  $200.     (Id.,  §  34.) 

It  is  the  duty  of  County  Solicitors  to  prosecute 
al.  offenses  against  this  act  without  delay  or 
indulgence  to  offenders.  (Id,  §  35.)  No  in- 
dictment shall  be  found  hereunder  unless  the 
offense  was  committed  within  one  year  there- 
before.    (Id.,  §36.) 

Liquor-sellers  illegally  selling  are  exempted 
from  jury  duty.  (Laws,  1887,  c.  44.)  Whoever 
knowingly  brings  into  or  transports  within 
the  State  any  intoxicating  liquor  to  be  illegally 
sold  or  kept  for  sale,  is  to  be  fined  $50  or  im- 
prisoned 31)  days,  or  bolh.     (Id  ,  c.  53  ) 

Any  building  .  .  .  resorted  to  for  ...  or 
used  for  the  illegal  sale  or  keeping  for  sale  of 
spirituous  or  malt  liquors,  wine  or  cider,  is  de- 
clared a  common  nuisance ;  and  the  Supreme 
Court  upon  information  filed  by  the  County 
Solicitor  or  petition  of  20  voters  of  the  town  or 


liGgislation.] 


32G 


Legislation. 


city  may  enjoin  or  abate  the  same   (Laws,  1887, 
c.  77.) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  only  through  revision  by  a  Constitu- 
tional Convention.  Unce  every  seven  years  the 
electors  shall  decide  by  majority  vote  whether 
such  a  Convention  shall  be  called.  Amendments 
proposed  by  such  a  Convention  must  be  ap- 
proved by  two-thirds  of  the  voters  voting. 

New  Jersey. 

Colonial  Provisions. — In  1668  persons  found 
drinking  after  y  o'clock  were  apprehended  and 
puniohed  at  discretion.  (Learning  &  Spic  r, 
p.  80. )  Drunkenness  was  lined  Is,  2s  and  2s  Gc?, 
for  the  first,  second  and  third  otfenses  respec- 
tively. (Id.,  p.  84.)  Every  town  was  ordered 
to  provide  an  ordinary,  and  no  person  was 
allowed  to  sell  liquor  but  the  ordinary-keeper 
under  penalty  of  10s.     (Id.,  p.  87.) 

In  1677  selling  to  Indians  was  fined  20s. 
(Id  ,  p.  12").)  The  charges  of  ordinary-keepers 
for  liquor  were  modified.    (Id.,  p  128  ) 

In  1678  sales  to  Indians  were  fined  £20, 
doubled  for  each  subsequent  oii'ense  (one-third 
to  the  informer),  with  20  stripes  if  the  offender 
could  not  pay.    (Id.,  p.  137.) 

A  law  of  1688  provided  that  ordinary-keepers 
were  to  be  licensed  by  two  Justices  and  give 
bond  in  £20  to  keep  orderly  houses.  Selling 
without  licen.se  was  fined  £10  (6ne-third  to  the 
informer),     ^d.,  p.  317.) 

Early  State  Proiisions.  -  In  1797  an  act  con- 
cerning inns  and  taverns  (R.  S  ,  1821 ',  provided 
for  licensing  liquor-selling  therein  upon  recom- 
mendation of  resident  freeholders.  Such 
licenses  to  be  only  as  many  as  were  n  eded  for 
accommodation  of  travelers.  The  C'ourt  of 
Quarter  Sessions  was  to  grant  such  licenses 
(upon  bond,  with  two  sureties  in  $50  each,  to 
obey  the  law ),  and  to  assess  thereon  such  sum 
as  they  thought  proper,  taking  into  considera- 
tion desirability  of  location.  Permitting  gam- 
ing and  disorderly  conduct  and  selling  to  drunk- 
ards, minors  and  slaves,  were  prohibited  upon 
pain  of  forfeiture  of  license.  The  act  of  1820 
l^Id.,  p.  744)  required  the  recommendation  of 
12  freeholders  to  procure  license,  and  fined  un- 
licensed selling  not  exceeding  ^20. 

Toicnship  Local  Option  (1847). — There  were 
no  important  additions  or  changes  made  to  this 
code,  except  the  Sunday  prohibition  of  1848 
( Laws,  D.  183)  and  the  election  day  prohibition 
of  18371; Laws,  p.  1013),  until  1888.  There  1  ad 
been,  however,  a  Local  Option  law  passed  in 
1847  (Laws,  p.  158)  giving  townships  the  cp- 
portunity  to  vote  for  license  or  no-hcense.  and 
to  vote  any  year  thereafter  on  the  subject  upon 
petition  of  one  fourth  of  the  legal  voters.  This 
was  repealed  the  next  year  (1848)  by  Laws, 
p.  150.  There  were  also  three  or  four  local 
Prohibitory  acts  during  this  period. 

The  law  of  1888,  c.  110,  provided  menus  for 
revoking  license  and  for  County  Option  on  the 
question  of  prohibiting  the  sale  of  liquor,  on 
petition  of  one-tenth  of  the  voters  of  the  county 
once  in  three  years,  and  increased  the  license 
fee  to  SilOO  in  townships,  and  -*250  in  citie-s. 

The  Law  as  It  Existed  in  1889.— The  last  act 
was  repealed  by  Laws  of  1889,  c.  53.  This 
provided  that  license  to  retail  should  not  be 


granted  by  any  Court  or  Excise  Board  except 
upon  payment  of  i^lOO  in  municipalities  having 
less  than  3,000  inhabitants,  $150  in  those  having 
from  3,000  to  10,000.  and  $150  in  larger  ones. 
Selling  without  license  is  punished  as  keeping  a 
disorderly  house.  ( Laws.  1889,  c  59,  §  1. )  Licenses 
to  sell  from  one  quart  to  five  gallons  must  be 
obtained  in  the  same  way  and  at  the  same  rates 
as  the  retail  license.  (Id.,  ijs  2,  3.)  Upon 
petition  of  one-fifth  of  the  voters  in  municipali- 
ties wherein  licenses  are  required  to  be  granted 
by  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  of  the  county 
(this  then  does  not  apply  to  any  of  the  larger 
cities),  the  question  of  a  named  min.mum 
license  fee,  not  less  than  required  by  law  to  be 
charged  in  such  municipality,  may  be  sub- 
mitted to  vote  of  the  people  therein.  Such 
petition  is  to  be  addressed  to  and  granted  by  the 
law  Judge  of  the  county,  the  election  to  be 
ordered  within  30  daj's,  but  not  to  be  held 
within  60  days  of  any  general  election,  not  less 
than  two  or  more  tlian  five  months  from  the 
making  of  the  order.  (Id.,  g  4.)  Three  weeks' 
notice  of  such  election,  next  p:e3eding  the  elec- 
tion, shall  be  published  in  all  the  newspapers  of 
the  municipality,  and  such  otl.er  notice  given  as 
the  Judge  shall  deem  necessary.  The  election 
shall  be  conducted  as  a  general  election  and  re- 
turn thereof  shall  be  made  within  five  days  to 
the  County  Clerk.  (Id.,  ^  5  )  Ballots  shall  be 
"  For  $ —  license  fee,"  and  "  Against  $ —  license 
fee,"  naming  the  amount  stated  in  the  petition 
for  the  election.  (Id.,  §  6  )  Thereafter  no 
license  shall  be  granted  for  that  place  for  less 
fee  than  that  fixed  at  such  election.  (Id.,  §  7.) 
Such  election  shall  not  be  oftener  than  once  in 
three  years  in  the  same  place.     (Id.,  i;  8.) 

Tlie  Board  of  Councilmen  of  any  incorporated 
town  in  the  Slate  shall  have  power  to  pass  ordi- 
nances to  license,  regulate  and  prohibit  the  sale 
of  liquor  ;  to  fix  the  terms  of  license  not  less  tBan 
now  required  by  law,  and  to  prescribe  penal- 
ties not  exceeding  $50  fine  or  10  days'  imprison- 
ment for  violating  any  ordinance  hereby  author- 
ized. (Laws,  1888,  c.  179,  i$  1  )  Such  ordi- 
nances shall  receive  four-fifths  vote  of  the  whole 
number  of  members  of  the  Council,  be  laid 
over  to  the  next  meeting  and  then  receive  such 
four-fifths,  and  each  ordinance  shall  be  pub- 
lished 10  days  in  a  newspaper  published  in  the 
countv,  and  shall  be  so  posted  in  20  places. 
(Id.,  i  2.) 

All  fees  for  licenses  granted  by  the  Court  of 
Common  Pleas  shall  be  received  by  the  County 
(;ierk  and  by  him  transmitted  within  80  days  to 
the  Treasuries  of  the  respective  municipalities 
in  which  license  is  exercised.  (Laws,  1889, 
c.  59,  t;  9. ) 

When  the  holder  of  a  license  shall  unlawfully 
sell  or  allow  to  be  sold  within  his  place  any 
liquor  on  Sunday,  or  to  any  minor  or  apprentice, 
or  to  any  person  known  in  the  neighborhood  to 
be  of  confirmed  intemperate  habits  or  who  is 
visibly  under  the  influence  of  liquor,  or  shall 
keep  a  disorderly  house,  or  harbor  drunken 
persons,  thieves,  prostitutes  or  other  disorderly 
persons,  or  suffer  gambling  or  unlawful  games 
of  chance  or  other  unlawful  acts  to  be  done 
upon  his  premi'^es,  or  violate  any  law  respecting 
intoxicating  liquors,  his  license  shall  become 
forfeited  and  void.     And  upon  complaint  of  any 


Leg^islation]. 


327 


[Legislation. 


three  voters  of  the  municipality,  upon  oath, 
presented  to  the  licensing  authority,  alleging 
such  forfeiture  and  specifying  the  acts  com- 
plained of,  such  body  shall  endorse  on  such 
complaint  an  order  that  the  accused  show  cause 
within  10  to  30  days  why  his  license  shouhi  not 
be  revoked.  A  copy  of  such  complaint  shall  he 
served  personally  or  by  leaving  the  same  at  the 
residence,  tavern  or  licensed  place  of  the  ac- 
cused, at  least  five  days  before  the  retvirn  of  the 
order.  All  such  complaints  shall  be  heard  in  a 
summary  way,  the  burden  of  proof  being  upon 
the  complainants,  and  either  party  may  be  rep- 
resented by  counsel.  If  upon  the  hearing  the 
defendant  is  found  guilty,  his  license  shall  be 
revoked  and  he  bf  disqualitied  to  hold  one  for 
a  year ;  if  not  guilty  the  order  to  show  cause 
shall  be  discharged.  The  Court  making  the 
order  to  show  cause  may  require  the  complain- 
ants to  file  a  stipulation  for  costs,  which  must 
be  paid  by  them  if  unsuccessful  The  r^-medy 
provided  by  this  section  is  in  addition  to  other 
penalties  provided  by  law.    (Id..  >?  10.) 

No  license  shall  be  granted  in  any  store  or  place 
where  any  grocery-store  or  other  mercantile 
business  is  carried  on,  except  in  a  restaurant  or 
in  a  place  selling  tobacco  and  cigars  by  retail. 
Any  such  person  so  selling  contrary  to  this 
section  is  guilty  of  keeping  a  disorderly  house. 
(Id,  4^  11.)  Druggists  may  retail  liquors  if  in 
good  faith  compounded  or  sold,  for  medicinal 
purpo-;es  only,  upon  physicians'  prescriptions 
(not  to  be  drunk  on  the  premi.ses^.  Offending 
herein  is  keeping  a  disorderly  house.  (Id., 
^13) 

Whenever  upon  any  trial  under  this  act  it  is 
alleged  that  any  spirituous,  vinous,  malt  or 
brewed  liquor  has  been  .sold,  it  is  not  necessary 
to  prove  the  particular  kind.     (Id.,  i?  13.) 

If  any  person  has  been  twice  found  guilty  of 
keajjing  a  disorderly  house,  he  shall  be  forever 
thereafter  disqualified  from  having  a  license. 
(Id.,i<14.) 

It  was  enacted  that  if  any  part  of  the  above 
act  should  be  declared  unconstitiUional,  the 
rest  should  stand  unaffected.  (L.iws,  1889, 
c.  227.) 

Excise  Boards  in  cities  are  authorized  to 
transfer  ©r  revoke  any  license  granted  by  them, 
at  their  discretion.  In  case  ot  transfer  on  the 
removal  of  the  licensee,  there  shall  be  paid  a  fee 
of  $5.  (Laws,  1889,  c.  226. )  To  prevent  viola- 
tion of  the  law,  such  Board  in  any  city  may 
appoint  a  License  Inspector  at  not  exceeding 
$1,000  per  year.     (Id..  S  2) 

Boarding-house  keepers  are  forbidden  to  sell 
liquor  to  be  drunk  on  the  premises  without  a 
liquor  license,  upon  penalty  of  fine  not  exceed- 
ing $1,000,  or  imprisonment  not  exceeding  two 
years,  or  both.     (Laws,  1888  c,  30.) 

Prosecutions  under  this  act  shall  be  before 
the  Recorder  or  other  police  magistrate  of  the 
town.     (Laws.  1888.  c.  179,  is  3.) 

No  intoxicating  liquor  shall  be  sold  or  given 
in  any  quantities  to  any  minor  under  18  years  of 
age  by  any  dealer  in  .such  liquor,  nor  shall  such 
minor  be  allowed  to  lounge  in  or  frequent  such 
premises.    (Laws.  1888  c.  196  ) 

Clerks  of  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  are  re- 
quired to  keep  records  in  the  minutes  of  the 
Court  of  licenses  granted  by  such  Courts,  and 


report  to  the  Court  the  names  of  those  who  re- 
fuse to  take  out  and  pay  for  their  licenses,  and 
thereupon  such  licenses  shall  be  revoked.  (Rev. 
Supp.,  1886.  p.  384,  i^  5.) 

Probably  the  only  part  of  the  former  law  not 
inconsistent  with  or  practically  duplicated  by 
the  iibove  summarized  laws  of  1888  and  lb89.  is 
J?  I  of  Rev.,  Ib07.  p.  486.  vesting  the  ordinary 
licensing  authority  in  the  Court  of  Common 
Pleas  (except,  of  course,  in  cities  and  places  that 
have  licensing  boards  of  their  own  by  charter  i. 
Whatever  provisions  of  the  old  law  may  upon 
comparison  be  found  to  be  operative,  are  not 
of  importance. 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  vote  of  a  majority  of  th^  two 
Houses;  to  be  concurred  in  by  a  majority  of 
each  House  in  the  next  Legislature;  a  majority 
vote  of  the  electors  carries  it. 

New  Mexico  Territory. 

The  Laic  as  It  Existed  in  1889. — License 
taxes,  half  of  which  shall  be  for  Territorial  and 
half  for  county  purposes,  shall  be  imposed  as 
follows  :  On  all  wholesale  dealers  in  intoxicat- 
ing liquors  in  quantities  of  more  than  five  gal- 
lons, $100  ;  on  retail  dealers,  $40  ;  brewers,  t60; 
distilltrs,  *200.     (C.  L.,  1884.  tj  2901.) 

No  officer  of  any  prison  shall  deliver  liquor 
to  any  prisoner  unless  upon  certificate  of  a' 
physician  (Id.,  45  471),  upon  penalty  of  $25  to 
$50,  and  disqualificaiiou  for  his  ofhce  on  second 
conviction.  (Id.,  5^472.)  If  any  other  per,son 
so  deliver  liquor  to  a  prisoner  he  shall  be  fined 
^5  to  $25.    (Id,  45  841.) 

If  any  person  sell  liquor  to  a  minor  without 
consent  of  the  parent  or  guardian,  or  to  an  in- 
toxicated person,  he  shall  be  fined  $5  to  $50. 
(Id.,  45  841.) 

Selling  liquor  without  license  is  fined  not  ex- 
ceeding $r)00.     (Id.,  S  842.) 

Adulterating  lic|Uor  or  selling  the  same  is 
fined  $5  to  $50.     (Id.,  §  843.) 

Any  saloon-keeper  trusting  any  minor  for 
drinks  does  so  at  his  own  risk  ;  he  has  no  action 
therefor.  ild.,f5  852.)  Any  saloon  keeper  per- 
mitting minors  to  play  billiards,  cards  or  any 
other  game  on  his  premises,  shall  be  fined  $10 
to  $100.  (Id..  45  853.)  Selling  or  giving  liquor 
to  minors  under  18  years  of  age.  by  one  not  the 
father  or  guardian,  is  punished  by  fine  of  $10  to 
$50,  or  imprisonment  not  exceedmg  60  days. 
(Id.,  §855.) 

Delivering  liquor  to  Indians  under  charge  of 
agents  is  punished  by  fine  of  $20  to  $100.  or  by 
imprisonment  not  exceeding  three  months. 
(Id..  §  856.) 

Selling  on  election  day  is  illegal  and  punished 
by  fine  of  $25  to  $100,  or  by  imprisonment  20  to 
80  days  (half  of  the  fine  to  the  informer).  (Id, 
gjj  857-8  ) 

Selling  to  any  Indians  excepting  Pueblo 
Indians  is  fined  $5  to  $200.     (Id.,  45  859.) 

Any  saloon-keeper  permitting  games,  cards 
or  dice  upon  .his  premises  shall  be  fined  $50  to 
$300.    (Id.,  §881.) 

Municipal  corporations  have  the  right  to 
license  regulate  or  prohibit  the  sale  of  liquor 
and  determine  the  amount  of  license,  and  to 
grant  permits  to  druggists  to  sell  for  medical 
and  similar  purposes,  and  to  punish  sales  to 


Xiegislation.] 


328 


[Legislation. 


minors,  insane,  idiotic  or  distracted  persons, 
habitual  drunkards  and  intoxicated  persons. 
(Id.,  i<  1022.) 

Every  husband,  wife,  child,  parent,  guardian, 
employer  or  other  peison,  injured  in  person, 
property  ttr  means  ot  support  bj'  any  intoxicated 
person  wlio  is  a  habitual  drunkard,  or  in  conse- 
quence of  such  intoxication,  shall  have  action 
against  the  sellers  of  the  licjuor  causing  the  in- 
toxication, if  such  plaintiff  has  before  given  the 
seller  notice  not  to  sell  to  such  habitual  drunk- 
ard.    (Laws,  1887,  c.  20.) 

New  York. 

Colonial  Provisions. — The  Duke  of  York's 
Book  of  Laws,  "digested  into  one  volume 
for  the  public  use  of  the  territories  in  America 
under  the  government  of  His  Royal  Highness, 
collected  out  of  the  several  laws  now  in  force 
in  His  Majesty's  American  colonies  and  planta- 
tions, published  March  1,  1664,  at  a  general 
meeting  at  Hempstead  upon  Long  Island,"  and 
there  on  tile,  was  introduced  into  Pennsylvania, 
Sept.  22,  1676.  It,  with  the  laws  from  1682  to 
1700,  is  published  in  one  volume  (Harrisburg, 
1879),  to  which  reference  is  made  below. 

Brewers  w^ere  required  to  be  skilled  in  the 
art.,  and  if  any  one  sold  unfit  or  unwholesome 
beer,  damage  might  be  recovered  of  him.  (Id., 
p.  13. )  No  person  sho\dd  at  any  time  under  any 
pretence  or  color  whatsoever  undertake  to  be  a 
common  victualler,  keeper  of  a  cookshop  or 
bouse  of  common  entertainment,  or  public 
seller  of  wine,  beer,  ale  or  strong  waters  by  re- 
tail, or  a  less  quantity  than  a  quarter  cask, 
without  certiticate  of  good  behavior  from  the 
constable  and  two  Overseers,  at  least,  of  the 
parish  wherein  he  dwelt,  and  license  first  ob- 
tained under  the  hand  of  two  Justices  of  the 
Peace,  in  the  sessions,  upon  pain  of  forfeiting 
£5  for  every  such  offense,  or  imprisonment  at 
the  discretion  of  the  Court. 

"Every  person  so  licensed  for  common  en- 
tertainment shall  have  some  ordinary  sign  ob- 
vious for  direction  of  strangers,  within  three 
months  after  the  license  granted,  under 
the  penalty  of  20.s.  Every  person  licensed 
to  keep  an  ordinary  shall  always  be  provided 
of  strong  and  wholesome  beer  of  four  bushels 
of  malt,  at  the  least,  to  a  hogshead,  which  he  shall 
not  sell  at  above  2d  the  quart  under  the  penalty 
of  20.S  for  the  first  offense,  40s  for  the  second 
and  loss  of  his  license.  It  is  permitted  to  sell 
beer  out-of-doors  at  a  penny  the  ale-quart  or  un- 
der. No  licensed  person  shall  suffer  any  to  drink 
excessively  or  at  unreasonable  hours,  after  9  of 
tlie  clock  at  night,  in  or  about  any  of  their 
houses  upon  penalty  of  2s  6d  for  every  offense 
if  complaint  and  proof  be  made  thereof.  If 
any  quarrel  or  disorder  doth  arise  from  intem- 
perate persons  within  their  house,  the  person 
8o  licensed,  for  not  immediately  signifying  the 
same  to  the  constable  or  one  Overseer  at  the 
least,  who  are  authorized  to  cause  the  peace  to 
be  kept,  shall  for  every  such  neglect  forfeit  10s; 
and  ev(;ry  person  found  drunk  in  or  about  any 
of  their  houses  shall  forfeit  2s  6fZ,  due  for 
being  the  author  or  accessory  of  the  breach  of 
the  peace  and  disorders,  or  for  tippling  at  un- 
seasonable hours  shall  forfeit  10s,  and  for 
■want  of  payment,  or  in  case  they  be  servants 


and  neglect  their  masters'  occasions,  they  shall 
be  sent  to  the  stocks  one  hour  at  the  least.  It 
shall  be  lawful,  notwithstanding,  for  all 
licensed  persons  to  entertain  land-travellers  or 
seafaring  men  in  the  night  season  when  they 
come  on  shore  or  from  their  journey,  for  their 
necessary  refreshment  or  toward  their  prepara- 
tion for  their  voyage  or  journey;  and  also  all 
strangers,  lodgers  or  other  persons  may  freely 
continue  in  such  houses,  when  their  lawful  oc- 
casions and  business  doth  require,  provided 
there  be  no  disorder  amongst  them.  Every 
person  so  licensed  for  the  entertainment  of 
strangers  with  their  horses,  shall  provide  one 
or  more  enclosure  for  summer,  hay  and  pro- 
vender for  winter,  with  convenient  stable  room 
and  attendance,  upon  penalty  of  2s  M  for 
every  day's  default,  and  double  damage  to  the 
party  thereby  wronged.  No  licensed  person 
shall  unreasonably  exact  upon  his  guest  for 
any  sort  of  entertainment,  and  no  man  shall  be 
compelled  to  pay  above  M  a  meal,  with  small 
beer,  only  unless  the  guest  shall  make  other 
agreement  with  the  person  so  licensed. 

"No  license  shall  be  granted  by  any  two 
Judges  in  sessions  for  above  the  term  of  one 
year;  but  every  person  so  licensed  before  the  ex- 
piration of  the  said  term  shall  and  are  hereby 
enjoined  to  repair  to  the  sessions  of  that  juris- 
diction for  renewing  their  several  licenses,  for 
which  they  shall  pay  to  the  C;ierk  of  the 
sessions  2s  6(Z,  or  else  they  shall  forfeit  £5  as 
imliceused  persons.  All  offenses  committed 
against  this  law  shall  be  determined  by  the  con- 
stable with  two  or  more  of  the  Overseers,  who 
are  empowered  to  collect  and  receive  the  several 
tines  or  distrain  in  case  of  non-payment,  ren- 
dering account  thereof  as  is  elsewhere  required." 
(Id.,  p.  30.) 

Selling  or  delivering  strong  liquor  to  Indians 
was  fined  40s  a  pint,  and  in  i)roportion  .for 
greater  or  lesser  quantities  (one-third  to  the  in- 
former); except  that  by  way  of  relief  or  charity 
to  any  Indian  in  case  of  sudden  sickness,  faint- 
ness  or  weariness,  the  quantity  of  two  drams 
might  be  sold  or  given,  provided  that  the  Gov- 
ernor might  license  persons  to  sell  such  liquor 
to  Indians  upon  security  for  their  good  behav- 
ior. (Id.,  p.  32.)  No  man  was  hindered  from 
buying  for  his  own  private  use  any  quantity  of 
liquors,  provided  he  did  not  sell  by  retail  with- 
out a  license.     (Id.,  p.  59.) 

In  1665  it  was  provided  that  inn-keepers 
should  not  be  obliged  to  put  any  particular 
quantity  of  malt  into  their  beer,  but  should  not 
sell  it  above  "M  a  quart,  or  any  liquor  above  12s 
a  gallon,  imder  penalty  of  20s  a  gallon  so  sold. 
If  any  complaint  were  made  to  the  officers  of  a 
town  against  selling  of  liquors  at  too  unreason- 
able and  extraordinary  rates,  by  ordinary-keep- 
ers or  others,  such  officers  had  power  to  give 
redress.     (Id.,  p.  64.) 

Selling  liquor  to  Indians,  as  well  as  trading 
with  them,  was  prohibited  throughout  the  gov- 
ernment (New  York),  and  the  law  was  likewise 
to  be  observed  which  prohibited  selling  strong 
liquors  to  the  Indians  in  Yorkshire  on  Long 
Island  and  dependencies.     (Id.,  p.  75.) 

Thus  far  the  Duke  of  York's  laws,  which  were 
in  force  from  1676  to  1682  as  well  in  Pennsyl- 
vania as  in  New  York. 


Legislation.] 


329 


[Legislation. 


In  1697  frequonting  tippling-houscs  was  in- 
cluded a.s  a  profanation  of  the  Sabbath  and  tiued 
6s.  (Baskett's  Laws,  p.  24.)  In  1709  drunken- 
ness was  lined  ds.  (Id.,  p.  89.)  In  the  same 
year  selling  liquors  to  Indians  in  Albany  County 
was  prohibited.     (Id.,  p.  110.) 

In  1710  an  excise  was  laid  on  liquor  retailed. 
(Id.,  p.  125.)  An  excise  was  laid  of  one-eighth 
of  an  ounce  of  silver  for  each  gallon  of  strong 
liquors,  and  one-third  of  an  ounce  on  every 
barrel  of  beer  and  cider  retailed  throughout  the 
colony.  The  Justices  or  Mayor  and  Aldermen 
might  agree  upon  a  sum  equal  to  the  excise  to 
be  "paid  by  the  year,  and  license  the  retailer,  or 
make  him  enter  into  recognizance  to  pay  the 
excise. 

In  1712  selling  without  license  was  fined  £5; 
to  slaves,  40.s-.     (Bradford's  Laws,  p.  89.) 

In  1720  imported  wine  paid  7^  oz.  of  silver 
per  pipe,  and  distilled  liquor  15  grains  per  gal- 
lon.    (Id.,  p.  186.) 

In  1745  tavern-keepers  were  not  to  keep  gam- 
ing-tables, under  penalty  of  £20,  nor  permit 
youths,  servants,  apprentices  or  journeymen  to 
game,  under  penalty  of  £3,  and  such  persons 
were  fined  £6  for  gaming.  (Van  Schaack's 
Laws,  vol.  1,  p.  253.)  Selling  liquor  to  servants 
and  apprentices  was  fined  40s,  and  so  was  taking 
from  them  clothes  or  pawns  in  payment.  And 
tavern-keepers  were  not  to  give  credit  for  over 
6s  for  liquors,  except  to  travellers.  (Id.,  286 
[1750].) 

In  1772  a  license,  to  be  granted  by  Justices  at 
a  cost  of  5s,  with  a  penalty  of  20s  for  selling 
without,  was  provided  for  Cumberland  County 
(2  Id.,  p.  645),  extended  to  Gloucester  County 
(p.  805  [1773]).  This  was  the  territory  now 
Vermont.  The  Excise  Commissioners  appointed 
in  the  act  were  to  impose  £1,000  iijion  the  deal- 
ers in  New  York  City,  and  the  other  Commis- 
sioners were  to  appoint  the  several  retailers  and 
determine  what  each  should  pay,  not  less  tlian 
20s  annually,  except  at  the  Court  House,  in  Suf- 
folk County,  and  not  including  those  retailing 
not  to  be  drank  on  the  premises.  (Id.,  p.  741 
[1773].)  Tavern  accommodations  were  pro- 
vided for  iu  nine  counties,  but  the  Justices 
might  make  exemptions  in  places  of  little  re- 
sort, and  forfeiture  of  license  was  provided  for 
selling  to  ajiprentices,  servants  or  slaves  without 
consent.     (Id.,  p.  798  [1773].) 

Early  SUUe  Provisions. — Supervisors  of  cities, 
towns  and  districts,  and  the  Mayor  of  Albany 
were  to  act  as  Commissioners  of  Excise,  and 
were  to  grant  licenses  to  retail  liquor  at  rates  of 
$2  to  $4  per  month,  to  be  assessed  as  excise 
duty,  with  a  charge  in  each  case  of  16s  as  a 
fee  "of  the  Commissioners.  The  applicant  was 
required  to  have  a  certificate  of  character  from 
the  two  nearest  Justices  of  the  Peace  and  six 
sulistantial  freeholders  of  the  place.  Selling 
without  license  forfeited  £10.  The  Commis- 
sioners were  to  determine  the  prices  of  liquors, 
victuals  and  lodging,  which  were  to  be  posted 
cou.spicuously.     (Laws,  1779,  c.  17.) 

Rei^olutioiuiry  Prohibition,  of  Distillation. — In 
the  same  year  (1779),  distillation  from  grain 
was  pr()hil)ited  upon  penalty  of  £200  fine. 
(Id.,  c.  18.) 

The  Laws  of  1780.  c.  40,  provided  that  li- 
censes were  to  be  granted  only  to  such  as  had 


sufficient  ability  to  keep  inns.  A  bond  in  £300 
conditioned  not  to  suffer  cock-fighting  or  gam- 
ing was  required.  Unlicensed  selling  was  fined 
£100  (half  to  the  informer).  A  fee  of  ,$11  for 
license  and  $5  for  each  recognizance  was  re- 
quired to  be  paid  the  Commissioners. 

The  act  of  1781,  c.  27,  made  the  license  fee 
£2  to  £8,  and  reduced  the  penalty  for  selling 
without  license  to  £10  (half  to  the  informer), 
and  the  bond  to  £50.  By  the  Laws  of  1784, 
c.  37,  a  Commissioner  of  Excise  for  New  York 
City  and  County  was  to  be  appointed  by  the 
Mayor  and  Common  Council,  who  was  to  grant 
licenses  at  from  £1  to  £20.' 

The  act  of  1788  (Laws,  c.  48)  codified  and 
extended  the  law,  repeating  former  laws.  Only 
taverns  necessary  to  the  public  were  to  be  li- 
censed, as  before,  half  the  penalties  going  to 
the  informer. 

Sale  of  liquor  on  Sunday  was  prohibited,  ex- 
cept to  lodgers  and  travellers.  (Laws,  1798, 
c.  82.) 

Merchants  licensed  were  not  to  allow  the 
liquor  sold  to  be  drunk  where  goods  were  sold, 
and  they  were  required  to  keep  inns  also. 
(Laws,  1799,  c.  78.) 

The  Laws  of  1801.  c.  164,  taxed  licenses  at 
|5  to  $30,  fined  illegal  sales  $25,  and  made  the 
bond  $125. 

In  1820  Overseers  of  the  Poor  were  given  the 
authoritj',  and  it  was  made  their  duty,"t()  prose- 
cute for  penalties  under  the  liquor  laws  for  the 
benefit  of  the  poor.     (Laws,  1820,  c.  37.) 

First  Local  Option  (1845). — The  electors  of 
each  town  or  city  were  to  determine  the  ques- 
tion of  license  or  no-license  by  ballot,  which  vote 
was  to  stand  until  another  was  taken  upon  peti- 
tion of  one-fourth  of  the  voters.  New  York 
City  was  excepted.  (Laws,  1845,  c.  300.)  By 
the  Laws  of  1846,  c.  14,  this  was  changed  to  an 
annual  vote,  at  spring  elections.  These  acts 
were  repealed  by  Laws  of  1847,  c.  274. 

If  the  Overseers  of  the  Poor  neglected  for 
ten  days  to  prosecute  under  the  Excise  laws, 
any  one  might  do  so.     (Laws,  1854,  c.  285.) 

Prohibitory  Late  o/"  1855. — Chapter  231  of  the 
Laws  of  1855  was  a  law  prohibiting  the  sale 
and  keeping  of  liquors  for  any  purpose,  except 
as  a  medicine  or  for  sacramental,  chemical  and 
mechanical  purposes.  Violators  forfeited  their 
liquors.  The  penalties  for  keeping  liquors 
were:  first  offense,  $50  fine;  second,  $100  tine 
and  30  days'  imprisonment;  third,  $100  to  $200 
and  three  to  six  months.  The  penalty  for  sell- 
ing was  $100  tine,  imprisonment  for  30  days 
and  disqualification  to  sell  afterward.  In 
Wynehamer  v.  People  (13  N.  Y.,  378)  this  law 
was  declared  unconstitutional,  because  liquor 
possessed  at  the  time  of  the  enactment  was  not 
excepted  from  its  proliibition,  and  because  jury 
trials  of  offenses  thereunder  might  be  denied. 

The  Law  of  1866,  c.  578,  was  a  complete 
license  code  for  the  Metropolitan  Police  Dis- 


1  The  license  rates  Ejiven  in  this  paragraph  were  subse- 
qnentlv  reduced  by  revision.  By  the  revision  of  1828,  the 
license  fee  was  placed  at  $5  to  "$30  (1  R.  S.,  1838,  p.  678, 
§  4),  and  the  penalty  for  selling  without  license  at  %^b. 
These  fees  and  this  penalty  were  the  same  in  the  4th  edi- 
tion of  the  Revised  Statutes  of  18.52,  and  they  remained 
in  force  until  the  enactment  of  the  Prohibitory  law  of 
1855. 


Ijegislation. 


330 


[Legislation. 


trict,  leaving  out  the  requirement  for  tavern  ac- 
commodations.    It  was  repealed  in  1870. 

The  Law  as  it  Existed  in  1889. — The  Law  of 
1857,  c.  628,  is  still  given  as  law  in  Burdsaye's 
edition  of  the  Revised  Statutes,  1889,  and  in 
Bank's  8th  edition.  I  abstract  what  is  given  in 
the  latter  at  p.  2326,  and  following,  taking  the 
last  sections  passed  where  there  are  conflicting 
regulations  therein. 

There  shall  be  a  Board  of  three  Excise  Com- 
missioners in  each  municipality.  In  incorpo- 
rated villages  it  shall  consist  of  the  President  of 
the  Board  of  Trustees,  and  two  other  Trustees,  to 
be  designated  by  the  Board  itself.  (Laws,  1870, 
c.  175,  §  1 ;  8th  ed. ,  p.  2235. )  In  cities  the  Mayor 
and  Aldermen  shall  appoint  such  Commissioners. 
(Id.,  ^  2.)  But  in  New  York  City  these  are  now, 
as  city  officers,  appointed  by  the  Mayor  without 
confirmation.  In  Brooklyn  the  head  of  the 
Department  of  Police  and  Excise  is  appointed 
by  the  Mayor,  with  two  other  Commissioners  of 
Excise  to  serve  with  him.  (Laws,  Brooklyn, 
p.  49,  §§  1,2.)  At  the  annual  town-meetings 
shall  be  elected  the  Commissioners  of  Excise, 
one  each  year.  (Laws,  1874,  c.  444;  8th  ed., 
p.  2239.)  These  Conmiissioners  meet  on  the 
first  Monday  of  IVIay  in  each  year  for  the  pur- 
pose of  granting  licenses,  and  at  no  other  time, 
except  upon  application  for  license  in  any  town 
or  village  not  oftener  than  once  a  month,  and  in 
cities  the  fir.st  Monday  of  each  month,  or  oftener, 
if  necessary.  Licenses  expire  the  first  Mon- 
day in  May,  except  in  New  York,  Brooklyn 
and  Rochester,  where  they  expire  a  year  after 
their  date.  (Laws,  1870,  c.  175,  §  3;  8th  ed., 
p.  2237.) 

Licenses  may  be  granted  for  $30-  to  $150  in 
towns  and  villages,  and  for  $30  to  $250  in  cities. 
The  license  must  be  conspicuously  posted  in  the 
place  of  .sales.  Persons  not  licensed  may  sell  in 
quantities  not  less  than  five  gallons,  not  to  be 
drunk  on  the  premises.    (Id.,  ^  4.) 

Licenses  do  not  authorize  sales  between  1  and 
5  o'clock  in  the  morning,  and  saloons  must  be 
closed  then.  (Id.,  i^  5.)  Violations  of  the 
liquor  laws  forfeit  licenses,  and  Exci.se  Boards 
after  hearing  shall  revoke  and  cancel  the  same. 
(Id.,  §  8.) 

In  cities  of  over  150,000  inhabitants,  licenses 
may  be  granted  to  those  not  keeping  inns,  and 
those  denied  license  by  the  Board  may  apply  to 
a  Judge  of  a  Court  of  record  of  the  city  for  a 
writ  of  mandamus  to  review  the  action  of  the 
Excise  Board,  and  if  the  application  for  li- 
cense was  arbitrarily  rejected  the  Judge  may 
order  the  Board  to  issue  it.  (Laws,  1885,  c.  340, 
§  1;  8th  ed.,  p.  2241.)  Such  Board  may  author- 
ize the  removal  of  the  place  of  the  licensed 
business  in  such  cities.  (Id.,  §  2.)  No  licensed 
persons  or  their  agents  in  such  cities  may  be 
arrested  without  warrant,  except  between  1  a.m. 
and  12  p.m.  on  Sunday,  for  violations  of  the  law 
in  the  presence  of  any  officer.  And  such  officer 
may  so  arrest  those  engaged  in  the  unlicensed 
sale  of  liquor  in  such  cities.  (Id  ,  §  3.)  Tavern 
accommodations  are  required  as  under  the  very 
old  laws,  except  in  such  cities.  (Laws,  1857, 
c.  628,  §6;  8th  ed.,  p.  2229.) 

Bond  in  the  penal  sum  of  $250  shall  be  taken 
that  the  licensee  will  not  allow  disorder  or  gam- 
ing.   (Id.,  §7.) 


There  shall  be  no  recovery  for  liquor  sold  on 
credit.     (Id.,  §  10  ;  8th  ed.,  p.  2230.) 

Licenses  to  retailers,  not  to  be  drunk  on  the 
premises,  were  provided  for,  with  bond  in  $500 
and  a  $50  penalty  for  allowing  consumption  on 
the  premises.    (Id.,  i^i^  11-14  ;  8th  ed.,  p.  2230.) 

Sales  to  apprentices,  knowingly,  or  to  minors 
under  18  without  consent  of  master  or  parent  or 
guardian,  are  fined  $10,  and  sales  to  Indians 
or  minors  under  14,  $25.  (Id.,  §  15  ;  8th  ed., 
p.  2230.) 

Any  officer  shall  arrest  any  one  violating  the 
act  and  take  him  before  a  magistrate,  who  shall 
try  him  if  he  so  elect,  or  if  the  offense  be  drunk- 
enness or  otherwise  shall  bind  the  offender  over 
to  the  next  sessions  or  to  the  Oyer  and  Ter- 
miner.    (Id.,  i;  16  ;  8th  ed.,  p.  2231.) 

Those  found  intoxicated  in  a  public  place 
shall  be  fined  $3  to  $10,  or  imprisoned  10 
days  to  six  months.  (Id.,  i:;  17.)  No  one  shall 
sell  liquor  to  an  intoxicated  person,  imder  pen- 
alty of  $10  to  $25.   (Id.,  t?  18  ;  8th  ed.,  p.  2232.) 

Magistrates  and  Overseers  of  the  Poor,  upon 
complaint  of  a  wife,  husband,  parent  or  child, 
that  the  husband,  wife,  child  or  parent,  respect- 
ively, is  a  habitual  drinker,  .shall  notify  dealers 
not  to  .sell  liquor  to  them  for  six  months,  under 
penalty  of  $50.     (Id.,  §§  19,  20.) 

No  one  shall  .sell  liquor  on  Sunday,  or  within 
a  quarter  of  a  mile  of  any  election  on  election 
day,  upon  penalty  of  $30  to  $200,  or  imprison- 
ment five  to  50  days,  or  both.     (Id.,  i:^  21.) 

Penalties  shall  be  sued  for  by  the  Overseers  of 
the  Poor,  or  where  there  are  none,  by  the  Board, 
of  Excise.     (Id.,  ^  22  ;  8th  ed.,  p.  2233.) 

Every  bond  under  this  act  shall  be  filed  within 
10  days  in  the  Municipal  Clerk's  office.  (Id., 
§  23.)  Whenever  there  is  a  breach  of  .such 
bond,  the  Excise  Board,  the  Supervisor,  Mayor 
or  Trustees  of  the  municipality  shall  prosecute 
the  same.  (Id.,  J;  24.)  Whenever  any  convic- 
tion or  judgment  shall  be  obtained  against  any 
licensed  person,  the  Court  shall  transmit  a 
statement  of  the  same  to  the  next  Court  of  ses- 
sions. (Id.,  t?  25.)  The  said  Court  shall  on 
notice  proceed  to  revoke  the  license.  (Id.,  ^  26.) 
Persons  whose  licenses  have  been  revoked  can- 
not again  receive  licenses  for  three  years.  (Id., 
§27.) 

Any  person  selling  to  a  person  to  whom  sales 
are  forbidden  is  liable  for  all  damages  to  the 
party  injured.  (Id.,  §  28.)  Courts  shall  instruct 
Grand  Juries  to  inquire  into  violations  of  this 
act,  or  adulterations  of  liquors,  or  selling  such, 
the  latter  being  punished  by  imprisonment  three 
months  and  fine  of  $100.     (Id.,  §  29.) 

Private  parties  may  prosecute  under  this  act 
after  10  days'  notice  to  those  whose  duty  it  is 
to  so  prosecute.     (Id.,  §  30  ;  8th  ed.,  p.  2234.) 

Companies  or  persons  carrying  passengers 
must  not  employ  intemperate  persons.  (Id., 
§31.) 

"Every  husband,  wife,  child,  parent,  guard- 
ian, employer  or  other  person  who  shall  be 
injured  in  person  or  means  of  support  by  any- 
intoxicated  person,  or  in  consequence  of  the 
intoxication,  habitual  or  otherwise,  of  any  per- 
son, shall  have  a  right  of  action  in  his  or  her 
name  again.st  any  person  or  persons  who  shall, 
by  selling  or  giving  away  intoxicating  hquor.s, 
have  caused  the  intoxication  in  whole  or  in  part 


Iiegislation.] 


331 


[Legislation. 


of  such  person  or  persons  ;  and  any  person  or 
persons  owning  or  renting  or  permitting  the 
occupation  of  any  building  or  premises,  and 
having  knowledge  that  intoxicating  liquors  are 
to  be  sold  therein,  shall  be  liable,  severally  or 
jointly,  with  the  person  or  persons  selling  or 
giving  intoxicating  liquors  aforesaid,  for  all 
damages  sustained  and  for  exemplary  damages ; 
and  all  damages  recovered  by  a  minor  under 
this  act  shall  be  paid  either  to  such  minor  or  to 
his  or  her  parent,  guardian  or  next  fiiend  as 
the  Court  shall  direct  ;  and  the  unlawful  sale 
or  giving  away  of  intoxicating  liquors  shall 
work  a  forfeiture  of  all  rights  of  the  lessee  or 
tenant  under  any  lease  or  contract  of  rent 
upon  the  premises."  (Laws,  1873,  c.  640;  8th 
ed.,  p.  2239.) 

Introducing  liquor  into  any  poor-house, 
juvenile  reformatory,  protectory,  house  of  re- 
fuge, jail,  penitentiary  or  prison  except  upon 
requisition  of  the  medical  officer  thereof,  or  the 
allowing  the  use  of  such  liquor  therein  by  any 
olficer  thereof,  except  upon  such  prescription,  is 
a  misdemeanor.  (Laws,  1880,  c.  429;  8th  ed., 
p.  2240.) 

Selling  liquor  at  State  and  county  fairs,  ex- 
cept in  cities  of  over  500,000  inhabitants,  is 
fined  |50  to  $500.  (Laws,  1888,  c.  35;  8th  ed., 
p.  2244.) 

Allowing  children  under  16,  unaccompanied 
by  parent  or  guardian,  in  any  place  where 
liquors  are  sold,  or  permitting  them  to  play 
games  therein,  or  selling  or  giving  liquor  to 
.such  children,  is  a  misdemeanor.  (Laws,  1889, 
c.  170.) 

An  elaborate  act  regulating  wines,  "half 
wines  "  and  made  wines,  and  prohibiting  adult- 
eration of  wines,  was  passed  in  1887. 
(Laws,  c.  603;  8th  ed.,  p.  2242.)  It  does  not 
regulate  the  making  and  sale  in  a  restrictive 
way,  but  rather  the  contrary. 

There  is  a  law  requiring  scientific  temperance 
instruction  in  the  public  schools.  (1  Burdsaye's 
R.  S.,  p.  596,  §  287;  passed  1887,  Laws,  c.  30.) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  a  majority  vote  of  the  two  Houses, 
to  be  concurred  in  by  a  majority  of  each  House 
in  the  next  Legislature;  a  majority  vote  of  the 
electors  carries  it. 

North  Carolina. 

Colonial  Provisions. — An  act  concerning  tip- 
pling-houses  was  passed  in  1715,  and  an  addi- 
tional one  in  1770.  A  duty  on  liquors  was  laid 
in  1734.  Persons  getting  drunk  on  Sunday  were 
fined  5*;  on  any  other  day  2s  %d. 

In  1741  it  was  provided  that  all  persons  retail- 
ing liquors  should  sell  the  same  by  sealed  meas- 
ures, according  to  the  act  for  regulating  weights 
and  measures.  Persons  retailing  liquors  with- 
out license  were  to  forfeit  £5.  The  County 
Court  was  to  judge  whether  a  proposed  house 
was  convenient  and  the  keeper  responsible,  and 
was  to  grant  or  reject  the  prayer  for  license. 
The  licensee  was  to  give  bond  in  £30  not  to  per- 
mit gaming  or  suffer  any  one  to  tipple  more 
than  necessary  on  the  Sabbath.  The  license 
cost  25s.  Two  Justices  might  suppress  the 
license  for  violations  of  law  until  the  next  Court, 
which  should  continue  the  suppression  or  restore 
the  license.     The  Justices  were  to  fix  ordinary 


rates,  which  were  to  be  posted  in  the  house,  and 
over-charging  was  punished  by  fine  of  10s. 
Keeping  a  tippling-house  contrary  to  the  act 
was  fined  £5,  or  in  default  30  lashes,  and  on  the 
second  offense  the  same  fine  was  imposed,  or  39 
lashes  and  imprisonment  one  month.  This  act 
did  not  hinder  merchants  or  persons  from  selling 
not  less  than  a  quart  to  be  drunk  out  of  the 
house.     (Swann's  Laws,  p.  152  [1741].) 

A  revenue  act  of  1754  (Davis's  Revisal,  p.  155) 
laid  a  duty  of  4rf  per  gallon  on  imported  liquors. 

The  act  of  1778  (2  Martin's  Laws.  p.  122) 
provided  in  the  same  way  as  above  for  license 
at  a  cost  of  20s.  Selling  without  license  was 
fined  48s  and  to  slaves  without  permit  £5.  The 
provision  for  suppression  was  omitted. 

Early  State  Provisions. — By  the  act  of  1798, 
c.  18,  licenses  "were  granted  for  40s.  Retailing 
without  license  was  fined  48s. 

Bj'  the  last  two  acts  the  license  was  to  be 
granted  if  the  person  were  not  of  gross  im- 
morality or  of  too  small  means,  and  it  was 
even  provided  that  upon  payment  of  the  license 
fee  there  should  be  no  necessity  for  formal 
license. 

In  1825  this  tax  was  fixed  by  the  Revenue 
act  at  $4  for  retailers,  as  it  was  taken  to  be  for 
tavern-keepers.    (R.  S.,  1857,  p.  516,  ^§  20,  21.) 

By  the  act  of  1844  (Laws,  c.  86),  no  free 
negro  or  mulatto  might  sell  liquor  in  any  way 
to  any  person,  imder  penalty  of  $10  for  tlie  first 
ofi'ense  and  fine  and  imprisonment  at  discretion 
for  a  second  offense. 

Tlie  Revenue  law  of  1854  (Laws,  c.  37)  tax- 
ed retailers  of  liquor  $20;  that  of  1856  (Laws, 
c.  34),  taxed  them  $30,  while  that  of  1858(Law.s, 
c.  25),  taxed  liquor  brought  into  the  State  10 
per  cent,  ad  valorem.  In  these  last  two  years 
were  passed  the  first  of  the  local  Prohibitory 
laws;  there  were  but  few  of  them  enacted  before 
the  Civil  War,  and  none  at  all  during  the  war; 
but  after  the  w\ar  their  numbers  increased  rap- 
idly at  each  session. 

War  Provisions. — An  act  was  passed  in  1863 
(Laws,  c.  10)  prohibiting  all  distillation  under 
penalty  of  $500  and  imprisonment  60  days. 
This  act  referred  to  the  ordinance  of  the  Con- 
vention prohibiting  for  a  limited  time  the  dis- 
tillation of  liquor  from  grain.  It  was  extended 
to  malting  or  brewing  by  Laws  of  1864,  c.  30. 

Since  the  War. — By  the  Revenue  law  of  1866 
(Laws,  c.  21,  §  16),  the  license  of  retailers  was 
raised  to  $50.  Selling  liquor  on  election 
days  was  prohibited  by  Laws  of  1868,  c.  26. 
By  Laws  of  1881,  c.  319,  Prohibition  of  the 
manufacture  and  sale  of  intoxicating  liquor  was 
submitted  to  the  people  and  defeated. 

The  Laic  as  It  E.nsted  in  1889. — Every  one 
selling  intoxicating  liquors  or  medicated  bitters 
in  ciuantitie;  of  five  gallons  or  less  shall  pay  $50 
for  six  mouths,  to  be  collected  by  the  Sheriff 
for  the  benefit  of  the  school  fund  of  the 
county  ;  in  quantities  of  five  gallons  or  more, 
$100 ;  for  malt  liquors  exclusively,  $10  for 
said  period.  Nothing  in  this  section  prevents 
any  person  selling  spirits  and  wines  of  his  own 
manufacture  at  the  place  thereof  in  quantities 
not  less  than  a  ([uart.  Every  one  wishing  to 
sell  liquors  shall  apply  to  the  Board  of  County 
Commissioners  for  an  order  to  the  Sheriff  to 
issue  a  license,  stating  the  place  at  which  it  is 


Iiegislatiou.] 


332 


[Legislation. 


proposed  to  conduct  the  business.  The  Board, 
upon  satisfactory  proof  of  good  moral  character, 
shall  issue  such  order  except  in  territory  where 
the  sale  of  liquors  is  prohibited.  Counties  may 
levy  not  more  than  as  much  tax  as  the  8tate 
does  hereunder.  All  persons  licensed  shall  post 
their  licenses  in  some  public  part  of  their 
places  of  business.  The  license  shall  be 
printed  as  the  Treasurer  of  the  State  shall  pre- 
scribe, and  furnished  by  the  Register  of  Deeds 
to  the  Sheriff.  Persons  not  posting  their 
licenses  will  be  considered  doing  business  with- 
out license.  Licenses  taken  out  after  Jan.  and 
July  1  will  be  subject  to  the  full  amount  for 
six  months.     (Laws,  1889,  c.  316,  §  33.) 

Every  person  bringing  liquor  into  the  State  to 
sell  shall,  in  addition  to  the  ad  valorem  tax  on 
his  stock,  pay  as  a  license  tax  one-half  of  1  per 
cent,  of  such  purchases.     (Id.,  §33.) 

For  selling  without  license  the  seller  shall 
forfeit  not  exceeding  $20  per  day.  (Code, 
1883,  §  3704.) 

Any  person  giving  or  selling  liquor  on  elec- 
tion days  within  five  miles  of  any  polling-place 
at  any  thne  within  13  hours  next  preceding  or 
succeeding  any  election,  or  during  the  holiday 
thereof  (except  for  medical  purposes  upon  pre- 
scription), shall  be  fined  $100  to  $1,000.  (Id., 
§2740.) 

Any  person  bringing  into  or  selling  liquor 
within  the  Penitentiary  enclosure,  not  author- 
ized by  the  physician  for  the  use  of  the  hos- 
pital, and  the  prison  otticer  suffering  it,  shall 
be  fined  not  more  than  $50  or  imprisoned  not 
more  than  3!)  days;  and  if  an  otticer,  shall  be 
dismissed.     (Id.,'§  3440.) 

Selling  liquor  (except  by  licensed  dealers  at 
their  regular  places  of  business)  within  a  mile 
of  and  during  the  proirress  of  divine  service,  is 
fined  $30.     (Id.,  §  3671.) 

Liquor  shall  not  be  sold  within  four  miles  of 
Chapel  Hill.     (Id.,  §§  3640-3.) 

All  wines  made  from  fruit  raised  in  the  State 
may  be  sold  in  bottles  corked  up,  in  any  quan- 
tities, not  to  be  drunk  on  the  premises,  but 
must  not  be  sold  to  minors  ;  nor  may  wines 
mixed  with  spirituous  liquor  be  so  sold.  (Id., 
§  3110.) 

Notice  of  all  applications  to  the  General  As- 
sembly to  prohibit  the  sale  of  liquor  or  to  re- 
peal Prohibitory  local  laws  within  the  limits 
specified,  shall  be  posted  at  four  public  places 
within  those  limits  for  at  least  30  days  before 
the  application  shall  be  forwarded  to  the 
General  Assembly.  (Id.,  §  3111.)  In  all  cases 
where  Prohibition  is  asked  for  a  greater  dis- 
tance from  a  common  center  than  two  miles,  the 
question  shall  be  decided  by  the  votes  accord- 
ing to  this  chapter.     (Id.,  §  3113.) 

The  County  Commissioners,  upon  the  petition 
of  one-fourth  of  the  voters  of  any  county, 
town  or  township,  shall  order  an  election  to  be 
held  on  the  first  Monday  in  June  in  any  year  to 
ascertain  whether  spirituous  liquors  shall  be 
sold  therein;  but  such  election  shall  not  be  held 
oftener  than  once  in  two  years.  (Id.,  §  3113; 
amended  by  Laws  of  1885,  c.  336,  and  Laws  of 
1887,  c.  315,  §  1.)  Such  election  shall  be  held 
under  the  general  eh^ction  law.  (Code,  1883, 
§  3114;  see ''Laws,  1887,  c.  316,  §  3.)  At  such 
election  ballots    shall    be    "Prohibition"  and 


"License,"  respectively  (Code,  1883,  §  3115.) 
If  Prohibition  carries,  no  license  shall  be  grant- 
ed in  such  limits  until  the  vote  is  reversed,  pro- 
vided that  liquor-dealers  shall  have  six  months 
in  which  to  close  out  their  businesses,  if  their  li- 
censes shall  remain  so  long  in  force.  (Id., 
§  3116;  amended  by  Laws  of  1887,  c.  215,  §  3.) 
If  in  a  county  election  the  vote  is  in  favor  of 
license,  that  result  shall  not  operate  to  permit 
sale  in  any  township,  city  or  town  where  it  is 
prohibited  by  law,  unless  that  place  cast  a  ma- 
jority of  votes  for  license.    (Code,  1883,  §  3117.) 

No  druggist  shall  sell  or  dispose  of  any  in- 
toxicating liquor  except  for  medical  purposes 
upon  prescription  of  a  practicing  physician 
known  to  .such  druggist  to  be  reputable,  and  no 
physician  shall  give  a  prescription  to  a  drug- 
store in  which  he  is  financially  interested.  Any 
druggist  or  physician  violating  this  section  shall 
be  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor  and  fined  or  im- 
prisoned at  the  discretion  of  the  Court.  (Laws, 
1887,  c.  215,  §  4.) 

If  anyone  adulterate  liquor  or  sell  such 
liquor  he  shall  be  fined  or  imprisoned,  or  both, 
at  the  discretion  of  the  Court.  (Code,  1883, 
§982.)  Any  citizen  after  purchasing  liquor 
may  cause  the  same  to  be  analyzed,  and  if 
found  to  contain  any  foreign  poisonous  matter 
it  shall  be  prima  facie  evidence  against  the 
party  making  the  sale.  (Id.,  §  983.)  Any  per- 
son ofl'ering  to  sell  any  recipe  for  adulterating 
liquor  shall  be  punished  as  above  at  discretion. 
But  druggists,  physicians  and  persons  engaged 
in  the  mechanical  arts  may  adulterate  liquor 
for  medical  and  mechanical  purposes.  (Id., 
§984.) 

If  any  person  shall  retail  liquor  in  any  other 
manner  than  is  prescribed  by  law,  he  shall  be 
guilty  of  a  misdemeanor  and  punished  at  the  dis- 
cretion of  the  Court.     (Id.,  §  1076.) 

Dealers  selling  to  unmarried  minors  know- 
ingly are  guilty  of  misdemeanors.  (Id.,  §  1077.) 
The  father  or  (if  he  be  dead)  the  mother,  guard- 
ian or  employer  of  such  minor  has  a  right  to 
a  civil  action  against  the  seller  for  damages  not 
less  than  $35  and  for  exemplary  damages.  ( Id., 
§  1078.) 

Selling  liquor  within  two  miles  of  public 
political  speaking  is  fined  $10  to  $30.  (Id., 
§  1079.) 

If  anyone  sells  liquor  on  Sunday  except 
upon  a  physician's  prescription  he  is  guilty  of  a 
misdemeanor  and  may  be  punished  at  the  dis- 
cretion of  the  Court.     (Id..  §  1117.) 

The  Sheriff  shall  lay  before  the  Grand  Jury 
as  soon  as  it  assembles  a  list  of  the  persons 
licensed  to  retail  liquor  within  two  years.  (Id., 
§  1087.) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  a  three-fifths  vote  of  the  two 
Houses,  at  one  session;  popular  vote  to  be  taken 
at  the  next  general  election  for  Kepreseutatives. 
A  majority  vote  carries  it. 

North  Dakota. 

Present  Law  (1890). — No  person,  association 
or  corporation  shall  within  this  State  manufac- 
ture for  sale  or  gift  any  intoxicating  liquor, 
and  no  person,  association  or  corporation  shall 
import  any  of  the  same  for  sale  or  gift,  or  keep 
or  sell  or  offer  the  same  for  sale  or  gift,  barter 


Ijegislation.] 


333 


[Legislation. 


or  trade,  as  a  beverage.  The  Legislative  As- 
sembl}^  shall  by  law  prescribe  regulations  for 
the  enforcement  of  the  provisions  of  this  article, 
and  shall  thereby  provide  suitable  penalties  for 
the  violation  thereof.     (Const.,  art.  20,  §  217.) 

The  Prohibitory  law  passed  by  tlie  first  Leg- 
islature of  the  State,  to  go  into  effect  July  1, 
1890,  is  substantially  as  follows: 

Any  contravention  of  the  Constitution  as 
above  is  punished  for  the  first  offense  by  fine 
of  $200  to  $1,000  with  imprisonment  90  days  to 
one  year;  for  subsequent  offenses  by  imprison- 
ment one  to  two  j^ears,  being  a  felony. 

But  registered  pharmacists  may  sell  intoxicat- 
ing liquors  for  medicinal,  mechanical  and 
scientific  purposes,  and  wine  for  sacramental 
purposes,  as  hereinafter  provided.  (§  1.)  Sell- 
ing for  such  purposes  is  unlawful  until  a  drug- 
gist's permit  therefor  is  procured  from  the 
County  Judge.  This  he  may  grant  if  the  person 
is  of  good  character  and  can  be  entrusted  with 
the  responsibility.  The  applicant  must  file 
a  petition  signed  by  25  reputable  freeholders 
(voters),  and  2~)  reputable  women  over  21  years 
old,  residents  of  the  town,  village,  township 
or  city.  He  gives  bond  in  $1,000  to  obey 
the  law.  Any  permit  so  granted  must  be  re- 
voked upon  hearing  the  same  as  when  granted, 
and  upon  petition  of  the  same  number  of  per- 
sons. If  the  County  Judge  wrongly  issues  such 
a  permit  he  shall  be  fined  $500  to  $1,000,  and 
if  any  signer  of  a  petition  for  a  permit  knows 
its  statement  to  be  false  he  is  fined  $50  to 
$100.  (Id.,  §2.)  Any  physician,  when  a  pa- 
tient is  absolutely  in  need  thereof,  may  give  a 
prescription  for  liquors  for  him,  and  giving  it 
otherwise  is  punished  by  fine  of  $300  to  f'SOO 
"with  imprisonment  30  days  to  six  mouths. 
(^4.)  Sales  by  permit-holders  are  made  upon 
printed  affidavits  minutely  specifying  the  in- 
tended uses  (only  one  sale  to  be  made  upon  one 
affidavit),  the  affidavits  themselves  being  offi- 
cially furnished  and  duplicates  kept,  so  as  to 
check  sales.  Persons  making  such  affidavits 
falsely  are  imprisoned  as  for  jierjury  six  months 
to  two  years.  And  if  one  sign  a  false  name  he 
is  guilty  of  forgery  in  the  fourth  degree  and 
imprisoned  one  to  two  years.  Re-selling  liquors 
obtained  upon  affidavit  is  punished  bv  fine  of 
$100  to  $500  with  imprisonment  30  to  90  days. 
Any  druggist  holding  a  permit  who  fails  to  make 
tlie  record  of  sales  for  inspection  required,  or 
falsely  sells  an  affidavit,  or  fails  to  return  the 
affidavits,  or  illegally  sells,  is  fined  $200  to 
$1,000  and  imprisoned  90  days  to  one  year, 
and  disqualified  to  have  a  permit  again  for  five 
years.     (S^  5. ) 

All  spirituous,  malt,  vinous,  fermented  or 
other  intoxicating  liquors  or  mixtures  thereof 
that  will  produce  intoxication  are  held  to  be  in- 
toxicating liquors.     (§  6.) 

It  is  the  duty  of  all  officers  to  notify  the 
State's  Attorney  of  all  violations  of  this  law, 
with  names  of  witnesses;  if  they  do  not  they 
shall  be  fined  $100  to  $500  and  forfeit  office. 
(§8.) 

If  the  State's  Attorney  is  so  notified  of  or  is 
cognizant  himself  of  any  such  violation,  he 
shall  investigate  the  matter,  calling  witnesses, 
and  prosecute  thereupon;  and  if  the  State's 
Attorney  fail  therein  any  Justice  may  proceed 


to  so  collect  evidence  and  lay  it  before  the 
State's  Attorney,  who  shall  then  prosecute.  (§  9.) 

If  it  is  disclosed  that  any  liquor  is  kept  any- 
where for  illegal  sale,  warrant  shall  issue  for 
search  and  seizure.     (§  10.) 

Fines  and  forfeitures  hereunder  go  to  the 
liquor  prosecution  fund.  State's  Attorneys  fail- 
ing in  their  duty  hereunder  shall  be  fined  $100 
to  $500  and  imprisoned  30  to  90  days,  and  for- 
feit their  offices  ;  and  whenever  'any  State's 
Attorney  fails  or  neglects  his  said  duty,  the 
Attorney-General  shall  undertake  the  dutv. 
(§  12.) 

_  Places  where  liquors  are  sold  or  kept  in  viola- 
tion of  law  are  nuisances,  and  upon  establish- 
ment of  the  fact  shall  be  abated.  In,^unction 
may  be  granted  at  the  beginning  of  the  action. 
Violating  such  injiuiction  is  punished  as  illegal 
selling.  On  such  contempt  proceedings  the 
defendant  may  be  required  to  make  answer 
to  interrogatories  and  will  not  be  necessarily  dis- 
charged upon  his  denial  of  the  facts  stated  in 
the  moving  papers,     (ij  13.) 

Full  civil  damages  are  given.     (§§  14,  15.) 

Members  of  clubs  to  use  or  distribute  li(iuors 
are  punished  about  the  same  as  tht«e  making 
unlawful  sales,     (t:^  16.) 

Giving  away  liquor  and  evasions  of  the  law 
are  deemed  unlawful  selling,     (t^  17.) 

Fines  and  costs  are  liens  upon  the  property 
upon  which  the  unlawful  traffic  was  conducted, 
with  the  knowledge  of  the  owner  thereof. 
(§  18.) 

Any  person  may  employ  an  attorney  to  assist 
the  State's  xVttorney  in  his  duty,  and  such  em- 
ployed attorney  shall  be  recognized  as  associate 
coun.sel.     _(i^  20.) 

Suspension  of  judgment  for  reason  as  for  per- 
fecting appeals  may  be  entered  in  the  hand- 
writing of  the  Judge.     (§  21.) 

Pleading  and  evidence  are  simplified  and  ex- 
tended in  i<  22. 

The  Grand  Jury  is  to  be  charged  with  this 
act  specially.     (§  23.) 

Druggists  may  be  notified  not  to  sell  to 
habitual  drunkards.     (§  24.) 

Treating  or  giving  liquor  to  a  minor,  except 
by  his  father,  mother,  guardian  or  phjsician,  is 
punished  as  unlawful  selling. 

Officers  or  agents  of  carriers  are  punished  for 
carrying  liquor  to  be  sold  contrarv  to  the  act, 
by  fine  of  $100  to  $500,  with  imprisonment  30 
to  60  days.     (§  26.) 

Persons  arrested  for  violation  of  this  act, 
giving  bond  and  forfeiting  it,  upon  being  .sur- 
rendered to  Sheriff,  shall  be  committed  for  de- 
fault of  costs  not  over  six  months,     (i;  27.) 

Payments  for  liquor  may  be  recovered  and 
debts  therefor  are  void,     (i^  30.) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  a  majority  vote  of  the  two  Houses; 
to  be  concurred  in  by  a  majority  of  each  House 
in  the  next  Legislature;  upon  submission  to  the 
people  a  majority  vote  of  the  electors  carries  it. 

Ohio. 

Early  Provisions. — The  sixth  law  of  Ohio 
Territory  punished  drunkenness  by  a  fine  of  five 
dimes,  second  offense  $1;  on  default  in  either 
case  the  penalty  was  an  hour  in  the  stocks. 
(Chase's  Statutes,  c.  6,  §  20  [1788].) 


Legislation.] 


334 


[Legislation. 


In  1790  the  penalty  for  furnisliins;  liquor  to 
Indians  was  $5  for  every  quart;  for  less  than  a 
quart,  $4  (half  to  the  informer).  (Id.,  c.  11.) 
Selling  liquor  to  United  States  soldiers,  without 
order  from  an  officer,  was  lined  $2.  (Id.,  c.  13.) 
Selling  ardent  spirits  of  any  kind  without 
license  was  lined  $5  (half  to  the  informer). 
Commissioners  appointed  by  the  Governor  in 
each  county  had  power  to  establish  public  inns 
and  taverns,  and  also  to  grant  licenses  to  retail- 
ers of  spirituous  liquors,  and  thej^  might  license 
such  as  the  Justices  in  general  quarter  sessions 
should  recommend  as  personally  qualified,  and 
having  premises  situated  lor  the  accommoda- 
tion of  travellers  and  citizens  ;  license  fee,  $16. 
The  Justices,  upon  complaint  and  hearing, 
might  annul  a  license  for  neglect  of  duty  to 
provide  tavern  accommodations  or  for  allowing 
gaming,  unless  the  licensee  gave  bond  in  $100 
to  obey  the  law  and  keep  order.  Licensees 
could  not  collect  bills  for  over  $2  for  liquors 
retailed.     (Id.,  c.  24  [1792].) 

In  1795  licenses  were  to  be  granted  by  the 
Governor  on  the  same  recommendation  and 
conditions,  bond  of  $300  to  be  given  to  keep 
order  and  observe  the  law  ;  and  licensees  were 
not  to  harbor  minors  or  servants,  or  sell  to 
slaves,  xqjon  penalty  of  $3.     (Id.,  c.  51.) 

In  1800  such  licenses  were  to  be  granted  only 
upon  recommendation  of  12  freeholders  of  the 
county  to  the  Justices  of  Sessions.  The  penalty 
for  selling  without  license  was  raised  to  $20. 
The  provision  for  revocation  for  disorder  was 
continued,  and  the  license  tax  was  to  be  $4, 
$8  or  $12,  according  to  advantages  of  location. 
(Id.,  c.  132.) 

In  1804  licenses  were  granted  by  the  Associate 
Judges  of  the  county,  after  advertisement  30 
days,  at  prices  to  be  fixed  by  them.  The  penalty 
for  not  complying  with  the  act  was  a  fine  not 
exceeding  $50.  The  only  other  prohibition  was 
against  disorder  and  gaming,  which  was  lined 
not  exceeding  $20,  with  forfeiture  of  license 
and  disqualification  one  year.     (Id.,  c.  59.) 

In  1809  tavern-keepers  selling  liquor  to  In- 
dians were  fined  $5  to  $100  and  forfeited  what 
they  received  for  it,  to  be  restored  to  the  In- 
dian. (Id.,  c.  194.)  Tavern-keepers  permitting 
sporting,  gaming,  disorder,  revelling  or  drunk- 
enness were  fined  not  exceeding  $20,  forfeited 
their  licenses  and  were  disqualified  to  receive 
new  licenses  for  a  year.  The  retailing  of  cider 
and  beer  was  made  free.  (Id.,  c.  196.)  License 
was  to  be  granted  by  the  Court  of  Common 
Pleas,  and  the  fine  was  to  be  fixed  by  the 
County  Commissioners.     (Id.,  c.  222.) 

In  1818  tavern  license  was  to  be  granted 
upon  recomiuendation  of  12  landholders  of  the 
neighborhood,  upon  payment  of  $5  to  $30. 
The  penalty  for  selling  without  license  was  a 
fine  not  exceeding  $20  ;  for  allowing  disorder 
and  drunkenness,  not  exceeding  $50,  with  sus- 
pension of  license  four  months.  Tavern-keepers 
could  not  collect  bills  for  liquors  retailed  in 
excess  of  50  cents.     (Id.,  c.  434.) 

By  Id.,  c.  487  (1819),  the  penalty  for  selling 
without  license  was  made  not  exceeding  $100, 
the  other  provisions  being  re-enacted.  By  Id., 
c.  565  (1822),  neither  recommendation  nor  ad- 
vertisement was  needed  to  secure  a  renewal, 
but  both  were  necessary  in  applying  for  a  new 


license.  The  act  of  1823  (Id.,  c.  631)  made  no 
material  change  in  the  law  which  was,  how- 
ever, re-enacted. 

In  1830  selling  liquor  on  Sunday  was  fined 
$5  ;  selling  in  other  places  than  licensed  houses 
within  one  mile  (jf  a  religious  gathering 
was  fined  $20.  (Id.,  c.  834,  §§  2-10.) 
The  recommendation  of  freeholders  for  li- 
cense was  dispensed  with,  but  advertisement 
of  application  was  still  required,  such  applica- 
tion being  necessary  to  obtain  a  renewal  as  well 
as  a  new  license  ;  but  upon  remonstrance  of  10 
freeholders  the  licensing  Court  was  to  decide. 
The  price  of  license  was  $5  to  $50  ;  the  penalty 
for  selling  without  license  $5  to  $100.  (Id., 
c.  857.) 

Partial  ProMbition  of  Spirits  (1839).— "  No 
tavern  license  hereafter  granted  shall  be  con- 
strued to  authorize  the  sale  of  spirituous  liquors 
in  any  other  than  the  common  bar  of  the 
tavern  ;  and  any  tavern-keeper  who  shall, 
either  in  the  basement  of  the  building  occupied 
by  him  as  a  tavern,  or  in  any  shop  or  room  at- 
tached to  the  same,  or  in  any  other  place  than 
the  barroom  attached  to  the  same,  or  in  any 
other  place  than  tlie  barroom  usually  occupied 
as  such  for  the  reception  of  travellers,  sell 
spirituous  liquor  by  less  quantity  than  one 
quart,  or  to  be  drank  at  the  place  where  sold, 
shall  be  subject  to  the  same  penalties  as  though 
he  had  no  license  whatever."  (Laws,  1839. 
p.  54,  March  16.) 

In  1841,  (Laws,  p.  53)  each  and  every  act  con- 
ferring power  upon  any  municipal  corporation 
to  license  groceries  or  coffee-houses  or  in  any 
manner  to  authorize  the  sale  of  intoxicating 
drinks,  was  repealed. 

By  Laws  of  1844,  p.  8,  whenever  any  re- 
monstrance agaiiist  the  granting  of  any  license 
was  made,  whether  it  should  contain  any  state- 
ment of  facts  other  than  general  dissent  of  the 
remonstrants  or  not,  and  whether  any  testimony 
were  offered  by  the  remonstrants  or  not,  the 
Board  might  grant  or  refuse  license  at  discre- 
tion. 

Township  Local  Option,  Constitutional  Anti- 
License,  and  Prohibition  of  Sales  of  Liquor  for 
Consumption  on  the  Premises  (1846-54). — Town- 
ship Local  Option  was  given  to  10  counties  by 
Laws  of  1846,  p.  39.  The  submission  clauses 
were  repealed  in  1847.     (Ijaws,  p.  33.) 

Retailing  spirituous  liquor  to  be  drunk  on  t^.e 
premises  was  prohibited  altogether  by  Laws  of 

1850,  p.  87,  upon  penalty  of  $5  to  $25  for  tl;e 
first  offense,  $5  to  $120  for  the  second,  and  $5 
to  $150  for  the  third.  But  this  act  excepted 
selling  for  medicinal  and  pharmaceutical  pur- 
poses. 

Section  18  of  the  schedule.  Constitution  of 

1851,  was  submitted  and  adopted  separately. 
It  is:  "No  license  to  traffic  in  intoxicating 
liquors  shall  hereafter  be  granted  in  this  State, 
but  the  General  Assembly  may,  by  law,  provide 
against  evils  resulting  therefrom." 

The  act  of  1854  ("Laws,  p.  108)  prohibited 
adulteration  of  liquors  under  penalty  of  $100 
to  $500  and  imprisonment  10  to  30  days.  And 
the  laws  of  that  year  (p.  153)  re-enacted  with 
amplifications  the  law  against  selling  to  be 
dnmk  on  the  premises,  adding  prohibitions 
against  selling  to  minors  and  intoxicated  per- 


Xjegislation.] 


Ot>0 


[Legislation. 


sons.  It  declared  such  places  nuisances  and 
gave  full  civil  damages.  It  made  it  unlawful 
to  become  intoxicated.  It  made  the  penalty  of 
unlawful  selling  $20  to  $50  and  imprisonment 
10  to  30  days,  and  provided  somewhat  fully  for 
legal  procedure.  This  was  the  Adair  law. 
The  Laws  of  1859,  p.  173,  reduced  the  penalty 
for  selling  to  $5  to  $50  or  imprisoiunent  10  to 
30  days,  and  excepted  from  the  prohibition  do- 
mestic wine,  beer,  ale  and  cider. 

Selling  on  election  day  was  prohibited,  and 
the  duty  of  enforcing  the  prohibition  devolved 
on  the  municipalities,  by  Laws  of  1864,  p.  24. 

Sales  to  minors  and  intoxicated  persons  were 
again  prohibited  under  penalty  of  $10  to  $100 
or  imjirisonment  10  to  30  days,  or  both,  by 
Laws  of  1866,  p.  149. 

The  Laws  of  1870  (p.  101),  elaborated  the  civil 
damage  sections  and  made  them  include  the 
owner  of  the  real  estate  used  for  the  business. 

The  Law  of  1875,  p.  35,  made  provision  for 
previous  notice  not  to  sell  to  the  person  in  ques- 
tion, in  order  to  obtain  civil  damages  from  the 
seller,  but  provided  very  elaborately  for  such 
notice. 

Smith  Sunday  Law,  Pond  Lari)  and  Scott  Law 
(1881-3).— The  celebrated  Smith  Sunday  law, 
as  originally  enacted  in  1881  (Laws,  p.  126)  pro- 
vided that  anyone  selling  or  bartering  any 
liquor  on  Sunday  except  upon  a  physician's 
prescription  should  ])e  fined  not  more  than  $50. 
As  amended  in  1882  (Laws,  p.  128)  it  provided 
that  all  liquor  places  should  be  closed  on  Sun- 
day under  penalty  of  $100  fine  and  imprison- 
ment not  exceeding  30  days.  It  was  weakened 
by  the  Scott  law  of  1883,  with  the  proviso  that 
municipal  corporations  might  regulate  the  sale  of 
beer  and  native  wines  on  Sunday  by  ordinance. 

The  Pond  larW  (Laws,  1882,  p.  66)  imposed  a 
tax  of  $100  to  $300  on  every  person  engaged  in 
the  tratfic  in  intoxicating  liquors,  and  provided 
that  every  such  person  should  give  bond  to 
comply  with  the  act.  It  was  held  in  State  v. 
Hipp  (38  O.  St.,  199)  that  this  requirement  of  a 
bond  was  a  virtual  license,  contrary  to  the  arti- 
cle of  the  Constitution. 

This  law  was  re-enacted  in  the  Scott  law 
(Laws,  1883,  p.  164)  without  the  obnoxious  pro- 
vision, but  providing  that  the  tax  was  a  lien  on 
the  premises  occupied.  This  law  was  held  con- 
stitutional in  State  v.  Frame  (39  0.  St.,  399),  but 
in  Butzman  v.  Whitbeck  (42  O.  St.,  345)  it  a'so 
was  declared  to  amount  to  a  virtual  license  pro- 
vision by  reason  of  the  lien  impo.sed. 

Submission  of  Constitutional  Amendmeyits 
(1883).— By  Laws  of  1883,  p.  384,  were  submit- 
ted two  propositions  to  amend  the  no-license 
article  in  the  Con.stitution.  One  left  the  Legis- 
lature free  to  pass  license  laws,  the  other  sub- 
stituted a  regular  Prohibition  of  the  manufac- 
ture and  sale  of  intoxicating  liquor  to  be  used 
as  a  beverage.  It  was  provided  that  the  sub- 
mission should  be  at  a  general  election,  and  if 
either  proposition  received  a  majority  of  the 
votes  cast  at  the  election  it  should  be  adopted. 
Neither  proposition  received  such  majority. 

The  Law  as  It  Existed  in  1889.— The  Dow 
law  of  1886  (p.  157;  amended  by  Laws  of  1888, 
p.  116),  re-enacted  the  Scott  and  Pond  laws, 
with  some  changes  designed  to  eliminate  the 
unconstitutional  provisions  above  noticed. 


Upon  the  business  of  trafl!icking  in  intoxi- 
cating liquors  shall  be  assessed  yearly  $250. 
(R.  S.,  1890,  §  8892.)  Said  assessment  shall  be 
a  lien  on  the  property  iqion  which  the  business 
is  conducted  and  shall  be  paid  at  the  time  of 
paying  other  taxes.  (Id.,  §  8893.)  When 
such  business  is  commenced  after  the  fourth 
Monday  of  May,  said  assessment  shall  be  pro- 
portionate in  amount  to  the  i-emaiuder  of  the 
year,  but  it  shall  not  be  less  than  $25  ;  and 
whenever  business  is  discontinued  during  the 
year  a  proportionate  amount  of  the  tax,  if  not 
less  than  $50,  shall  be  refunded.  (Id.,  §  8894.) 
In  case  of  refusal  or  neglect  to  pay  this  tax  the 
amount  shall  be  levied  and  made  upon  the 
goods  and  chattels  used  in  the  business,  and 
what  cannot  be  thus  made  shall  be  added  to  the 
tax  on  the  real  estate  occupied.  (Id.,  i^  8895.) 
If  any  person  refuse  to  give  information  of  his 
said  business  or  to  sign  the  Assessor's  return  of 
the  same,  his  assessment  shall  thereupon  become 
$400.  (Id.,  §8896.)  The  Auditor  shall  make 
duplicates  of  such  assessments  and  deliver  a 
copy  to  the  County  Treasurer  (Id.,  §  8897), 
who  shall  collect  them  and  account  to  the 
Auditor  therefor.     (Id.,  §  8898.) 

The  phrase  "trafficking  in  intoxicating 
liquors"  means  the  buying,  procuring  and 
selling  of  such  liquors  except  upon  phj'sician's 
prescription,  or  for  mechanical,  pharmaceutical 
or  sacramental  purposes,  but  does  not  include 
the  manufacture  of  liquors  from  the  raw 
material  and  sale  thereof  at  wholesale  at  the 
manufactory.     (Id.,  §  8899.) 

Of  the  revenues  and  fines  resulting  under  this 
act,  two-tenths  shall  go  to  the  State,  six-tenths 
to  the  municipality  and  two-tenths  to  the  county 
poor  fund.     (Id.,  §8900.) 

The  sale  of  intoxicating  liquor  on  Sunday, 
except  by  a  druggist  upon  prescription,  is  de- 
clared unlawful ;  and  all  places  where  liquor  is 
sold,  except  regular  drug-stores,  shall  be  closed 
on  tliat  day  upon  penalty  of  $25  to  $100  and 
imprisonment  10  to  30  days.  In  regular  hotels 
and  eating-houses,  the  word  "place"  herein 
used  shall  mean  the  room  or  part  of  a  room 
where  liquors  are  sold.  Any  municipal  corpor- 
ation shall  have  full  power  to  regulate,  restrain 
and  prohibit  ale,  beer  and  porter-houses  or 
other  places  where  intoxicating  liquor  is  sold. 
(Id.,  §  8902.) 

Whoever  sells  liquor  to  a  minor,  except  upon 
written  order  of  his  parent,  guardian  or  family 
phvsician,  or  to  a  person  intoxicated  or  in  the 
habit  of  getting  so,  shall  be  fined  $25  to  $100 
and  imprisoned  from  five  to  30  days.  (Id. ,  §  8903. ) 

The  abrogation  or  repeal  of  any  section  or 
clause  of  this  law  shall  not  affect  any  other 
section  or  clause  thereof.     (Id.,  §  8904.) 

In  the  Dow  law  as  enacted  in  1886,  after  the 
prohibition  to  sell  on  Sunday,  it  was  provided 
that  nothing  therein  prohibited  the  Council  of 
any  municipal  corporation  from  regulating  the 
sale  of  beer  and  native  wine  on  that  day  as  it 
saw  fit. 

The  Dow  law  was  upheld  as  constitutional 
and  not  tantamount  to  a  license  in  Adler  v. 
Whitbeck  (44  O.  St.,  539). 

Whenever  one-fourth  of  the  qualified  electors 
of  any  township,  outside  of  any  municipal  cor- 
poration,  shall  petition  the  Trustees  therefor, 


Iiegislation.] 


336 


[Legislation. 


the  Trustees  shall  order  an  election  to  deter- 
mine whether  the  sale  of  liquor  as  a  beverage 
shall  be  prohibited  therein.  A  record  of  the 
result  of  such  election  shall  be  kept  by  the 
Township  Clerk  in  the  record  of  the  proceed- 
ings of  the  Township  Trustees,  and  shall  be 
evidence  that  selling  after  30  davs  from  the 
election  is  unlawful.  (R.  S.,  1890,  t^  8900.) 
Ballots  shall  be  "Against  the  sale  "  and  "For 
the  sale."  Selling  after  Prohibition  is  adopted 
is  punished  b}'  fine  of  $50  to  |oOO  and  impris- 
onment not  exceeding  six  months.  This  does 
not  apply  to  manufacturers  and  sellers  of  cider 
and  domestic  wine  not  in  a  place  where  sold  as 
a  beverage,  or  to  druggists  selling  for  the  ex- 
cepted purposes.  (Id.,  ^8907.)  Another  elec- 
tion under  the  act  may  be  had  after  two  years. 

Liquor  places  shall  be  closed  and  no  sales 
made  from  12  p.  m.  to  6  a.  m.  in  Cincinnati, 
upon  penalty  of  not  over  $100  and  imprison- 
ment 3',)  days  or  both.     (Id.,  §  8913.) 

Instruction  as  to  the  effect  of  alcoholic  drinks 
and  narcotics  on  the  human  system  is  required 
in  public  schools,  but  may  be  by  oral  in.strnc- 
tion  only,  and  without  the  use  of  text-books. 
(Id.,  ^  8917.)  No  certificate  to  teach  in  the 
common  schools  shall  be  granted  to  any  person 
who  does  not  pass  a  satisfactory  examination 
as  to  the  nature  of  such  drinks  and  narcotics  and 
their  effects  upon  the  system.  (Id.,  §  8918.) 
Any  teacher  neglecting  to  give  such  instruction 
f.hall  be  dismissed.     (Id.,  §  8919.) 

All  cities  and  villages  have  power  to  regulate 
ale,  beer  and  porter-houses  and  shops.  (Id., 
§  1692.) 

All  incorporated  villages  having  a  college  or 
university  within  their  limits  may  provide  by 
ordinance  against  the  evils  resulting  from  the 
sale  of  liquor.     (Id  ,  §  1692,  b.) 

The  Mayor  of  any  city  or  village,  shall,  three 
days  previously  to  election  day,  issue  a  procla- 
mation setting  forth  the  law  prohibiting  tlie 
sale  of  liquor  on  that  day,  and  such  Mayor  shall 
take  proper  measures  to  enforce  the  same.  (Id., 
§  1838.) 

Any  person  disposing  of  liquor  within  one 
mile  of  any  parade-ground  or  encampment  of 
the  militia  may  be  put  under  guard  by  the 
commandant  and  turned  over  to  the  local 
otficers.     (Id.,  §  3079.) 

Any  officer  shall,  upon  view  or  information, 
apprehend  any  person  selling  liquor  within  two 
miles  of  where  agricidtural  fairs  are  held  and 
seize  thebootli,  stand,  or  thing  at  or  from  which 
the  liquor  is  being  sold,  which  articles  shall  be 
bound  for  the  payment  of  costs  and  fines.  (Id., 
gi^  3712-13.) 

Inspection  of  liquor  is  provided  for  by  Id., 
§§  4277,  4327,  4333. 

Whoever  by  the  sale  of  liquor  causes  intoxi- 
cation shall  pay  a  reasonable  compensation  for 
taking  care  of  such  intoxicated  person  and  $1 
per  day  besides.     (Id.,  §  4356.) 

Every  husband,  wife,  child,  parent,  guardian, 
employer  or  other  person  injured  in  person, 
property  or  means  of  support  by  intoxication, 
having  given  notice,  has  a  right  of  action  for 
damages  sustained,  and  exemplary  damages 
against  those  who,  by  selling  the  liquor,  caused 
such  intoxication.  (Id.,  §  4357.)  Any  person 
liable  to  be  injured  by  the  intoxication  of  any 


one,  and  desiring  to  prevent  it,  shall  give  a 
notice  to  the  .sellers,  either  verbally  or  in  writ- 
ing, before  a  witness,  or  file  with  the  Township 
or  Corporation  Clerk  notice  to  all  liquor-deal- 
ers not  to  sell  liquor  to  a  named  person  after  10 
days.  (Id.,  §  4358.)  Such  notice  so  filed  shall 
be  entered  in  a  book  open  to  public  inspection, 
and  may  be  erased  by  the  person  giving  it.  (Id., 
§  4359.)  It  shall  inure  to  the  benefit  of  all  per- 
sons interested,  the  same  as  if  a  notice  had  been 
served  on  each.  (Id.,  §  4360.)  The  unlawful 
sale  of  liquor  works  forfeiture  of  all  rights  of  a 
tenant  upon  premises  where  it  takes  place.  (Id., 
I  4361.)  Any  saloon-keeper  who  publishes  the 
fact  that  any  such  notice  has  been  given  him 
shall  be  fined  $10  to  $50.  (Id.,  g  4361.)  If  a 
person  rent  premises  for  the  sale  of  liquor  or 
permit  their  use  for  such  purpose,  they  shall  be 
held  liable  for  all  fines,  costs  or  damages  assessed 
against  the  person  occupying  the  same.  (Id., 
g^4364.) 

Whoever  is  found  in  a  .state  of  intoxication 
shall  be  fined  $5.     (Id.,  g  6940.) 

A  keeper  of  a  place  where  intoxicating  liquors 
are  sold  in  violation  of  law  shall  be  fined  $50  to 
$100  or  imprisoned  10  to  30  days,  or  both,  and 
the  place  shall  be  deemed  a  common  nuisance 
and  be  ordered  abated.     (Id.,  g  6942.) 

Whoever  buys  liquor  for  an  intoxicated  person 
or  habitual  drunkard,  or  a  minor  unless  given 
b}^  a  physician,  shall  be  fined  $10  to  $100  or 
imprisoned  10  to  30  days,  or  both.  (Id.,  g  6943.) 

Selling  liquor  within  four  miles  of  any  re- 
ligious assemblage  or  harvest  home  festival,  or 
a  Grand  Army,  Sons  of  Veterans'  or  Union 
Veterans' celebration,  shall  be  fined  $10  to  $100. 
(Id.,  §  6945.)  Selling  liquor  within  1,200  yards 
of  Cohnnbus,  Dayton,  Athens  or  Toledo  Asy- 
lums for  the  Insane,  Soldiers'  and  Sailors'  Home, 
or  of  the  Institution  for  Feeble-Minded  Youth, 
or  the  Ohio  Soldiers'  and  Sailors'  Orphans' 
Home,  or  within  two  miles  of  the  Boys'  Indus- 
trial School  south  of  Lancaster,  or  within  two 
miles  of  an  agricultural  fair,  or  Avithiu  one  mile 
of  any  county  Children's  Home  sitiuite  within  a 
mile  of  any  village  or  city  in  which  selling  is 
prohibited  by  ordinance,  shall  be  fined  $25  to 
$100  or  punished  l)y  imprisonment  not  more 
than  30  days,  or  both,  and  the  place  of  sale  shall 
be  abated  as  a  nuisance.  (Id.,  §  6946.)  Selling 
within  one  mile  of  the  Soldiers'  and  Sailors' 
Home  near  Sanduskv  is  so  punished.  (Id., 
§  6947.) 

Whoever  conveys  liquor  into  a  jail,  or  having 
charge  of  a  jail  permits  a  prisoner  to  receive 
liquor  except  as  a  medicine,  shall  be  fined  $10 
to  $100  or  imprisoned  10  toSOdays.  (Id.,§  6947.) 

No  liquor  shall  be  sold  and  saloons  shall  be 
closed  election  days,  upon  penalty  of  a  fine  of 
not  more  than  $100  and  imprisonment  not  more 
than  10  days.     (Id.,  g  6948.) 

Adulterating  liquor  or  selling  such  is  pimished 
by  fine  of  $100  to  $500  and  imprisonment  10  to 
30  days.     (Id.,  g  6950.) 

Giving  liquor  to  a  female  to  induce  illicit  in- 
tercourse is  punished  by  imprisonment  from 
one  to  three  years.     (Id.,  §  7023  a.) 

Treating  with  liquor  to  influence  votes  is  fined 
$100  to  $2,000  or  punished  by  confinement 
not  more  than  three  years  in  the  Penitentiary. 
(Id..  §  7065.) 


Legislation.] 


33' 


[Legislation. 


An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  vote  of  three-fifths  of  the  two 
Houses,  at  one  session;  popular  vote  to  be  taken 
at  the  next  general  election  for  Representatives, 
six  months'  notice  to  be  given;  a  majority  vote 
of  all  the  electors  voting  at  such  election  is 
necessary  to  carry  it. 

Oklahoma  Territory. 

Lying  wholly  within  Indian  Territory,  Okla- 
homa, upon  being  opened  to  white  settlers  in 
1889,  was  subject  to  the  absolute  and  stringent 
regulations  of  the  Federal  Government,  prohib- 
iting the  liquor  traffic  in  all  its  forms  within  the 
' '  Indian  country. " 

In  March,  1890,  Congress  passed  an  act  pro- 
viding that  the  general  statutes  of  the  State  of 
Nebraska  should  be  in  force  in  Oklahoma  until 
the  Legislative  Assembly  of  that  Territory 
should  meet  and  enact  laws,  except  that  the 
Prohibitory  regulations  relating  to  the  liquor 
traffic  should  be  retained  and  be  operative  dur- 
ing the  interval. 

Oregon. 

Territorial  Troliihition  (1844). — Oregon's  first 
liquor  legislation,  under  her  Territorial  Govern- 
ment, was  Prohibitory.  It  was  provided  that 
if  any  person  should  import  or  introduce  any 
ardent  spirits,  with  intent  to  sell  the  same,  he 
should  be  fined  $50.  If  any  person  should  sell 
such  liquor,  he  had  to  pay  a  fine  of  $20.  If 
any  person  established  a  manufactory  or  distil- 
lery of  the  same,  he  was  to  be  indicted  for  a 
nuisance  and  fined  $100,  and  the  apparatus  was 
to  be  destroyed.  Sheriifs,  Judges,  Constables, 
Justices  of  the  Peace  and  other  officers  were  to 
give  notice  of  any  violation  of  this  act  to  some 
Justice  or  Judge,  who  was  to  i.ssue  warrant  for 
the  arrest  of  the  person,  who,  if  guilty,  was  to 
be  bound  over  to  the  next  Court.  This  was  not 
to  prevent  physicians  from  selling  liquor  for 
medicine,  not  exceeding  a  gallon  at  a  time. 
(Comp.  Laws,  1849,  p.  94  [paTssed  June  24,  1844. 
by  the  Legislative  Committee].) 

The  act  of  1845  strengthened  the  above  verb- 
ally, provided  for  search  and  seizure  for  illicit 
mamifacture,  allowed  half  of  all  fines  to  inform- 
ers and  reduced  the  q\iantity  physicians  might 
sell  to  half  a  pint.     (Id.,  p.  34.) 

Selling  liquor  to  Indians  had  previously,  in 
1843,  been  prohibited,  under  penalty  of  $100  to 
$500.     (Id.,  p.  167.) 

An  act  of  1847  proposed  that  the  word  "reg- 
ulate "  in  the  organic  law  be  stricken  out,  and 
that  where  the  same  occurred  in  the  passage  "to 
pass  laws  to  regulate  the  introduction,  manu- 
facture and  sale  of  ardent  spirits,"  the  word 
"prohibit"  be  inserted.  (Id.,  p.  44.)  This  was 
not  adopted.  The  "organic  law  "was  practi- 
cally the  Constitution  of  the  Territory. 

License  Act  of  1849,  and  Subsequent  Measures. 
— By  act  of  1849,  grocery  licenses  were  to  be 
issued  by  the  Probate  Court  for  not  less  than 
$200,  upon  bonds  given  in  $800  to  keep  orderly 
houses  and  not  allow  gaming,  fines  of  $50  to 
$500  being  provided  for  offenses.  This  license 
act  did  not  autliorize  sales  of  less  than  a  quart, 
such  sales  being  prohibited  under  penalty  of 
not  exceeding  $400.      (G.  S.,  1850,  pp.  157-8.) 

In  1853  retailing  liquor  without  license  was 


prohibited.  The  license  fee  was  made  $100  per 
annum.  The  penalty  for  selling  without  license 
was  a  fine  of  $50  to  $200.  And  sales  on  Sun- 
day were  prohibited  on  penalty  of  $10  to  $25. 
(Laws,  1853,  p.  500.) 

In  1874  selling  on  election  day  was  punished 
by  fine  of  $25  to  $200  or  imprisonment  10  to 
30  days.     (Laws,  1874,  p.  72.) 

Selling  to  a  minor  without  consent  in  writing 
of  a  parent  or  guardian  was  prohibited  under 
penalty  of  fine  not  exceeding  $100  or  imprison- 
ment not  exceeding  six  months,  or  both,  with 
forfeiture  of  license.     (Laws,  1876,  p.  4.) 

In  1885  (Laws,  p.  490)  a  Prohibitory  Amend- 
ment was  proposed  and  provision  for  an  elec- 
tion thereon  made  by  Laws  of  1887,  p.  70.  The 
Amendment  was  defeated. 

By  Laws  of  1885,  p.  25,  and  Special  Sess., 
1885,  p.  38,  a  license  law  was  passed  in  form  like 
the  first  above-named  law  and  almost  identical 
with  the  existing  law  given  below,  except  that 
it  applied  to  cities.  That  law  was  declared 
unconstitutional  so  far  as  it  applied  to  cities 
chartered,  and  doubt  was  expressed  as  to  its 
validity  generally  on  account  of  irregularitifts 
in  its  passage  through  the  Legislature.  (State 
V.  Wright, l4  Or.,  365.) 

The  La  IP  as  It  Existed  in  1889. — No  person 
sliall  sell  intoxicating  liquors  in  less  quantity 
than  one  gallon  without  obtaining  a  license 
from  the  County  Court.  (Laws,  1889,  p.  9.) 
Every  person  shall  pay  for  such  license  $400 
per  year  or  $200  for  malt  liquors  only,  and  in 
tlie  same  proportion  for  a  less  period.  (Id., 
§  3. )  Any  person  applying  for  license  shall  exe- 
cute a  bond  to  the  county  in  $1,000  to  keep  an 
orderly  house,  permit  no  gaming,  not  to  open 
on  Sunday,  and  not  to  give  or  sell  liquor  to 
minors  or  habitual  drunkards  or  persons  in- 
toxicated ;  and  in  case  of  violating  his  bond  he 
shall  be  liable  to  be  fined  $50  to  $200  and 
to  prosecution  as  prescribed.     (Id.,  §  3.) 

Api»]icants  for  license  shall  obtain  the  .signa- 
tures of  an  actual  majority  of  the  whole  num- 
ber of  legal  voters  in  the  precinct  in  which  they 
wish  to  do  business,  to  a  petition  to  grant  the 
license.  Such  number  of  names  must  be  equal  to 
a  majority  of  all  the  votes  cast  at  the  last  pre- 
ceding general  election,  and  shall  be  more  than 
the  number  signed  to  any  remon.strance  against 
granting  the  license.  (Id.,  §  4.)  The  appHcant 
must  at  his  own  expense  cause  the  petition, 
together  with  notice  of  the  day  he  will  apply 
for  license,  to  be  published  four  weeks  in  any 
daily  or  weekly  paper  of  the  county,  or  if  there 
is  none,  he  must  post  in  three  places  in  the  pre- 
cinct. (Id.,  i?  5.)  On  the  applicant's  produc- 
ing to  the  County  Court  the  receipt  of  the 
Treasurer  for  the  fee  and  proof  of  compliance 
with  the  preceding  provisions,  the  County 
Court  may  give  him  a  license.     (Id.,  §  6.) 

It  is  the  duty  of  the  Prosecuting  Attorney, 
Sheriff,  Confutable  and  Justices  of  the  Peace  to 
make  complaint  of  violations  of  this  act,  and  it 
is  also  the  duty  of  the  County  Clerk  to  prose- 
cute the  bonds  given  by  licensees  under  this  act 
for  violations  of  the  conditions  of  the  same. 
(Id.,  §  7.) 

Every  County  Clerk  shall  on  the  first  day  of 
the  term  of  the  Circuit  Court  deliver  to  the 
Grand  Jury  a  list  of  licensed  persons,  .showing 


Legislation.] 


338 


[Legislation. 


dates  of  obtainment  and  expiration  of  licenses. 
(Id.,  §  8.) 

If  any  person  sell  liquor  without  license  he 
shall  be  fined  ,$200  to  $400.     (Id.,  §  9.) 

It  is  the  duty  of  the  Grand  Jury  at  every 
term  of  the  Circuit  Court  to  make  strict  in- 
quiry and  return  bills  of  indictment  against 
every  person  violating  this  act.     (Id.,  §  10.) 

Nothing  in  this  act  applies  to  incorporated 
towns  and  cities,  and  nothing  is  to  be  construed 
to  affect  the  right  of  owners  of  vineyards  to 
sell  their  products  in  quantities  not  less  than 
a  quart.  (Id.,  §  11.)  Selling  or  giving  liquor 
to  minors,  or  permitting  them  to  loiter  about  a 
place  where  liquor  is  sold,  is  punished  by  line 
of  $50  to  $300  or  imprisonment  not  exceeding 
one  year,  or  both,  and  forfeiture  of  license. 
(Code,  1887,  §  1913.)  Selling  to  persons  in- 
toxicated or  in  the  habit  of  becoming  so  forfeits 
$100.  (Id.,  §  1914.)  Disposing  of  liquor 
within  half  a  mile  of  fair  grounds  is  fined  $10 
to  $100.  (Id.,  §  1915.)  On  repetition  of  the 
offense  double  that  penalty  is  charged.  (Id., 
§  1916.)  These  two  sections  do  not  apply  to 
persons  regularly  licensed  in  the  business,  and 
the  prohibition  extends  only  for  two  days  prior 
and  subsequent  to  the  holding  of  the  fair. 
(Id.,  §  1917.) 

No  prison  officer  shall  give  or  suffer  to  be  de- 
livered to  any  prisoner  any  liquor  without  a 
physician's  certificate,  on  pain  of  forfeiting  $25. 
(Id.,  §  3972.)  Other  persons  so  delivering  are 
fined  $15.     (Id.,  §  3973.) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  majority  vote  of  the  two  Houses  ; 
to  be  concurred  in  by  a  majority  of  each  House 
in  the  next  Legislature  ;  a  majority  vote  of  the 
electors  carries  it. 

Pennsylvania. 

Colonial  Provisions. — Under  the  Dutch  ad- 
ministration a  small  excise  was  laid  on  liquors 
imported,  and  the  sale  of  liquor  to  Indians  was 
forbidden  in  1655.  (Laws,  1676  to  1700  ;  Harris- 
burg,  1873,  p.  431.)  The  Duke  of  York's 
"Book  of  Laws"  (for  which  see  New  York) 
was  in  force  in  Pennsylvania  from  1664  to  1682  ; 
in  1682  the  "  Great  Law,  or  Body  of  Laws," 
was  enacted  at  Chester. 

Drunkenness  was  fined  5s ;  second  offense, 
10s.  (Id.,  p.  Ill,  c.  12.)  Those  permitting  it  at 
their  houses  were  fined  the  same.  (Id.,  c.  13.) 
Drinking  healths  was  fined  the  same.  (Id. ,  c.  14. ) 
Selling  to  Indians  was  fined  £5.  (Id.,  c.  15.) 
So  was  keeping  an  ordinary  without  license 
from  the  Governor.  (Id.,  p.  138,  c.  97.)  Ordi- 
naries might  be  suppressed  by  the  county  ses- 
sions for  disorder.     (Id.,  p.  172,  c.  169.) 

In  1710  licensees  had  to  be  recommended  by 
the  Lieutenant-Governor,  upon  recommenda- 
tion of  County  Courts,  upon  pa^yment  of  £3 
40s  and  30s.  Selling  without  license  was  fined 
£5,  and  .suffering  disorder,  drunkenness  or 
gaming  was  fined  40s,  with  suppression  of 
license  for  the  second  offense.  (Bradford's  Laws, 
p.  95.) 

Local  Option  in  the  Vicinity  of  Furnaces 
(1725). — In  1725  licenses  coidd  be  procured  in 
the  vicinity  of  a  furnace  only  by  permit  of  a 
majority  of  the  owners  of  the  furnace.  (Id., 
p.  325.) 


Distillation  of  Orain  Prohibited  (1778). — In 
1778  distillation  from  grain  was  prohibited 
for  a  limited  time.     (McKean's  Laws,  p.  160.) 

Early  State  Prolusions. — In  1783  the  rates  of 
tavern  licenses  were  doubled.  (Laws,  1783, 
c.  61.) 

By  Laws  of  1786,  c.  297,  the  Justices  of 
Quarter  Sessions  were  to  meet  and  decide  how 
many  licenses  they  would  have,  and  then  only 
recommend  that  number  to  the  Executive 
Council  for  license.     (Laws,  1786,  c.  297.) 

A  general  licensing  act,  in  1834,  gave  the 
licensing  authority  to  Courts  of  Quarter  Ses- 
sions, which  Courts  were  not  to  grant  any, 
however,  that  were  not  necessary  to  travellers 
(and  then  only  to  fit  persons) ;  license  fee,  $10 
per  $100  of  the  annual  rental  value  of  the  place. 
Keeping  a  tavern  without  license  was  fined  $10 
to  $100,  and  selling  without  license  was  fined 
not  exceeding  $100.  Licenses  might  be  revoked 
for  disorder,  allowing  gaming  or  harboring 
minors.     (Laws,  1833,  No.  69.) 

Act  No.  63  of  Laws  of  1841  provided  that 
notice  should  be  published  of  all  applications 
for  tavern  licenses,  and  made  the  price  of 
license  $10  for  a  house  whose  yearly  rental 
did  not  exceed  $100,  $15  for  one  not  exceeding 
$200,  and  in  all  other  cases  $15  and  4  per  cent, 
additional  on  the  rental  above  $100.  Inns  and 
taverns  were  to  be  construed  to  be  only  houses 
where  liquor  was  retailed.  Persons  convicted 
of  retailing  without  license  were  fined  $20  to 
$100. 

By  an  act  of  the  same  year  (No.  117),  to  pro- 
vide revenue,  a  tax  on  all  vendors  of  goods, 
wares  and  merchandise  of  from  $12.50  to  $200, 
according  to  the  amount  of  sales,  was  imposed, 
providing  that  those  who  sold  liquor,  with  or 
without  other  goods,  should  pay  50  per  cent, 
more. 

By  resolution  No.  10,  p.  442  of  Laws  of 
1841,  the  Clerk  of  Quarter  Sessions  of  Phila- 
delphia County  was  to  publish  lists  of  names  of 
persons  licensed  at  all  times  when  any  licenses 
were  granted.  This  requirement  for  publica- 
tion of  applications  for  license  was  repealed  as 
to  24  counties  in  1842.  (Laws,  pp.  216,  377, 
459.) 

Tavern  licenses  were  not  to  be  granted  to 
Sheriffs.     (Laws,  1842,  p.  201.) 

Local  Prohibition  (1843). — Licenses  for  sales 
of  liquor  were  prohibited  within  four  and  three 
miles,  respectively,  of  iron  works  and  furnaces 
in  Armstrong  anci  Clarion  Counties,  and  the 
license  law  was  made  more  stringent  for 
Chester  County  by  Laws  of  1843,  p.  383. 

The  question  of  license  or  no-license  was 
submitted  to  the  voters  in  Clearfield  County  by 
Laws,  1845,  No.  223.  The  same  question  was 
submitted  to  the  people  in  18  counties  and  two 
boroughs,  by  Laws  of  1846,  No.  206,  and  in 
another  county  by  No.  359.  Such  Local  Option 
was  declared  a  delegation  of  legislative  power, 
and  unconstitutional,  by  Parker  v.  Com.,  6  Pa. 
St.,  507  ;  but  this  decision  was  reversed  by 
Locke's  Appeal,  72  Pa.  St.,  492. 

By  Laws  of  1846,  No.  359,  §  4,  on  every 
application  for  license  the  Court  was  required 
to  give  remonstrances  such  consideration  as  the 
facts  set  forth  therein  were  entitled  to. 

Houses  where  beer,  ale  and  other  malt  liquors 


Legislation.] 


339 


[Legislation. 


were  kept,  were  required  to  obtain  licenses  of 
the  County  Treasurer  and  pay  $5  to  $200  per 
year,  according  to  amount  of  sales.  (Laws,  1849, 
No.  369,  §§20-23.)  Distillers  and  brewers  were 
also  taxed  $5  to  ,f  100,  according  to  business 
(§  32).  The  changes  in  these  revenue  taxes 
were  frequent  at  and  before  this  time.  Many 
laws  were  passed  (some  at  every  session),  mod- 
ifying the  license  laws  in  different  localities. 
A  complete  body  of  laws  was  thus  formed  for 
Philadelphia  and  Allegheny  Counties  sepa- 
rately, differing  little  essentially  from  each 
other  or  from  the  law  of  the  State  at  large. 
But  the  prevailing  tendency  was  not,  as  in  the 
South,  toward  Pi-ohibition. 

Furnishing  drinks  wilfully  to  minors,  intoxi- 
cated persons  and  tiiose  habitually  becoming  so, 
was  punished  by  fine  of  $10  to  $50,  with 
imprisonment  10  to  60  days.  Notice  to  dealers 
might  be  given  by  any  relative  of  any  habitual 
drunkard,  not  to  sell  to  him,  and  upon  disre- 
garding such  notice  the  offender  was  punished 
as  above.  Civil  damages  for  injuries  to  person 
and  property  on  account  of  unlawful  selling 
were  provided.  Adulteration  was  prohibited, 
and  the  sale  of  such  liciuor,  upon  penalty  of  ^GO, 
and  for  second  offense  $100  and  imprisonment 
not  exceeding  60  days.  Action  for  the  value  of 
liquors  unlawfully  sold  was  refused,  and  prose- 
cutors under  this  act  were  allowed  not  exceed- 
ing $20,  to  be  taxed  as  costs  in  the  case.  (Laws, 
1854,  No.  648.) 

Liquor-selling  on  Sunday  was  prohibited  upon 
pain  of  forfeiting  $50  (half  to  the  prosecutor). 
(Laws,  1855,  No.  55.)  Another  act  of  1855 
(No.  239)  made  the  license  fee  three  times 
the  amount  then  required,  and  in  no  case  less 
than  $30.  It  also  refused  to  allow  license 
to  be  issued  to  any  hotel,  restaurant  or  place 
of  amusement  or  refreshment-keeper,  and  ab- 
rogated City  and  County  Trea.surers'  licenses. 
This  act,  in  certain  provisions,  reads  like  a  Pro- 
hibitory law,  and  in  some  of  the  lists  of 
early  Prohibitory  statutes  it  is  included  ;  but  it 
was  really  a  license  law.  The  policy  indicated 
in  the  last  above-named  law  was  abandoned  the 
next  year  by  Laws  of  1856,  No.  233,  which  was 
a  full  license  act,  and  remained  the  ba.sis  of  the 
law  until  the  High  License  law  of  1887  was 
passed.  It  provided  a  license  fee  of  twice  the 
amount  required  before  the  adoption  of  the  act 
of  1855,  not  to  be  less  than  $50  for  beer,  wine  and 
spirituous  liquor- vendors  ;  $25  to  $1,000  accord- 
ing to  rental  value  of  property  for  taverns,  ex- 
cept that  in  Philadelphia  and  Pittsburgh  the 
minimum  was  $75.  Brewers  and  distillers  were 
taxed  as  before,  but  not  less  than  $50  for  any 
one.  The  Licensing  Court  was  given  power  to 
grant  licenses  after  hearing  by  evidence,  peti- 
tion, remonstrance  or  counsel.  Tavern  and 
eating-house  licenses  were  to  be  granted  only 
when  required  for  the  convenience  of  the  public. 
Eating-houses  could  be  licensed  only  to  sell 
malt  liquor  and  domestic  wines.  The  number  of 
licenses  for  taverns  could  not  exceed  one  for 
every  100  ratables  in  the  cities  and  150  in  the 
counties.  The  number  of  eating-house  licenses 
could  not  exceed  one-fourth  that  number.  The 
penalty  for  violating  the  act  was  a  fine  of  $10 
to  $100,  and  for  a  second  offense  imprisonment 
one  to  three  months  in  addition  to  such  fine. 


The  license  fees  were  reduced  about  half  by  the 
act  of  1858  (Laws,  No.  405),  and  the  denial  of 
licenses  to  theatres  was  changed  to  give  them 
and  beer-houses  and  other  places  of  amusement 
licenses  to  sell  domestic  wines  and  malt  liquors. 
The  Courts,  upon  hearing,  were  empowered  to 
refuse  licenses  if  not  necessary  for  the  accom- 
modation of  the  public,  except  in  Philadelphia. 
(Laws,  1859,  No.  652.) 

An  act  to  prevent  recovery  of  the  price  of 
adulterated  liquors  sold,  was  passed  in  1860. 
(No.  345.)  Hawking  and  peddling  liquors  in 
Potter  County  were  prohibited  by  No.  431  and 
No.  585  of  the  laws  of  the  same  year.  Con- 
stables in  Philadelphia  were  to  make  returns  of 
all  persons  vending  liquors,  and  those  without 
license  were  to  be  fined  not  exceeding  $200  and 
imprisoned  not  more  than  two  years. 

By  the  act  of  1862  (No.  484),  the  Mercantile 
Appraisers  were  to  personally  visit  each  liquor- 
store  and  give  notice  to  the  owner  of  his  assess- 
ment and  its  amount. 

The  use  of  deleterious  drugs  in  the  manufac- 
ture of  liquor,  and  the  sale  of  the  same,  was 
made  a  misdemeanor  and  fined  not  exceeding 
$500,  with  imprisonment  not  exceeding  13 
months,  or  both,  by  Laws  of  1863,  No.  384. 

To  enable  police  officers  to  enforce  order  and 
exterminate  the  unlicensed  tratflc,  selling  to 
minors  and  apprentices  without  leave  of  parent 
or  guardian,  to  husband  or  child,  against  the 
request  of  wife  or  parent,  or  keeping  open  and 
selling  between  midnight  and  sunrise  were  pro- 
hibited upon  penalty  of  forfeiture  of  license. 
Police  officers  were  to  enforce  these  prohibi- 
tions and  keep  order  in  saloons  upon  request, 
and  every  person  arrested  for  being  drunk  was 
to  be  interrogated  as  to  where  he  got  his  liquor. 
And  persons  selling  contrary  to  this  act  were 
made  liable  for  damages  growing  out  of  such 
sales.  (Laws,  1867,  No.  70.)  This  act  was  re- 
pealed by  Laws  of  1868,  No.  33. 

Local  Option  Law  of  1872-5. — In  1872  there 
were  several  local  liquor  laws  passed.  Such 
laws  (many  of  them  being  of  insignificant 
character)  had  considerably  multiplied.  By 
Laws  of  1872,  No.  41,  the  question  of  granting 
licenses  to  sell  liquor  was  to  be  submitted 
at  all  the  annual  municipal  elections  in  every 
city  and  county,  not  often  er  than  once  a  year 
for  the  same  place.  The  act  of  1873,  No.  16, 
amplified  this  act  and  made  it  more  certain. 

The  Laws  of  1875,  No.  47,  repealed  the  Local 
Option  law  and  re-enacted  the  license  provi- 
sions, with  license  fee  at  $50  up,  according  to 
estimated  amount  of  sales  ;  penalty  for  un-. 
licensed  selling,  $200  to  $500,  on  second  convic- 
tion $500  to  $1,000  and  imprisonment  three 
months  to  one  year.  Notices  not  to  sell  to  ex- 
cessive drinkers  were  provided  for,  with  civil 
damages  in  case  of  violating  the  notice.  Sales 
on  election  days,  Sundays,  to  minors  and  to 
those  visibly  intoxicated,  were  prohibited  with- 
out specific  penalty  being  provided. 

Submission  of  Constitutional  Prohibition  (1889). 
— An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  prohibit- 
ing the  manufacture  and  sale  of  intoxicating 
liquor  to  be  used  as  a  beverage  was  submitted 
(Laws,  1889,  p.  439)  and  defeated. 

The  Law  as  It  Existed  in  1889.— The  law 
whose  features  are  here  given  is  the  Brooks  law 


Ijegislation.] 


340 


[Legislation. 


of  1887,  which  is  complete  in  itself.  It  probably 
does  not  displace  every  provision  of  the  former 
statutes,  but  so  little  is  left  as  to  be  of  no  use 
for  the  purposes  for  which  such  statutes  are 
made. 

It  is  unlawful  to  keep  any  place  where  any 
vinous,  spirituous,  malt  or  brewed  liquors  are 
sold  at  retail  without  license.  (Purd.  Dig., 
Supp.,  1887,  p.  2329,  §  1.)  Licenses  to  retail 
such  liquors  in  quantities  not  exceeding  one 
quart  shall  be  granted  only  to  citizens  of  the 
United  States,  of  temperate  habits  and  good 
moral  character.  (Id.,  §  2.)  Such  licenses  shall 
be  granted  only  by  the  Courts  of  Quarter  Ses- 
sions, and  shall  be  for  one  year  from  a  date 
fixed  by  rule  or  standing  order  of  the  Court. 
(Id.,  §  3.)  The  Court  shall  tix  by  standing 
order  the  time  at  which  applications  for  licenses 
will  be  heard,  at  which  time  all  persons  apply- 
ing or  making  objections  to  applications  for 
licenses  may  be  heard  by  evidence,  petition, 
remonstrance  or  counsel.  (Id.,  §  4.)  Applicants 
for  licenses  shall  file  their  petitions  three  weeks 
before  the  first  day  of  the  session  at  which  they 
are  to  be  heard  and  shall  pay  $5  for  expenses. 
The  Clerk  shall  cause  publication  three  times 
in  two  designated  newspapers  of  li.st  of  the 
names  of  all  applicants,  their  residences  and  the 
places  for  which  applications  are  made.  (Id., 
I  5.) 

No  license  shall  be  granted  to  sell  in  any  room 
where  groceries  are  sold.  (Id.,  §  6.)  In  cities 
of  the  lirst  class,  in  the  month  of  January,  the 
Mercantile  Appraiser  must  return  with  the  list 
of  mercantile  taxes  all  licensed  and  unlicensed 
hotels,  restaurants  or  saloons  selling  liquor. 
(Id.,  §7.)  The  petition  for  license  shall  contain 
the  name  and  residence  of  the  applicant  and 
state  how  long  he  has  lived  there,  shall  indicate 
the  particular  place  for  which  license  is  desired, 
shall  state  the  place  of  birtli  of  applicant  and  if 
naturalized  when,  shall  give  the  name  of  the 
trwncr  of  the  premises,  shall  state  that  the  place 
is  necessary  to  the  accommodation  of  the  public 
and  that  the  applicant  is  not  interested  in  any 
other  place  for  which  license  is  to  be  asked,  nor 
will  be  during  the  existence  of  the  license,  shall 
state  whether  the  applicant  has  had  a  license 
revoked  within  a  year,  and  shall  give  the  names 
of  two  freeholders  of  the  ward  or  township,  who 
will  go  sureties  on  the  bond  required,  each 
person  to  be  worth  $2,000  and  not  to  be  engaged 
in  the  manufacture  of  liquor.  (Id.)  His  peti- 
tion must  be  verified  by  artidavit.  (Id.,  ^  8.) 
There  shall  be  annexed  to  such  petition  a 
certificate  signed  by  12  reputable  electors  of  the 
ward,  borough  or  township,  that  they  know  the 
applicant  and  have  reason  to  believe  the  state- 
ments of  the  petition  are  true,  and  praying  that 
the  license  issue.     (Id.,  §  9.) 

The  Court  of  Quarter  Sessions  shall  hear 
petitions  from  residents  of  the  ward,  borough 
or  township  in  favor  of  or  remonstrating  against 
the  application,  and  in  all  cases  shall  refuse  the 
same  whenever,  in  the  opinion  of  the  Court 
(having  due  regard  to  the  number  and  charac- 
ter of  the  petitioners  for  and  against  the  applica- 
tion), such  license  is  not  necessary  for  the 
accommodation  of  the  public  and  entertainment 
of  strangers  or  travellers,  or  the  applicant  is  not 
a  fit  person.    (Id.,  §  10.)    Upon  sufficient  cause 


shown  or  proof  made  to  the  said  Licensing 
Court  that  any  licensee  has  violated  any  law 
relating  to  the  .sale  of  liquor,  the  Court  shall 
upon  notice  to  him  revoke  his  license.     (Id., 

§  11.) 

Persons  licensed  in  cities  of  the  first,  second 
and  third  classes  shall  pay  $500  annually;  those 
in  other  citie.s,  $300;'  tho.se  in  boroughs,  $150;  in 
townships,  $75.  In  cities  of  the  first  class  four- 
fifths  shall  go  to  the  city  and  county  and  one- 
fifth  to  the  State;  in  cities  of  the  second  and  third 
classes,  two-fifths  shall  go  to  city  and  county 
respectively  and  one-fifth  to  the  State  ;  in  other 
cities  and  boroughs  three-fifths  .shall  go  to  city  or 
borough,  one-fifth  to  the  county  and  one-fifth  to 
the  State  ;  in  townships  one-half  shall  be  paid  to 
the  township,  one-fourth  to  the  county  and  one- 
fourth  to  the  State.  Municipalities  receiving 
parts  of  .said  license  moneys  shall  bear  their  pro- 
portionate .share  of  the  co,st  of  collection.  (Id., 
§  12.)  If  persons  neglect  to  pay  the  license  fee 
within  15  days,  no  license  shall  i.ssue  to  them, 
but  be  revoked.  (Id.,  §  13.)  The  license  shall  not 
issue  until  the  licensee  executes  a  bond  in  $2, 000 
to  observe  the  liquor  laws,  and  pay  all  co.sts,  fines 
and  penalties  which  may  be  imposed  upon  him. 
(Id.,  §  14.)  The  constables  of  the  respective 
wards,  boroughs  or  townships  in  each  county 
shall  in  the  fir.st  week  of  Quarter  Se.s.sions  make 
returns  of  all  places  where  liquor  is  sold,  stating 
which  are  licen.sed  and  which  not,  and  on  failure 
shall  be  fined  not  exceeding  $500  or  imprison- 
ed not  more  than  two  years,  or  both.  (Id., 
§  15.)  Every  constable  must  visit,  at  least  once 
a  month,  all  places  within  his  jurisdiction 
where  liquor  is  sold,  to  ascertain  whether  there 
are  violations  of  law,  and  shall  make  returns  to 
the  Court  of  Quarter  Sessions,  with  the  names 
of  the  witnes.ses  thereto.     (Id.,  §  16.) 

Each  licensee  shall  frame  his  license  and  hang 
it  conspicuou.sly  in  his  place  of  business.  (Id., 
§  17.)  No  licensee  .shall  give  credit  for  liqiior 
retailed,  on  penalty  of  losing  the  debt.  (Id., 
§  18.)  Any  person  on  conviction  of  selling  with- 
out licen.se  shall  pay  $500  to  $5,000  and  be 
imprisoned  three  to  12  months.  (Id.,  g  19.) 
Licensees  violating  the  license  law  shall  be  fined 
$100  to  $500  ;  for  second  conviction,  $300  to 
$1,000,  and  for  third,  $500  to  $5,000  or  suffer 
impri.sonment  three  to  12  months,  or  both.  (Id., 
§  20.)  Any  person  convicted  of  more  than  one 
offense  .shall  not  again  be  licensed  in  the  State. 
(Id.,  §  21.)  The  license  of  any  person  permit- 
ting the  cu.stomary  visitation  of  disreputable 
persons  or  keeping  a  disorderly  house,  shall  be 
revoked,  and  the  licensee  shall  not  again  be 
licen.sed  in  the  State.     (Id.,  §  22.) 

Druggists  are  not  required  to  be  licensed,  but 
they  shall  not  sell  liquor  except  upon  pliysi- 
tians'  prescriptions  ;  alcohol,  however,  or  any 
preparations  containing  the  same,  may  be  sold 
for  scientific,  mechanical  or  medicinal  purposes. 
Only  one  sale  can  be  made  on  one  prescription. 
Any  person  wilfully  prescribing  liquor  as  a 
beverage  to  persons  of  intemperate  habits  shall 
be  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor.     (Id.,  §  23.) 


'  By  a  decision  of  the  State  Supreme  Court  it  was 
found  that  an  act  of  tlie  Lej^islature  providing  for 
tlie  chissificatlon  of  cities  was  defective  in  some  respects, 
and  acconiinijly  tlie  license  rate  ijccomes  $.500  uniformly  in 
all  cities,  pending  the  adoption  of  new  legislation. 


Iiegislation.] 


341 


[Legislation. 


No  person  with  or  without  license  may  furnish 
liquor  on  any  election  day,  or  on  Sunday,  or 
to  any  minor  or  person  of  known  intemperate 
habits,  or  to  a  person  visibly  intoxicated,  for 
his  own  use  or  that  of  another,  or  furnish  liquor 
on  a  pass-book  or  store-order,  or  in  exchange 
for  goods,  wares,  merchandise  or  pi'ovision.s, 
upon  penalty  of  $50  to  $500  and  imprison- 
ment 20  to  90  days.     (Id.,  §  24.) 

Any  house,  room  or  place  where  liquors  are 
sold  in  violation  of  law,  is  declared  a  nuisance, 
and  shall  be  abated  by  proceedings  in  law  or 
equity.     (Id.,  §  25.) 

All  local  laws  fixing  a  license  fee  less  than  is 
here  required  are  repealed.  None  of  the  pro- 
visions of  this  law  shall  authorize  sales  in 
places  having  special  Prohibitory  laws.  (Id., 
§27.) 

Any  wholesale  dealer,  brewer,  distiller,  re- 
finer or  compounder  dealing  in  liquor,  shall  pay 
an  annual  license  in  cities  of  the  first  three 
classes  of  $500 ;  in  other  cities,  $300 ;  in 
boroughs,  $200,  and  in  townships,  $100,  which 
shall  go  to  the  State  Treasury.  (Id.,  §  28.) 
Licenses  to  such  persons  shall  be  granted  by 
the  Court  of  Quarter  Sessions  as  for  other 
licenses.'  Such  wholesalers,  etc.,  shall  not  sell 
in  less  quantities  than  one  gallon.  (Id.,  §  29.) 
Bottlers  shall  also  procure  licenses  as  above, 
for  which  they  shall  pay  $200  in  cities  of  the 
first  three  classes,  and  $100  elsewhere,  but  they 
may  not  sell  to  be  drunk  on  the  premises.  (Id., 
§  29.) 

There  is  a  law  requiring  scientific  temperance 
instruction  in  the  public  schools.  (Laws,  1885, 
No.  6.) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  a  majority  vote  of  the  two 
Houses,  to  be  concurred  in  by  a  majority  of 
each  House  in  the  next  Legislature  ;  a  majority 
vote  of  the  electors  carries  it. 

Rhode  Island. 

Colonial  Provisions. — In  1647  taverns,  ale- 
houses and  victualling-houses  were  not  to  be 
kept  without  license,  under  penalty  of  20s. 
(1  R.  I.  Col.  Rec,  185.)  Each  town  might 
allow  such  houses,  and  bind  the  keepers  by 
bond  to  keep  good  order,  and  not  allow  unlaw- 
ful games,  nor  suffer  any  townsman  to  remain 
tippling  there  for  an  hour,  under  penalty  of 
10s,  the  townsman  forfeiting  3s  Ad.  (Id.) 
Drunkenness  was  forbidden  upon  penalty  of 
5s,  or  six  hours  in  the  stocks  on  default ;  for  a 
second  offense,  10s  and  recognizance  in  £10  for 
good  behavior.  (Id.,  p.  186.)  Selling  to  In- 
dians was  forbidden  under  penalty  of  £5  (half 
to  the  informer).  (Id.,  p.  279.)  Each  town 
was  ordered  to  license  one  or  two  houses  for 
entertainment  of  strangers,  and  to  encourage 
them.  No  one  else  was  to  be  licensed  to  sell 
liquor.     (Id.,  p.  280.) 

In  1656  the  con.stables  and  ordinary -keepers, 
with  warrant,  might  search  any  man's  house 
to  see  what  quantity  of  liquor  he  had.  (Id., 
p.  331.) 


•  By  a  decision  of  the  State  Supreme  Court,  made  in 
1889,  the  power  of  the  Courts  of  Quarter  Sessions  to  re- 
fuse applications  for  wholesale  and  brewers'  licenses  was 
practically  nullified. 


In  1673  no  liquor  was  to  be  sold  Sunday 
on  pain  of  6s.     (Id.,  p.  503.) 

In  1721,  upon  complaint,  Town  Councils 
might  post  prohibitions  against  selling  liquor  to 
persons  named  as  drunkards  ;  penalty,  20s; 
for  second  offense,  40s.  (Laws  of  1730,  p.  114 
[passed  1721].) 

By  the  Laws  of  1767,  p.  169,  the  license-fee 
was  put  at  not  exceeding  £5. 

Early  Stats  Provisions. — By  the  Laws  of 
1798,  p.  391,  Town  Councils  might  grant  licen.se, 
at  discretion,  for  $20,  and  unlicensed  selling 
was  fined  $20. 

In  1822  the  license  w^as  $4  to  $20,  and  the 
penalty  for  selling  without  was  $50.  (P.  L., 
1822,  p.  295.) 

Licen.se  was  increased  to  $5  to  $50  by  Laws 
of  1830,  p.  726. 

By  Laws  of  1834,  p.  837,  the  Town  Councils 
might  prohibit  sales  on  Sunday  and  such  other 
days  as  they  thought  proper. 

License  was  placed  at  $10  to  $25  to  those 
having  tavern  accommodations  only,  by  Laws 
of  1837,  p.  930.  In  1838  (Laws,  p.  1021)  li- 
censes to  tavern-keepers  as  above  were  placed 
at  $10  to  $50,  with  retail  license  (not  to  be 
drunk  on  the  premises)  at  not  exceeding  $20. 

Loral  Option  by  Towns  and  Wards  (1838). — 
The  Laws  of  1838  (p.  1033)  also  provided  that 
towns  and  wards  might  by  vote  instruct  that 
no  licenses  be  granted  therein. 

The  last  two  laws  were  consolidated  and 
enacted,  with  several  other  prohibitions  and 
provisions  for  enforcement,  by  Laws  of  1839, 
p.  1073. 

A  new  law  in  1841  left  out  the  Local  Option 
provision  (Laws,  p.  2038.) 

The  Town  Councils  had  power  to  regulate 
retailing  by  granting  or  refusing  licenses. 
Licenses  were  placed  at  $12  to  $50 ;  selling 
without  license  was  fined  $50.  Licensees  were 
to  maintain  good  order,  and  were  not  to  sell  on 
Sunday,  or  to  any  habitual  drunkard  or  person 
intoxicated,  or  suffer  their  places  to  be  fre- 
quented by  such,  or  one  who  was  wasting  his 
property  or  earnings,  or  by  minors,  or  to  suffer 
games  for  liquor,  upon  penalty  of  $50.  Li- 
censees were  to  give  bonds  in  $200  to  obey  the 
law,  and  the  Town  Councils  might  annul  a 
license  for  conviction  of  disorder,  and  the  cul- 
prit would  be  disqualified  to  secure  another  for 
two  years.     (P.  L.,  1844,  p.  495.) 

Tlie  Local  Option  provision  was  re-enacted  in 
1845.     (Laws,  p.  620.) 

In  no-license  towns  one  or  more  persons 
might  be  licensed  to  sell  for  medicinal  and  art 
purposes.     (Laws,  1848,  p.  728.) 

Penalties  were  reduced  to  $20  by  Laws  of 
1848,  p.  735. 

Maine  Laic  of  1853-63. — A  law  prohibiting 
the  manufacture  and  sale,  or  Maine  law,  was 
enacted  in  1852.  (Laws,  p.  3.)  It  provided  for 
Town  Agents,  and  punished  selling  in  violation 
of  the  law  by  $20  fine.  In  1853  a  similar  act, 
but  having  a  penalty  of  $20  and  10  days'  im- 
prisonment for  the  first  offense,  was  enacted  ; 
and  the  question  of  its  repeal  was  submitted  to 
vote  of  the  people  (Laws,  1853,  p.  232)  and  not 
concurred  in. 

The  act  was  very  much  changed  and  ex- 
tended by  Laws  of  1856,  p.  48, 


Legislation.] 


343 


[Iiegislation. 


License  Again  (1863-74). — A  license  law  was 
substituted  for  the  Prohibitory  one  in  1863. 
(Laws,  c.  444.)  License  was  placed  at  $100,  or 
$30  if  liquor  were  sold  only  in  less  quantities 
than  three  gallons.  The  only  formality  neces- 
sary to  get  a  license  was  to  file  in  the  Town 
Clerk's  office  a  notice  of  intention  to  sell 
liquors,  pay  the  fee,  and  give  bond  to  the 
Town  Council  in  $200  to  keep  good  order,  and 
not  sell  Sunday,  to  minors,  drunkards  or  those 
drunk.  The  penalty  for  selling  without  license 
was  $20. 

The  Town  Councils  were  given  power  to 
limit  the  number  of  licenses  granted,  at  dis- 
cretion.    (Laws,  1865,  c.  553.) 

Town  Councils,  at  absolute  discretion,  were 
to  grant  licenses,  and  charge  therefor  $200  to 
$500,  and  they  might  revoke  them  upon  viola- 
tions of  law.     (Laws,  1867,  c.  670.) 

Special  constables  to  enforce  the  law  were 
authorized  to  be  appointed  by  Town  Councils 
(Laws,  1868,  c.  757),  and  Sheriffs  might 
appoint  deputies  for  the  same  purpose.  (Laws, 
1869,  c.  823.) 

No  licenses  were  to  be  granted  after  a  town 
voted  not  to  grant  them.     (Laws,  1872,  c.  990.) 

An  elaborate  inspection-of-liquors  act  was 
passed  in  1877.     (Laws,  c.  973.) 

ProMhiiion,  License,  and  Adoption  and  Repeal 
of  Constitutional  ProMMtion  (1874-89).— In  1874 
(Laws,  c.  385),  the  shortest  Prohibitory  law  on 
record  was  passed.  It  repealed  the  license 
clauses,  and  the  words  " licensed  "  and  "unli- 
censed." Sales  for  medicinal,  art  and  mechan- 
ical purposes  were  not  interfered  with. 

A  very  extended  license  law,  including  Town 
Local  Option,  was  passed  in  1875.  (Laws, 
c.  508.)  It  charged  $150  to  $300  for  a  license  to 
retail,  required  bond  in  $1,000  and  punished 
unlawful  sales  by  $20  fine  and  imprisonment 
10  days  for  first  conviction.  Cider  and  domes- 
tic wines  were  excepted  from  the  law.  This  law 
was  many  times  amended,  and  another  general 
act  was  passed  in  1881  (Laws,  c.  889),  of  the 
same  general  character  but  with  more  extended 
prohibitions  and  provisions  for  enforcement. 

By  Laws  of  1886,  c.  550,  a  Prohibitory 
Amendment  against  "the  manufacture  and  sale 
of  intoxicating  liquors  to  be  used  as  a  beverage," 
was  submitted  to  the  people  and  passed.  The 
Laws  of  that  year  (c.  596)  established  a  Pro- 
hibitory law.  It  provided  for  a  State  Police. 
There  were  search  and  seizure  clauses  but  no 
Injunction  clauses.  Special  prohibitions  of 
sales  to  minors  and  habitual  drraikards,  after 
notice,  were  incorporated.  Penalties :  for 
manufacturing  and  selling,  $20  and  10  days  for 
the  first  offense,  .$50  and  three  months  for  the 
second,  and  $100  and  three  to  six  months  for 
the  third  ;  for  common  selling  and  manufac- 
turing, $100  and  60  days  for  the  first  offense 
and  $200  and  four  mouths  for  subsequent  ones. 

The  Prohibitory  Amendment  (art.  5  of  the 
Amendments  to  the  Constitution)  was  sub- 
mitted for  annullment  by  Laws  of  1889,  May 
session,  c.  808,  and  being  carried,  the  Prohibi- 
tory law  was  repealed. 

Tlie  Law  as  It  Existed  in  1889. — No  person 
shall  manufacture  or  sell,  or  keep  or  suffer  the 
same,  any  intoxicating  liquor,  except  as  pro- 
vided.    Intoxicating  liquor  includes  ale,  wine, 


rum  or  other  strong  or  malt  liquors,  or  mixed 
liquors,  any  part  of  which  is  said  liquors, 
or  any  mixture  of  liquors  which  contains 
more  than  2  per  cent,  by  weight  of  alco- 
hol. (Laws,  Special  Session,  1889,  c.  816,  §  1.) 
The  Town  Councils  and  the  Boards  of  Com- 
missioners hei'einafter  provided  may  grant  or 
refuse  licenses  in  their  towns  or  cities  as 
they  shall  think  proper.  Such  licenses  shall 
expire  May  1,  and  shall  cost  a  price  in  propor- 
tion to  the  price  for  a  year,  if  for  less  than  that 
period.  They  shall  not  authorize  sales  on 
Sunday,  to  any  woman  (except  as  hereinafter 
provided),  to  any  minor,  or  person  of  notor- 
iously intemperate  habits,  or  to  any  person  on 
a  pass-book  or  order  on  a  store,  or  the  ex- 
change of  goods,  wares  or  merchandise  for 
liquors. 

Before  granting  license  the  application  shall 
be  advertised  two  weeks  in  some  newspaper  of 
the  town,  or  if  there  is  none,  some  newspaper 
of  the  county,  giving  notice  of  the  name  of  the 
applicant  and  the  particular  location  of  the 
place  ;  and  there  shall  be  opportunity  for  re- 
monstrants to  be  heard.  No  license  shall  be 
granted  when  the  owners  or  occupants  of  the 
greater  part  of  the  land  within  200  feet  of  the 
proposed  place  file  their  objection  thereto. 
Bond  in  the  sum  of  $2,000  shall  be  first  given 
and  the  license  fee  paid,  three-fourths  thereof 
being  for  the  use  of  the  town  or  city,  and  one- 
fourth  for  the  general  Treasury  of  the  State. 
(Id.,  §  2.)  The  Mayors  of  the  several  cities 
shall  appoint  three  Commissioners,  to  hold 
office  until  April,  1890,  and  then  three  to  hold 
one,  two  and  three  years  respectively ;  and 
Town  Councils  may  elect  three  such  Com- 
missioners in  April  of  each  year,  to  be  com- 
pensated as  City  and  Town  Coiuicils  respect- 
ively shall  provide,  not  exceeding  $5  per  day  of 
actual  employment  in  the  latter  case.  Such 
Commissioners  shall  elect  one  of  their  number 
Clerk,  who  shall  keep  records  which  shall  be 
evidence  when  certified  by  said  Clerk.  The 
Commissioners  shall  annually,  on  or  before 
Feb.  1,  make  report  of  the  licenses  granted  by 
them.  Members  of  the  Town  Councils  are 
ineligible  to  be  such  Commissioners,     (Id.,  §  3.) 

The  electors  of  the  cities  and  towns  shall  at 
each  election  of  general  officers  vote  for  or 
against  granting  licenses,  but  no  such  vote  shall 
be  taken  unless  electors  equivalent  in  number 
to  10  per  cent,  of  the  whole  vote  cast  at  the  last 
such  election  in  cities,  and  15  per  cent,  in  towns, 
petition  the  City  or  Town  Clerk  therefor  20 
days  prior  to  the  election,  when  the  proposition 
shall  be  put  in  the  warrant  for  the  election.  If 
the  vote  be  for  no-license  it  shall  stand  until 
another  such  vote  be  called.     (Id.,  §  4.) 

No  license  shall  be  issued  for  any  place,  ex- 
cept a  licensed  tavern,  where  a  dwelling-house 
or  place  used  as  such  is  connected  from  within 
such  licensed  place.  And  no  entrance  shall  be 
allowed  other  than  directly  from  a  public- 
travelled  way,  except  in  taverns,  on  penalty  of 
forfeiting  the  license.     (Id.,  §  5.) 

Fees  for  license  shall  be  :  To  manufacture  or 
sell  at  wholesale  or  retail  (not  to  be  drunk  on 
the  premises),  $500  to  $1,000  ;  to  sell  at  retail 
only,  $400  for  Providence,  $350  for  other 
places    of   over    15,000  inhabitants,  $300  for 


Legislation.] 


343 


[Iiegislation. 


places  down  to  6,000  people,  and  $200  to  $300 
for  all  other  towns.  A  license  to  manufacture 
carries  with  it  the  right  to  sell  at  wholesale  at 
the  manufactory.  Sales  in  less  quantities  than 
two  gallons  are  retail  sales;  in  larger  quantities, 
wholesale.     (Id.,  §  6.) 

No  licensee  shall  sell  liquors  to  any  unlicensed 
dealer,  or  to  any  keeper  of  any  house  of  ill- 
fame,  having  reason  to  believe  the  same  are  to 
be  resold,  on  penalty  of  $100  and  30  days'  im- 
prisonment and  disqualification  to  hold  license 
for  four  years.     (Id.,  §  7.) 

Importers  of  liquors  under  United  States  law 
may  own  or  sell  such  liquors  in  original  pack- 
ages in  quantities  not  less  than  such  law  re- 
quires for  importation,  and  such  liquov  5hall  be 
as  pure  and  unadulterated  as  when  imported. 
(Id.,  §  8.) 

The  Commissioners  may  permit  a  license  to 
be  transferred  on  notice  (given  as  for  a 
new  license),  and  on  consent  of  sureties  or  a 
new  bond.  In  case  of  death  of  any  licensee  the 
license  is  part  of  the  personal  estate  of  the  de- 
ceased. (Id.,  §9.)  All  licenses  shall  state  the 
name  of  the  person  and  place  licensed,  the  class 
and  the  amount  paid.  They  shall  be  signed  as 
the  Commissioners  direct  and  be  posted  con- 
spicuously in  the  room  of  the  sale  and  be  ex- 
hibited to  all  officers  on  demand.     (Id.,  §  10.) 

If  any  licensee  is  convicted  of  a  violation  of 
this  law,  the  Town  or  City  Treasurer  must  put 
his  boud  in  suit  and  recover  the  penal  sum 
thereof.  If  a  licensee  permit  his  place  to  be- 
come disorderly  to  the  disturbance  of  the 
neighborhood,  or  shall  permit  gaming  or  the 
violation  of  any  laws  of  the  State  therein,  he 
may  be  summoned  before  the  Commissioners 
and  witnesses  may  be  heard  and  his  license  be 
revoked,  and  he  disqualified  for  license  for  five 
years.     (Id.,  §  11.) 

Every  person  selling  liquor  to  be  sold  to  any 
woman  (to  be  drunk  on  the  premises),  or  to  any 
minor,  shall  be  fined  $100  and  imprisoned  90 
days  to  one  year,  and  be  disqualified  for  license 
for  five  years.     (Id.,  §  13.) 

Every  person  who  shall  forcibly  eject  from 
bis  premises  any  intoxicated  person  to  whom  he 
has  sold  liquor,  shall  be  fined  $30  and  be  dis- 
quahfied  one  year.     (Id.,  §  13.) 

The  Town  Councils  shall  appoint  special 
constables  to  enforce  the  liquor  laws.  (Id., 
§  14.)  They  shall  have  tl^e  powers  of  the  State 
Police  and  Chiefs  of  Police  of  cities.  (Id., 
§  15.)  The  Sheriffs,  their  deputies,  the  town 
Sergeants  and  Constables,  and  the  Chiefs  of 
Police  of  cities,  shall  constitute  a  State  Police  ; 
and  it  shall  be  their  duty  to  see  that  the  laws 
are  enforced  and  their  special  duty  to  prevent 
and  repress  crime  by  the  suppre.ssion  of  all  un- 
licensed liquor-shops,  etc.,  and  they  shall  do  so 
upon  the  request  of  any  tax-payer  of  the  town 
or  city.  Any  member  of  such  police  neglecting 
or  refusing  to  perform  such  duties,  shall  be 
fined  not  exceeding  $500  and  be  rendered  in- 
eligible to  be  again  appointed  to  any  such  posi- 
tion. (Id.,  §  16.)  The  Sheriff  shall  appoint  or 
designate  one  deputy  to  discharge  the  duty 
under  this  law.     (Id.,  §  18.) 

Any  person  selling  or  offering  for  sale,  by 
sample  or  otherwise,  liquors  in  violation  of  this 
chapter,  shall  be  sentenced  to  pay  a  tine  of  $30 


and  to  be  imprisoned  10  days,  and  for  the 
second  conviction  $50  and  three  months  ;  third. 
$100  and  three  to  six  months.  (Id. ,  §  19. )  The 
penalty  for  unlawfully  keeping  liquor  for  sale 
is  $30  and  10  days  in  jail.  (Id.,  §  20.)  Section 
831  gives  forms  to  be  used  in  prosecutions 
under  the  last  two  sections. 

No  negative  allegations  of  any  kind  need  be 
averred  or  proved  in  any  complaint  hereunder, 
and  evidence  of  the  sale  or  keeping  for  sale  of 
any  liquor  enumerated  herein  shall  be  evidence 
of  unlawful  sale  or  keeping,  but  the  respondent 
may  show  his  license  or  authority  by  way  of 
defense.     (Id.,  §  23.) 

No  sales  shall  be  made  on  Sunday  except  by 
pharmacists  upon  physicians'  prescriptions,  and 
Town  Councils  or  City  Boards  of  Aldermen 
may  prohibit  sales  during  specific  hours,  on 
election  days  or  holidays,  giving  public  notice 
thereof  for  34  hours.  Any  person  selling  on 
Sunday  or  during  such  prohibited  hours  shall  be 
fined  $30  and  imprisoned  10  days  for  first  con- 
viction, $50  and  three  mouths  for  second,  and 
shall  forfeit  license  and  be  disqualified  for  five 
years.     (Id.,  §  34.) 

Common  carriers  receiving  liquor  which  has 
been  sold  or  is  intended  to  be  sold  in  violation 
of  law,  having  reasonable  cause  to  believe  the 
same,  shall  be  fined  $30  and  may  be  prosecuted 
in  the  town  where  received  or  any  town  into 
which  it  has  been  carried.  (Id.,  §  36.)  Persona 
having  authority  from  railroads  so  receiving 
such  liquors  shall   be  fined  $30.     (Id.,  ^  37.) 

If  any  person  shall  make  complaint  under 
oath  before  any  Justice  or  Clerk  of  a  District 
Court  that  liquors  are  kept  in  any  place  for  un- 
lawful sale,  such  Justice  or  Clerk  shall  Lssue  a 
search-warrant  therefor.  (Id.,  §  38.)  Such 
warrant  shall  describe  the  place  and  liquors  as 
nearly  as  may  be  and  state  the  name  of  the 
owner,  if  known  ;  and  such  liquor  shall  be 
seized  and  held  by  the  officer,  who  shall  sum- 
mon the  owner,  if  to  be  found  by  him.  (Id., 
§29.)  If  such  place  be  a  dwelling-house,  the 
complaint  must  state  a  belief  that  liquors  have 
been  sold  unlawfully  therein  within  30  days, 
and  are  then  kept  therefor  therein,  and  .state  the 
facts  upon  which  that  belief  is  founded.  (Id., 
§  30.)  If  the  owner  be  not  found,  notice  of 
such  seizure  shall  be  posted  in  three  places,  and 
such  other  notice  as  the  Court  deems  necessary. 
(Id.,  §  31.)  Liquors  so  seized,  if  .so  kept,  shall 
be  forfeited,  and  an  officer  shall  be  designated 
by  the  Court  to  prosecute  for  the  forfeiture 
thereof.  (Id.,  §  33.)  If  the  cause  of  forfeit- 
ure be  not  proved, the  liquor  shall  be  returned. 
(Id.,  §  33.)  If  proved  the  Court  shall  issue 
warrant  for  destruction  of  such  liquor.  (Id., 
§  34.)  Any  irregularity  in  notice  for  seizure  or 
forfeiture  may  be  permitted  to  be  amended, 
and  further  notice,  to  secure  personal  notice  to 
the  owner,  may  be  directed.  (Id.,  §  35.)  The 
officer  shall  be  allowed  $5  for  service  and  $3  for 
days  additionally  employed  thereabout,  and  10 
cents  per  mile  travelled,  and  a  reasonable  sum 
for  storage  and  care,  all  of  which  shall  be  taxed 
as  costs  and  paid  by  the  State  Auditor.  (Id., 
§36.) 

Fines  recovered  under  §§  19  and  30  shall  be 
half  to  the  complainant,  and  judgment  ren- 
dered upon  a  suboequeut  complaint  for  the  same 


Iieg^slatiou.] 


344 


[Legislation. 


offense  shall  be  no  bar  to  any  prior  com- 
plaint ;  but  the  pendency  of  the  former  com- 
plaint may  be  pleaded  in  bar  of  the  second. 
(W.,  §  37.) 

Any  person  convicted  under  this  chapter  in 
the  District  C'ourt,  may  appeal  within  five  days 
to  the  next  Court  of  Common  Pleas.  (Id., 
§  38.)  On  appeal  the  appellant  must  give  bond 
in  $100  for  his  appearance,  and  that  he  will  not 
during  the  pendency  of  the  appeal  violate  this 
chapter.  (Id.,  §  39.)  Upon  neglecting  to  give 
such  bond  the  appellant  shall  be  committed. 
(Id.,  §  40.)  On  such  appeal  any  witness  sworn 
may  be  required  to  give  bond  in  !|50  to  testify 
on  the  appeal.     (Id.,  §  41.) 

Every  person  manufacturing  unlawfully,  or 
who  shall  become  a  common  seller,  shall  be 
punished  by  hue  of  $100  and  90  days'  imprison- 
ment for  tlie  first  conviction,  and  $200  and  six 
months  for  second  and  subsequent  ones. 
Several  sales  to  the  same  or  different  persons 
constitute  one  a  common  seller,  and  being  twice 
convicted  under  §  19,  and  convicted  of  another 
violation  thereof  within  six  months  succeeding 
the  last,  sustains  an  allegation  of  being  a  com- 
mon seller.     (Id.,  §  43.) 

Nothing  herein  shall  prohibit  the  manufac- 
ture or  sale  of  cider,  or  the  manufacture  of 
wine  or  malt  liquor  for  domestic  use,  or  the 
manufacture  of  alcohol  for  exportation  out  of 
the  State.  (Id.,  §  44.)  Nor  shall  anything 
herein  apply  to  the  domestic  manufacture  of 
wine  from  currants,  grapes  or  other  fruits  or 
berries  grown  in  the  State,  or  to  the  sale  thereof 
in  quantities  not  less  than  a  gallon.     (Id.,  §  45.) 

No  officer  complaining  of  a  violation  of  this 
chapter  shall  be  required  to  become  liable  for 
costs.     (Id.,  §  46.) 

If  any  person  in  a  state  of  intoxication  from 
liquor  furnished  him  in  violation  of  law,  injure 
any  person,  the  seller  of  the  liquor  is  liable 
therefor,  jointly  with  the  person  intoxicated,  or 
separately.     (Id.,  §  47.) 

Selling  to  women  (to  be  drunk  on  the 
premises),  or  to  a  minor,  or  allowing  either  to 
loiter  upon  the  i)remises,  forfeits  $100,  to  be  re- 
covered by  the  husband  of  the  woman  or  parent 
or  guardian  of  the  minor.  (Id.,  §  48.)  The 
husband,  wife,  parent,  child,  guardian  or  em- 
ployer of  any  habitual  drunkard  may  give 
notice  requesting  no  .sales  to  such  person,  and 
if  sales  be  made  to  such  person  or  he  be  allowed 
to  loiter  upon  the  premises,  the  person  notified 
is  liable  to  the  giver  of  the  notice  in  damages. 
(Id.,  §49.) 

The  ]\Iayor  and  Aldermen  of  any  city,  or  the 
Town  Council  or  any  member  thereof,  or  the 
Chief  of  Police  or  any  police  officer,  or  any 
constable  specially  authorized,  or  any  of  the 
State  Police  may  enter  upon  the  premises  of  a 
licensed  person  to  ascertain  his  method  of  doing 
business  or  to  preserve  order,  and  may  arrest 
without  warrant  anyone  therein  violating  the 
law  and  keep  him  in  custody  not  over  24  hours, 
till  he  can  be  brought  before  a  magistrate. 
Whenever  any  person  is  seen  to  drink  on  any 
8uch  premises  on  Sunday,  or  prohibited  days  or 
hours,  it  shall  be  evidence  that  the  liquors  were 
sold  by  the  occupant.     (Id.,  §  50.) 

On  a  conviction  carrying  revocation  of  license, 
the  Clerk  of  the  Couxl,  shall  give  notice  to  the 


Board  of  Commissioners,  on  penalty  of  $50. 
(Id.,  §51.) 

Pharmacists  may  sell  liquor  not  exceeding 
one  pint  for  medical  purposes,  once  only,  upon 
a  physician's  prescription,  which  shall  be  filed. 
Persons  making  false  statements  to  so  procure 
liquor  shall  be  fined  $50  to  $100.  The  sale  of 
pure  alcohol  for  mechanical  or  art  purposes  is 
not  prohibited.     (Id.,  §  52.) 

In  any  complaint  or  warrant  it  shall  not  be 
necessary  to  set  forth  the  kind  or  quantity  of 
liquor  sold  or  the  time  of  sale  or  manufacture  ; 
but  proof  of  anj^  violation  set  forth  in  substance 
is  sufficient.  The  record  of  previous  convic- 
tions shall  be  set  forth,  with  the  date  thereof. 
(Id.,  §53.) 

Defects  of  form  in  any  action  may  be 
amended.     (Id.,  §  54.) 

In  all  appeals  the  Attorney-General  shall 
conduct  the  case  for  the  State.     (Id.,  §  55.) 

Payments  for  liquor  sold  unlawfully  shall  be 
held  without  consideration  (Id.,  §  56),  and  no 
action  shall  be  maintained  for  the  value  of 
liquor  drunk  on  the  premises  or  unlawfully  sold. 
(Id.,  §57.) 

Obstructions  preventing  a  clear  view  of  the 
interior  of  licensed  premises  by  the  passer-by 
shall  be  removed  all  day  Sunday,  on  penalty  of 
$20.     (Id.,  §58.) 

The  Treasurer  of  a  town  or  city  shall,  on 
June  and  Dec.  10,  make  returns  to  the  State 
Treasurer  of  all  moneys  for  licenses  belonging 
to  the  State.     (Id.,  §  60.) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  majority  vote  of  the  two  Houses  ; 
to  be  conciuTcd  in  by  a  majority  of  each  House 
in  the  next  Legislature  ;  an  affirmative  vote  of 
three-fifths  of  the  electors  voting  on  the  ques- 
tion is  necessary  to  adoption. 

South  Carolina. 

Colonial  Provisions. — There  was  an  act  passed 
in  1688  to  prevent  unlicensed  taverns  and  punch- 
houses,  and  for  ascertaining  the  rates  and  prices 
of  wine  and  other  liquors.  It  is  not  now  to  be 
found. 

The  act  of  1686  (2  Stats,  at  Large,  18)  pro- 
vided that  no  one  should  retail  liquor  with- 
out obtaining  license  of  the  Governor,  upon 
penalty  of  £10.  Those  selling  under  one  gal- 
lon were  retailers.  The  license  fee  to  retail 
wine  was  £5,  to  retail  punch  £3.  This  act  did 
not  extend  to  any  inhabitants  of  the  country 
who  sold  rum  or  other  liquors  to  their  servants 
or  workmen,  or  who  supplied  their  neighbors 
out  of  their  houses.  This  was  to  provide  rev- 
eniie  to  support  the  Governor. 

The  act  of  1694  (Id.,  85)  for  regulating  public 
houses  commenced  with  these  words :  '  'Where- 
as, The  unlimited  number  of  taverns,  tap- 
houses and  punch-houses,  and  the  want  of 
sobriety,  honesty  and  discretion  in  the  owners 
and  masters  of  such  houses  have  and  will  en- 
courage all  such  vices  as  are  the  productions  of 
drunkenness."  This  act  substantially  repeated 
former  laws. 

The  act  of  1695  (Id.,  113)  adopted  and  en- 
acted the  statutes  and  common  law  of  England 
for  the  government  of  public  houses.  Peddling 
liquor  was  prohibited  in  1703.     (Id.,  199.) 

Sales  by  planters  excepted  by  former  acts  were 


Legislation.] 


345 


[Legislation. 


by  act  of  1709  (Id.,  337)  limited  to  sales  not  to 
be  drunk  on  the  premises.  Up  to  this  time 
these  laws  were  re-enacted  for  the  term  of  each 
Governor,  but  in  1711  (Id.,  368)  the  act  was 
made  permanent. 

Early  State  Provisions. — By  the  act  of  1783 
(4  Id.,  565)  licenses  were  put  at  50s,  and  in 
Charleston  at  £5  more,  and  the  penalty  of  sell- 
ing without  license  was  put  at  £50.  By  another 
act  of  the  same  year  (Id.,  576),  such  licenses 
were  placed  at  £10  and  £3  respectively.  By 
the  first  of  these  acts  an  import  duty  of  \d  was 
levied  on  every  gallon  of  liquor  imported, 
which  duty  Avas  by  the  latter  act  differentiated 
as  to  each  kind  of  liquor,  the  average  being 
reduced. 

The  act  of  1791  (7  Id.,  268)  gave  the  power 
of  granting  licenses  to  the  County  Courts  then 
created.  After  their  disestablishment  by  the 
act  of  1799  (Id.,  299),  that  power  was  given  the 
Commissioners  of  Roads. 

By  act  of  1801  (5  Id.,  399)  the  power  of  licens- 
ing "liquor-selling  was  vested  in  the  Commis- 
sioners of  Roads,  at  discretion,  the  proceeds  to 
be  used  on  the  roads.  Tavern  licenses  cost  $10 
and  licenses  to  retail  not  less  than  a  quart  (not 
at  a  tavern)  $15.  Selling  without  license  was 
fined  flOO. 

Sales  of  liquors  within  one  mile  of  places  of 
worship  during  service,  except  by  regular  li- 
censed dealers,  were  fined  $50  by  act  of  1809. 
(Id.,  599.) 

The  Screen  Law  of  1839.— By  act  of  1835  (Id., 
528)  licensees  were  required  to  give  bond  in 
$1,000  to  observe  the  law,  and  were  required  to 
keep  their  places  without  screens  or  obstruc- 
tions, so  the  vending  should  be  done  openly, 
upon  penalty  of  $50  to  $200.  A  $50  license 
fee  was  required. 

Delivering  liquor  to  a  slave,  except  upon  the 
written  order  of  the  master,  was  punished  by 
imprisonment  not  exceeding  six  mouths  and  fine 
not  exceeding  $100  (Laws,  1834,  7  Id.,  469),  and 
those  licensed  were  first  required  to  take  oath 
not  to  so  sell  ;  and  if  a  negro  entered  defend- 
ant's place  without  the  article  and  left  w'ilh  it, 
that  fact  was  sufflcieut  evidence. 

By  the  act  of  1842  (Laws,  p.  295),  the  Court 
might  imprison  for  not  exceeding  six  months, 
instead  of  the  fine  then  imposed  by  law. 

The  act  of  1849  (Laws,  p.  557)  granted  retail 
licenses  to  tavern-keepers  only  ;  and  upon  rec- 
ommendation of  at  least  three  respectal)le  free- 
holders of  the  neighborhood,  or  in  incorporated 
towns  by  six,  they  were  strictly  required  to 
have  tavern  accommodations  for  travellers. 
Bond  in  $1,000  was  required.  It  was  made  un- 
lawful for  anyone  licensed  to  retail  liquors  to 
sell  such  liquors  in  quantities  le.ss  than  one 
quart,  nor  did  retail  licenses  authorize"  the 
drinking  such  liquors  at  the  place  where  sold. 

War  Provisions. — Distillation  from  grain  was 
prohibited  and  pimished  by  forfeiture  of  appa- 
ratus. Imprisonment  six  months  to  two  years, 
and  a  fine  of  $1,000  to  $5,000  ;  but  agents  to 
distil  for  medical  purpo.ses  only,  under  the 
Governor's  direction,  might  be  appointed  by  the 
Governor.  (Laws,  1862-3,  p.  111.)  This  act 
was  extended  to  distillation  from  anything  but 
fruits  in  their  season,  and  the  permits  before 
granted  by  the  Governor  were  revoked,  and  the 


Governor  was  authorized  to  license  only  one  or 
more  such  agents  for  the  same  purposes,  and 
then  only  if  liquor  could  not  otherwise  be  pro- 
cured. (Id.,  p.  113.)  Such  agents  (not  to  ex- 
ceed one  in  each  judicial  district)  were  subject 
to  strict  limitations.     (Laws,  1863,  p.  198.) 

Since  the  War. — Peddling  spirits  was  pro- 
hibited by  Laws  of  1870,  No.  274. 

A  general  license  law  (1872,  No.  155)  included 
licenses  to  sell  liquors.  The  tax  on  taverns  and 
saloons  to  retail  was  graded  according  to  rental 
value  of  the  places,  at  from  $37.50  to  $375.  By 
Laws  of  1874,  No.  646,  the  provisions  of  the 
general  law  relating  to  the  granting  of  licenses 
were  declared  to  be  applicable  only  to  the  in- 
corporated limits  of  cities,  towns  and  villages. 
This  law,  with  some  additions,  is  now  in  force. 

Considerable  numbers  of  local  Prohibitory 
laws  have  been  passed  within  the  last  few  years 
in  South  Carolina. 

The  Law  as  It  E.i'isted  in  1889. — No  license 
for  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquor  shall  be 
granted  outside  of  the  incorporated  cities,  towns 
and  villages,  and  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any 
person  to  .sell  such  liquors  without  license.  (G. 
S.,  1882,  §  1731.) 

No  license  shall  be  granted  by  any  municipal 
authorities,  except  vipon  payment  to  the  Treas- 
urer of  the  county  of  $100.     (Id.,  §  1732.) 

The  sale  of  all  wines,  fruits  prepared  with 
spirituous  liquors,  or  other  beverages,  of  which 
spirituous  liquor  forms  an  ingredient,  is  hereby 
prohibited  except  in  incorporated  places.  (Id., 
§  1733.) 

Domestic  wine  made  from  grapes  or  berries 
grown  within  the  State  may  be  sold  by  the 
makers  in  quantities  not  less  than  a  quart,  put 
up  in  bottles,  casks  or  demijohns  containing  not 
le.ss  than  a  quart,  labelled  with  the  name  of  the 
said  maker.     (Laws,  1885,  p.  359.) 

Any  person  violating  the  general  law,  or  any 
special  law  regarding  the  sale  of  liquors,  shall  be 
fined  not  over  $200,  or  imprisoned  not  exceeding 
six  months,  or  both  (half  of  the  fines  going  to 
the  informer.)  (Laws,  1885,  p.  415,  amending 
G.  S.,  1882,  55  1734.) 

No  licen.se  may  i.ssue  in  any  city,  town  or 
village  where  the  sale  is  prohibited  by  act  of 
the  Legislature  or  by  ordinance  of  the  munic- 
ipality.    (Id.,  §1735.) 

Nothing  herein  prohibits  sale  by  licensed  dis- 
tillers in  the  original  packages  of  not  less  than 
10  gallons  upon  the  premises  of  manufacture. 
(Id.) 

Municipal  authorities  may  grant  license  to 
retail  to  keepers  of  drinking-saloons  and  eating- 
houses,  apart  from  taverns,  and  fix  the  price  of 
the  same  at  not  less  than  $75,  the  person  to  be 
first  recommended  by  six  respectable  tax- 
payers of  the  neighborhood,  and  to  give  bond 
in  $1,000  for  the  keeping  of  an  ordeily  house 
and  the  observance  of  the  law.     (Id.,  §  1736.) 

Municipal  authorities  may  grant  licenses  for 
retailing  wine,  cider,  brewed  or  malt  liquors 
upon  payment  of  $25,  and  recommendation  as 
above,  and  bond  in  $500  as  above,  on  condition 
that  such  licensees  shall  not  keep  spirituous 
liquors  or  any  mixture  thereof.     (Id.,  §  1737.) 

Wilfully  furnishing  intoxicating  drink  to  any 
person  of  known  intemperate  habits,  or  person 
when  drunk,  or  to  a  minor  or  insane  person. 


iLegislation.] 


346 


[liegislatiou. 


for  use  as  a  beverage,  shall  be  deemed  a  misde- 
meanor, and  it  shall  be  lawful  for  any  relative 
or  guardian  of  such  intemperate  person  or 
minor,  or  the  committee  of  such  insane  person, 
or  for  any  trial  Justice  of  the  township,  to  give 
notice  to  any  seller  not  to  furnish  liquor  to  such 
person  ;  and  if  he  do  so  within  three  months  he 
shall  be  responsible  for  injury  to  person  or 
property  resulting,  and  a  wife  may  recover  for 
loss  of  means  of  support.     (Id.,  §  1738.) 

Any  person  found  drunk  in  any  public  place 
shall  be  lined  not  exceeding  $5,  and  the  person 
who  sold  the  liquor  to  be  drunk  on  the  premises 
which  caused  the  intoxication  shall  be  liable  in 
|5  to  the  wife,  parent,  child  or  guardian  of  such 
person  found  intoxicated.     (Id.,  §  1739.) 

Whenever  any  riot  or  breach  of  the  peace 
occurs  in  any  drinking-place  the  keeper  shall  be 
deemed  an  aider  and  abettor  thereof,  and  shall 
be  liable  as  such  unless  he  can  show  it  was  not 
caused  by  persons  becoming  intoxicated  on  his 
premises.     (Id.,  t^  1740.) 

No  person  shall  trade  in  liquors  on  Sunday. 
(Id.,  §1741.) 

The  municipal  authorities  of  incorporated 
cities,  towns  and  villages  have  power  to  grant 
licenses  to  sell  by  the  quart,  and  any  person  so 
licensed,  who  shall  permit  the  liquor  so  sold  to 
be  drunk  on  the  premises,  shall  forfeit  his 
license,  and  it  shall  not  be  renewed  for  a  year. 
No  license  shall  be  issued  until  the  receipt  of 
the  County  Treasurer  for  the  license  fee  is  pre- 
sented.    (Id.,  §1742.) 

No  druggists  shall,  except  upon  prescriptions, 
sell  any  bitters  of  which  spirituous  or  malt 
liquor  is  an  ingredient,  or  any  medicated  liquors 
by  the  bottle  or  drink,  unless  licensed,  when 
they  may  sell  as  in  cases  of  those  licensed  to  sell 
by  the  quart.  (Id.,  §  1743;  amended  by  Laws 
of  1884,  No.  495. ) 

In  all  cases  the  Court  before  which  any  fine 
is  recovered  under  this  chapter  shall  award  to 
the  prosecutor  a  reasonable  share  thereof  for  his 
trouble,  not  exceeding  one-third.  (G.  S.,  1883, 
§  1744.) 

All  licensed  persons  shall  expose  their  licenses 
to  public  view  in  their  chief  places  of  business. 
Any  person  convicted  of  retailing  without 
license,  or  on  the  Sabbath,  shall  not  be  entitled 
to  license  for  two  years.  And  every  licensee 
shall  sell  in  a  room  fronting  the  public  street, 
without  any  screen  or  device  for  preventing  the 
passing  public  from  fully  viewing  what  may  be 
transpiring  within.     (§  1745. ) 

Whenever  one-third  of  the  number  of  voters 
at  the  preceding  municipal  election  shall  peti- 
tion (before  the  15th  of  November  in  any  year) 
for  an  election  upon  the  question  of  license,  the 
Council  shall  submit  the  question  at  a  special 
election,  on  or  about  Dec.  1  following,  and  if  a 
majority  voting  is  in  favor  of  no-license,  none 
shall  be  granted  then  for  the  ensuing  two  years. 
(Id.,  §  1747;  amended  by  Laws  of  1884,  No. 
246.) 

All  licenses  shall  be  so  granted  as  to  end  on 
the  31st  day  of  December.     (Id.,  §  1747.) 

Whenever  a  vote  has  been  taken  as  above,  the 
decision  shall  stand  until  reversed  by  another 
vote. 

Sections  1746,  1747  and  1748  do  not  apply 
to  any  city,  town  or  village  in  which  the  sale  of 


liquor  is  prohibited  by  legislative  enactment. 
(Id.,  §  1749;  amended  by  Laws  of  1884,  No.  419.) 

Whenever  at  any  such  election  as  above,  the 
vote  is  in  favor  of  no-license,  no  druggist  may 
sell  liquor  except  upon  a  physician  s  prescrip- 
tion, which  shall  be  filed  one  year  by  the  drug- 
gist. (G.  S.,  1882,  §  1750.)  No  physician  shall 
give  such  a  prescription  except  when  actually  in 
bond' fide  attendance  upon  a  patient.  (Id.,§  1751.) 

Saloons  must  be  closed  from  6  o'clock  of  the 
evening  preceeding  the  day  of  election  until  6 
o'clock  of  the  morning  of  the  day  after,  and  the 
sale  of  liquor  is  prohibited  during  that  time, 
upon  penalty  of  fine  not  exceeding  $50  or  im- 
prisonment not  exceeding  six  months,  or  both. 
(Id.,  §  114.) 

No  trial  Justice  shall  retail  liquor,  upon  pen- 
alty of  $250  and  disqualification  for  the  office. 
(Id.,  §  801.) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  a  two-thirds  vote  of  all  the  mem- 
bers of  both  Houses  ;  to  be  concurred  in  by  a 
majority  of  the  electors  voting  at  the  next 
general  election  ;  and  then,  in  order  to  be 
adopted,  must  be  ratified  by  two-thirds  of  each 
House  in  the  next  Legislature. 

Sout7i  Dakota. 

No  person  or  corporation  shall  manufacture 
or  aid  in  the  manufacture  for  sale,  any  intoxi- 
cating liquor  ;  no  person  shall  sell  or  keep  for 
sale,  as  a  beverage,  any  intoxicating  liquor. 
The  Legislature  shall  by  law  jirescribe  regula- 
tions for  the  enforcement  of  the  provisions  of 
this  section,  and  provide  suitable  and  adequate 
penalties  for  the  violation  thereof.  (Const.,  art. 
24.) 

The  Legislature  of  1890  passed  an  elaborate 
Prohibitory  statute  in  compliance  with  this 
article.  Not  being  available  at  the  time  that 
this  is  prepared  for  the  press,  the  provisions  of 
the  act  cannot  be  stated  here  ;  but  they  will  be 
found  summarized  on  p. 614. 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  majority  vote  of  all  the  members 
of  the  two  "Houses,  at  one  session  ;  popular  vote 
to  be  taken  at  the  next  general  election  for  Rep- 
resentatives, 12  weeks'  notice  to  be  given.  A 
majority  carries  it. 

Tennessee. 

Early  Provisions. — Tavern-keepers  encourag- 
ing gaming  or  hor.se-racing,  or  furnishing  liquor 
in  connection  with  gambling  or  horse-racing, 
were  fined  $10,  with"  forfeiture  of  license  and 
disqualification  to  receive  another  one  for  one 
year.  (Laws,  1799,  c.  8.)  Ordinary  licenses 
were  taxed  $5.     (Id.,  c.  30.) 

In  1811  licenses  were  to  be  granted  by  the 
Court  of  Pleas  and  Quarter  Sessions,  to  those 
not  of  gross  immorality,  for  $3  ;  and  selling 
without  license  was  fined  $1  to  $3,  and  con- 
stables were  to  sive  information  against  offend- 
ers.   (Laws,  1811,  c.  113.) 

In  1813  persons  selling  drink  capable  of  pro- 
ducing intoxication  to  slaves,  without  permits 
in  writing,  were  to  be  fined  $5  to  $10.  (Laws, 
1813,  c.  135.) 

In  1817  ordinary-keepers,  before  receiving 
license,  were  to  be  sworn  not  to  permit  gaming 
of  any  kind.     (Laws,  1817,  c.  61,  §  5.) 


Ijegislation.] 


347 


[Legislation. 


In  1821  all  laws  prohibiting  the  sale  of  ale, 
beer,  cider  and  methylin  by  retail,  were  re- 
pealed.    (Laws,  1821,  c.  18.) 

No  Licenses  to  he  Granted  to  Persons  Whose 
Principal  Object  was  the  Retailing  of  Liquors, 
(1823). — In  1838  no  license  was  to  be  granted  un- 
less the  applicant  proved  in  open  Court  his  good 
character,  and  that  he  had  adequate  tavern 
accommodations  ;  and  no  license  was  to  be 
granted  if  the  principal  object  was  the  retailing 
of  liquors.     (Laws,  1823,  c.  33.) 

Those  at  whose  houses  elections  or  musters 
were  held  might  sell  liquor  on  such  days. 
(Laws,  1827,  c.  15.) 

In  1831  the  Clerk  of  the  County  Court  was 
required  to  grant  licenses,  upon  payment  of  $25. 
(Laws,  1831,  c.  80.) 

In  1835  an  oath  not  to  sell  to  slaves  was  re- 
quired before  licen.se  could  be  obtained.  (Laws, 
1835,  c.  34.)  An  additional  oath  not  to  allow 
gaming  was  required.     (Laws,  1835,  c.  25.) 

Repeal  of  all  License  Laws  (1838). — The  act  of 
1838  (Laws,  c.  122)  repealed  the  acts  authoriz- 
ing the  granting  of  licenses,  and  provided  that 
all  persons  convicted  of  the  offense  of  retailing 
spirituous  liquors  should  be  lined  at  the  discre- 
tion of  the  Court.     (Passed  Jan.  26,  1838.) 

In  1841  (Laws,  c.  141),  selling  liquor  to  free 
persons  of  color,  or  to  slaves  (to  be  drunk  on 
the  premi.ses)  was  forbidden  as  a  misdemeanor, 
and  so  was  any  sale  to  a  slave  without  permis- 
sion of  his  master,  even  though  the  liquor  were 
not  drunk  on  the  premises. 

By  act  of  1845  (Laws,  c.  90)  tippling-houses 
were  taxed  $25  if  the  stock  of  the  establish- 
ment did  not  exceed  $250,  and  $10  for  each 
$100  of  stock.  Incorporated  towns  and  coun- 
ties might  each  exact  an  equal  tax.  A  similar 
tax  on  all  purcha.ses  of  stock  was  imposed.  It 
was  made  a  misdemeanor  to  sell  without  license. 
An  oath  was  required,  before  license  issued,  not 
to  sell  to  slaves,  permit  gaming  or  sell  on 
Sunday.  Buying  liquor  for  negroes  was  made 
a  misdemeanor  by  Laws  of  1851,  c.  174. 

Licenses  were  placed  at  $50  in  country  places, 
$70  in  towns  of  1,000  to  5,000  inhabitants  and 
$100  in  larger  places,  with  the  privilege  ac- 
corded to  incorporated  places  and  counties  to 
duplicate  .such  fees.     (Law,s,  1869,  c.  38.) 

The  Four  Mile  law,  which  is  the  most  im- 
portant later  act,  was  passed  in  1877. 

Submission  of  Constitutional  Prohibition 
(1887). — A  Constitutional  Amendment,  pro- 
hibiting the  manufacture  and  sale  as  a  beverage 
of  intoxicating  liquors,  was  by  Laws  of  1885, 
p.  349,  proposed,  concurred  in,  voted  upon  and 
defeated  in  1887. 

The  Law  as  It  Existed  in  1889.— The  right  to 
sell  spirituous,  vinous  or  fermented  liquors  in 
quantities  le.ss  than  a  quart,  or  in  larger  quan- 
tities (to  be  drunk  at  the  place  of  .sale),  is  a  tax- 
able privilege  in  the  sense  of  §  28,  art.  2,  of  the 
Constitution.  (Id.,  §  857.)  This  privilege 
shall  not  be  exercised  without  license  from  the 
Clerk  of  the  County  Court.  (Id.,  §858.)  No 
licen,se  shall  be  granted  to  a  person  incompetent 
as  a  witness,  to  a  person  convicted  of  keeping 
disorderly  house  or  permitting  gaming  under 
former  license,  or  to  one  twice  convicted  of  un- 
lawfully selling  to  minors  or  habitual  drunkards 
or  within  a  year  from  his  first  conviction  thereof. 


(Id.,  §  859.)  License  shall  be  granted  upon 
condition  that  the  applicant  deliver  the  Clerk  a 
sworn  statement  of  the  value  of  his  stock  of 
liquors;  that  he  execute  bond  in  $500  to  obey 
the  law,  and  within  12  months  state  to  the 
Clerk  the  amount  of  purchases  since  the  license 
was  issued  and  pay  the  taxes  thereon  for  the 
use  of  the  State,  town  or  county,  aud  that  he 
will  take  oath  not  to  permit  gaming.  (Id., 
§  860. )  No  person  shall  sell  any  liquor  until  he 
has  taken  oath  and  given  bond  in  $500  not  to 
adulterate  the  liquor  he  sells.  (Id.,  §  861.) 
At  the  end  of  a  year  the  license  may  be  re- 
newed if  the  applicant  has  complied  with  the 
law,  gives  new  bonds  and  takes  the  oath  again. 
(Id.,  §  862.)  Licenses  without  the  oath  en- 
dorsed and  subscribed  by  the  licensees  are 
void.     (Id.,  §863.) 

No  person  shall  be  a  clerk  in  a  liquor  place 
who  is  not  a  competent  witness  in  Court.  (Id., 
§  864. )  Such  clerk  shall  take  oath  not  to  sell 
to  minors  or  permit  gaming.     (Id.,  §  865.) 

Each  liquor-dealer  pays  a  tax  of  $150;  in 
towns  of  5,000  inhabitants  or  over,  $200;  and 
this  applies  to  druggists.  (Id.,  §  617.)  Whole- 
salers pay  $150.  (Id.)  They  also  pay  an  ad 
valorem  tax  upon  their  capital  at  tax  levy 
rates.     (Id.,  §  614.) 

It  is  a  misdemeanor  to  sell  spirituous  or 
vinous  liquors  in  less  quantity  than  a 
quart,  or  in  larger  quantity,  to  be  drunk  on  the 
premises  without  a  license.  (Code,  1884,  §  5667. ) 
Any  person  who  after  having  taken  out  a 
license  violates  the  oath  taken  is  guilty  of 
perjury.  (Id.,  §  5668.)  If  any  licensed  per- 
son violate  any  law  regulating  license,  he  is 
guilty  of  a  misdemeanor.  (Id.,  §5669.)  The 
provisions  of  this  article  are  to  be  construed 
liberally,  so  as  to  prevent  evasions  and  subter- 
fuges and  to  effectuate  the  objects  thereof.  (Id., 
§  5670.) 

No  licensed  grocer  or  other  person  shall  sell 
liquor  on  Sunday,  the  punishment  to  be  at  the 
discretion  of  the  Court.     (Id.,  §  5671.) 

Any  person  who  sells  any  student  liquor,  or 
anyone  for  him,  without  consent  of  parent 
or  guardian,  is  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor.  (Id., 
§  5672. )  It  is  unlawful  for  persons  to  sell  to  or 
procure  liquors  for  minors  without  the  written 
consent  of  the  parents  or  mother  and  guardian 
of  such  minor,  or  the  principal  of  any  school 
he  attends;  also  to  sell  to  any  husband  who  is 
a  habitual  drunkard  after  notice  prohibitory 
thereof  from  the  wife,  upon  penalty  of  $10  to 
$200,  and  persons  so  selling  shall  forfeit  their 
licenses  and  be  disqualified  12  months  to  re- 
ceive new  ones,  and  on  second  offenses  shall  be 
forever  disqualified.     ( Id. ,  §§  5673-7. ) 

It  is  unlawful  to  sell  any  intoxicating  bever- 
age within  four  miles  of  an  incorjiorated  insti- 
tution of  learning,  upon  penalty  of  $100  to 
$250  and  imprisonment  one  to  six  months. 
This  does  not  apply  to  incorporated  towns. 
(Id.,  §§  5679-80.)  It  is  not  lawful  to  sell  li- 
quor within  four  miles  of  any  school-house, 
public  or  private,  whether  the  school  is  in  ses- 
sion or  not,  upon  penalty  of  $10  to  $100  and 
imprisonment  not  more  than  six  months,  this 
not  applying  to  incorporated  towns.  (Laws, 
1887,  c.  167.)  No  person  shall  keep  for  sale  or 
sell  any  liquor  within  two  miles  of  any  hospital 


Legislation.] 


348 


[Iiegislation. 


for  the  insane,  on  penalty  of  not  over  $50 
and  imprisonment  at  discretion.  (Code,  1884, 
§  5681.)  It  is  an  indictable  offense  to  enter  the 
premises  of  such  hospital  drunk;  penalty,  $25 
and  imprisonment  ac  di.scretiou.      (Id.,  t^  5682.) 

It  is  a  misdemeanor  to  adulterate  for  sale  any 
wine,  spirituous  or  malt  liquors,  or  knowingly 
sell  the  same,  and  a  felony  to  so  adulterate 
them  with  poLsons.     (Id.,  §§  5682-3.) 

Selling  liquor  (except  in  incorporated  towns) 
within  five  miles  of  any  furnace  or  factory  of 
any  kind,  established  by  any  foreign  corpora- 
tion (Id.,  §  2002),  or  selling  within  one  mile 
of  any  place  of  public  worship,  except  at  a 
regular  place  of  such  business,  is  punishable  by 
fine  of  $10.     (Id.,  §§  2011-2.) 

Being  drunk  on  Sunday  is  punished  the 
same  as  working  on  that  day.     (Id.,  §  2290.) 

In  theatres  no  liquor  shall  be  sold,  or  in  any 
connecting  room,  upon  penalty  of  $50,  and  for 
second  offense  $50  and  forfeiture  of  license. 
(Id.,  ^5  2295.) 

It  is  unlawful  for  any  person  to  sell  liquor 
within  one-half  mile  of  any  fair-grounds  during 
the  time  of  holding  the  fair,  without  consent 
of  the  directors,  upon  penalty  of  $50  to  $200 
and  imprisonment  one  to  three  months;  but 
this  does  not  apply  to  a  regular  business.  (Id., 
§§  2296-8.) 

No  jailer  shall  permit  any  prisoner  to  have 
more  than  half  a  pint  of  spirits  in  any  24 
hours,  under  penalty  of  $50.  (Id.,  p  6293.) 
No  spirituous  liquor  shall  be  introduced  into 
the  Penitentiary,  except  for  the  families  of  the 
officers  or  for  the  hospital  under  the  directions 
of  the  physician.     (Id.,  §  6388.) 

The  notice  by  a  wife  not  to  sell  to  her  hus- 
band (if  he  is  a  habitual  drunkard)  shall  be 
served  and  a  due  return  made  thereon  to  the 
Clerk  of  the  County  Court  by  the  Sheriff  or 
any  constable  of  the  county.  Persons  disre- 
garding the  notice  shall  be  fined  $10  to  $200. 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  (not  oftener  than  once  in  six  years) 
by  a  majority  vote  of  all  the  members  of  the 
two  Houses  ;  to  be  concurred  in  by  two-thirds 
of  each  House  in  the  next  Legislature;  a  popu- 
lar vote  equal  to  a  majority  of  those  voting  for 
Representatives  is  requisite  for  its  adoption. 

Texas. 

Early  Provisions.— The  Republic  of  Texas  by 
its  6th  Congress  taxed  liquor-selling  in  quan- 
tities of  a  quart  or  over  $25  ;  retailing,  $100. 
(Laws,  1842,  p.  107.)  Introducing  liquor 
among  the  Indians  was  prohibited  bv  Laws  of 
1843,  p.  24. 

The  retail  license  tax  was  made  $50  by  the 
first  Legislature  of  the  State.  (Laws,  1840, 
p.  147.) 

County  Local  Option  (1854).— The  question  of 
the  abolition  of  the  sale  of  liquor  was  submitted 
to  the  counties  ;  in  any  county  voting  in  favor 
of  license,  if  50  voters  should  petition  for 
another  election  within  a  year  it  should  be 
taken.  Selling  contrary  to  the  act  was  fined 
$10  to  $20.     (Laws,  1854,  c.  88.) 

That  act  was  repealed  and  license  was  substi- 
tuted, the  fee  being  $250,  with  bond  in  $1,000 
and  restrictions  of  sales  to  nunors  and  slaves, 
and  of  gaming  ;   penalty  for  selling  without 


license,  $50  to  $200.  (Laws,  1856,  c.  66.) 
Local  prohibitions  were  enacted  both  in  1854 
and  1856. 

War  Provisions. — County  Courts  were  given 
power  to  prohibit  distillation  when  prejudicial 
to  public  subsistence,  but  not  to  deprive  dis- 
tillers of  legal  licenses  without  adequate  compen- 
sation. (Laws,  1863,  c.  65. )  By  the  act  of  1864 
(Laws,  c.  11),  the  occupation  of  distilling  was 
charged  with  a  license  fee  of  $1,000  ;  that  of 
retailing  liquor,  $250. 

In  1866  license  was  put  at  $300,  and  the 
penalty  of  selling  without  license  was  $100  to 
$200  and  imprisonment  30  days.  (Laws,  1866, 
c.  70.) 

By  the  Constitution  of  1869  (art.  12,  §  48), 
the  Legislature  might  jirohibit  the  sale  of  liquor 
in  the  immediate  vicinity  of  any  college  or 
seminary  of  learning,  if  not  at  the  capital  or  at 
a  county-seat. 

The  Bell-Punch  law  for  collecting  a  tax  on 
each  drink  sold  was  enacted  in  1879  (Laws, 
c.  66);  repealed  the  next  session. 

The  Laws  of  1887,  p.  155,  submitted  a  Pro- 
hibitory Constitutional  Amendment,  which  was 
lost. 

The  Law  as  It  Existed  in  1889.—"  The  Legis- 
lature shall  enact  a  law  whereby  the  qualified 
voters  of  any  county,  Justice's  precinct,  town 
or  city,  by  a  majority  vote  from  time  to  time, 
may  determine  whether  the  sale  of  intoxicating 
liquors  shall  be  prohibited  within  the  pre- 
scribed limits."     (Const.,  art.  16,  §  20.) 

The  Commissioners'  Court  of  each  coimty  in 
the  State  may  order  an  election  by  the  voters 
of  said  county  or  of  any  Justice's  precinct, 
town  or  city  therein,  to  determine  whether 
or  not  the  sale  of  liquor  shall  be  permitted 
therein.  It  is  the  duty  of  said  Court  to  order 
such  election  when  petitioned  for  by  200  voters 
in  any  county,  or  50  in  precincts,  towns  or 
cities.  (R.  S.,  1888,  art.  3227.)  The  preceding 
article  shall  not  prohibit  the  sale  of  wines  for 
sacramental  purposes,  or  alcoholic  stimulants 
as  medicines  in  cases  of  actual  sickness,  when 
sold  upon  prescription  of  a  regular  practicing 
physician  with  his  certificate.  One  sale  only 
shall  be  made  on  each  prescription,  which  shall 
be  stamped,  cancelled  and  filed.  (Id.,  art. 
3228.)  When  the  Court  shall  order  the  elec- 
tion, it  shall  be  at  the  regular  polling-places 
from  15  to  30  days  from  the  date  of  the  order, 
which  shall  he  prima  facie  evidence  of  regular- 
ity. (Id.,  art.  3229.)  Notice  of  the  election 
shall  be  posted  20  davs  in  five  places.  (Id., 
art.  3230.)  Ballots  shall  be  "For  Prohibi- 
tion," and  "Against  Prohibition."  (Id.,  art. 
3231.)  The  election  shall  be  conducted  under 
general  election  laws,  and  returns  made  to  the 
Court  ordering  it.     (Id.,  art.  3232.) 

The  Court  shall  hold  a  special  session  to 
count  the  votes,  and  if  the  majority  be  "  For 
Prohibition "  the  Court  shall  issue  an  order 
declaring  the  result  and  absolutely  prohibiting 
the  sale  within  the  prescribed  limits,  except  for 
the  above  excepted  purposes,  until  a  contrary 
vote.  (Id.,  art.  3233.)  The  order  of  the 
Court  shall  be  published  four  weeks,  in  a  news- 
paper of  the  county,  or  if  there  is  none,  posted 
in  three  places  within  the  limits  prescribed. 
(Id.,    art.  3234.)     If  a  majority  vote    against 


Ijegislation.] 


349 


[Legislation. 


Prohibition  the  Court  shall  make  an  order  de- 
claring that  result.  (Id.,  art.  3235.)  No  elec- 
tion shall  again  be  held  for  two  years,  and  then 
as  before.  (Id.,  art.  3236.)  The  failure  to 
carry  Prohibition  in  a  county  shall  not  prevent 
an  election  from  being  immediately  held  in  a 
precinct,  town  or  city  thereof,  nor  shall  such 
failure  in  a  tow^n  or  city  prevent  an  election 
immediately  thereafter  in  the  precinct  or  county 
wherein  it  is  situated.  But  when  Prohibition 
carries  in  any  county  no  election  in  any  pre- 
cinct, city  or  town  thereof,  shall  be  ordered 
until  Prohibition  is  defeated  in  the  entire 
county  and  so  for  a  precinct.  (Id.,  art.  3238.) 
Selling  liquor  or  giving  it  away  to  evade  the 
law  after  the  above  order  of  Prohibition  is 
punished  by  the  Penal  Code.  (Id.,  art.  3239.) 
Within  30  days  any  citizen  may  contest  the 
election  in  any  Court  of  competent  jurisdiction, 
and  the  Court  may  declare  the  election  void 
and  order  another.  (Id.,  art.  3239  a.)  Where 
anyone  has  a  license  cut  off  by  the  order  of 
Prohibition,  he  shall  have  refvmded  to  him  an 
amount  proportionate  to  his  unexpired  term. 
(Id.,  art.  3239  b.) 

District  Judges  shall  give  the  Local  Option 
law  in  charge  to  the  Grand  Juries.  Where  any 
hidden  device  is  resorted  to  a  Justice  of  the 
Peace  may  issue  a  warrant  to  search  the  place 
and  force  it  open,  if  necessary,  and  arrest  the 
person  violating  the  law.     (Id.,  art.  3239  c.) 

There  shall  be  levied  upon  the  business  of 
selling  spirituous,  vinous  or  malt  liquors,  or 
medicated  bitters  in  quantities  less  than  a  quart. 
$300  ;  between  one  quart,  and  five  gallons, 
$200  ;  over  five  gallons,  $300  ;  for  malt  liquors 
exclusively,  $50.  But  wholesale  dealers  and 
merchants  may  sell  in  unbroken  packages  con- 
taining less  than  five  gallons  without  licenses  as 
quart  dealers.     (Id.,  art.  3226  a,  %  1.) 

The  Commissioners'  Courts  of  the  Counties 
may  levy  taxes  equal  to  one-half  the  State 
taxes,  and  any  city  or  incorporated  town  may 
in  addition  levy  another  tax  equal  to  that  levied 
by  the  Commissioners.  (Id.,  art.  3226  a,  §  2.) 
All  these  taxes  must  be  j)aid  in  advance.     (Id., 

Anyone  desiring  to  engage  in  such  business 
must  give  bond  in  $5,000  to  keep  an  open, 
quiet  and  orderly  house,  and  to  obey  all  the  law 
w^hose  prohibitions  are  enumerated  in  the  bond  ; 
which  said  bond  may  be  sued  on  at  the  instance 
of  any  person  aggrieved  by  the  violation  of  any 
of  its  provisions,  and  such  person  shall  recover 
$500  as  liquidated  damages,  and  said  bond 
shall  not  be  void  on  the  first  recovery  but  may 
l)e  sued  on  until  the  full  penal  sum  is  ex- 
hausted. It  is  also  the  duty  of  the  County  and 
District  Attorneys  to  sue  such  bonds  in  cases  of 
violation  of  law  and  recover  $500.  Whenever 
a  bond  is  exhausted  by  suits,  a  new  one  miist 
be  provided,  or  whenever  a  bond  promises  to  be 
exhausted  by  a  suit  brought,  and  if  on  notice 
the  new  bond  is  not  given,  the  right  to  sell 
ceases.  This  section  does  not  repeal  the  penal 
laws  concerning  the  sale  of  liquor.  An  open 
house  is  one  in  which  no  screen  or  other  device 
is  used  or  placed  so  as  to  obstruct  the  view 
through  the  open  door  or  place  of  entrance  into 
such  house.  A  quiet  house  is  one  in  which  no 
music,   loud  talking,  yelling  or  indecent   lan- 


guage is  allowed,  or  any  noise  to  disturb  neigh- 
bors or  passers-by.  An  orderly  house  is  one  in 
which  no  prostitute  or  lewd  woman  is  allowed 
to  enter  or  remain,  which  house  must  contain 
no  obscene  pictures.     (Id.,  §  4.) 

The  County  Clerk  shall  issue  license  upon 
receipt  for  the  above  taxes  and  bond  required. 
(Id.,  §  5.)  A  Collector  of  Taxes  knowingly  per- 
mitting anyone  to  pursue  such  business  withoiit 
paying  the  tax  shall  be  fined  $25  to  $200,  but  it 
is  a  defense  for  him  if  he  has  reported  the 
matter  to  the  District  Attorney.  (Id.,  i;  6.) 
_  The  Comptroller  shall  furnish  blank  forms  of 
licenses  and  bonds  and  receipts  for  taxes  herein. 
(Id.,  §  7.) 

The  license  shall  be  posted  in  some  con- 
spicuous place  where  the  business  is  done,  upon 
penalty  of  not  exceeding  $25  per  day  or  the 
amount  of  the  tax.     (Id.,  §§  8-12.) 

City  Councils  have  power  to  restrain,  regu- 
late and  prohibit  the  sale  of  liquor,  except  by 
licen.sed  persons,  and  selling  to  minors  and 
dnmkards,  to  close  saloons  on  Sunday  and  pre- 
scribe hours  for  closing  them,  and  to  prevent 
sales  of  liquor  where  theatrical  representations 
are  given.     (Id.,  arts.  390-3.) 

Selling  liquor  to  Indians  is  fined  $10  to  $100. 
(Pen.  Code,  1888,  §§  611-12.)  Selling  to  minors 
knowinglv  without  written  consent  of  parent  or 
guardian  "is  fined  $25  to  $100.  (Id.,  §  613.) 
Selling  by  the  quart  or  more,  and  permitting 
the  same  drunk  on  the  premises,  is  fined  $50  to 
$200.  (Id.,  §  616.)  Selling  in  prohibited  dis- 
tricts is  punished  by  fine  of  $25  to  $100,  and  by 
innn-i.sonment  20  to  60  days.     (Id.,  §  618.) 

Failure  to  cancel  prescriptions  used  to  procure 
liquors,  and  permitting  liquor  bought  upon  pre- 
scription to  be  drunk  on  the  premises,  are  fined 
$25  to  $100.  (Id.,  §  620.)  Anyone  giving  a 
prescription  when  not  a  physician,  or  being  .such 
and  interested  in  the  sale  of  the  liquor,  or  for 
one  not  sick  or  actually  examined,  shall  be 
fined  $25  to  $100  and  imprisoned  20  to  60  days. 
(Id.,  g62.) 

If  anyone  shall  keep  or  run  a  "blind  tiger" 
or  other  device  whereby  the  party  selling  or 
delivering  is  concealed  from  the  buyer,  he  shall 
be  imjn'isoned  two  to  12  months  and  fined  $100 
to  $500,  and  upon  complaint  describing  the 
place  where  any  "blind  tiger  "  is  run  a  warrant 
shall  issue  to  search  the  place  and  arrest  the 
persons  violating  the  law,  by  force  if  necessary. 
A  United  States  "license"  posted  in  a  place 
where  a  ' '  blind  tiger  "  is  kept  is  prima  facie 
proof  that  the  person  named  therein  is  running 
such  "blind  tiger."     (Id.,  §  622.) 

The  subsequent  reversal  of  a  local  Prohibition 
does  not  exempt  an  offender  against  it  while  in 
force.     (Id.,  §623.) 

Where  persons  are  jointly  indicted  for  .selling 
it  is  sufficient  to  show  they  were  reputed  to  be 
in  partnership.  (Id.,  §  62  >.)  Any  member  of 
a  firm  is  separately  liable  tor  selling  by  the  firm. 
(Id.,  i^  (27.)  Where  any  establishment  is  con- 
ducted without  the  name  of  the  owner  being 
known,  all  persons  found  selling  therein  are 
subject  to  separate  pro.secution.     (Id.,  §  628.) 

A  disorderly  house  is  one  where  liquors  are 
sold  and  prostitutes  and  lewd  women  are  em- 
ployed or  permitted  to  display  themselves.  And 
the  keeper  thereof  is  liable  in  $200  per  day ;  and 


Legislation.] 


350 


[Legislation. 


the  owner  of  the  property,  with  knowledge,  is 
also  liable.  (Laws,  1889,  c.  38,  amending  Pen. 
Code,  arts.  339  and  341.) 

Keeping  open  saloons  or  selling  or  giving 
liquor  within  three  miles  of  any  voting  pre- 
cinct is  fined  $100  to  $500.  (Pen.  Code,  1888, 
§§  178-9.) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  a  two-thirds  vote  of  all  the  rnem- 
bers  of  each  House,  at  one  session;  popular  vote 
to  be  taken  at  any  date  fixed  by  the  Legislature, 
three  months'  notice  to  be  given.  A  majority 
vote  carries  it. 

Utah  Territory. 

Early  Provisions. — An  inspection  law  for 
liquors  was  passed  in  1853.  (Laws,  c.  58  of 
Laws,  1851-70.) 

The  County  Courts  were  authorized  to  grant 
licenses  to  manufacture  and  sell  liquor  and  to 
fix  the  price  of  the  same.  The  penalty  for 
violating  the  act  was  a  fine  not  exceeding  $100. 

Sales  on  Sunday  were  forbidden  upon  penalty 
not  to  exceed  $25.     (Laws,  1860,  c.  69,  Id.) 

The  Law  as  It  Existed  in  1889.— There  shall 
be  a  Territorial  Inspector  of  spirituous  liquors 
(C.  L.,  1888,  §§  2149-50.)  All  spirituous 
liquors  manufactured  or  imported  into  this 
Territory  before  being  offered  for  sale  shall  be 
inspected.  (Id.,  §§2151-2.)  Any  person  sell- 
ing liquor  not  inspected  shall  forfeit  not  ex- 
ceeding $500.  (Id.,  §2155.)  No  person  shall 
manufacture  or  sell  intoxicating  liquors  without 
obtaining  license  from  the  Coimty  Court  or  City 
Council.  (Id.,  §  2156.)  Such  authorities  are 
authorized  to  grant  license  upon  application 
signed,  and  stating  the  place  of  business  pro- 
posed. Before  license  the  applicant  must  give 
bond  in  $100  to  $1,000  to  keep  an  orderly 
house,  permit  no  gaming  and  pay  all  damages, 
fines  and  forfeitui-es  adjudged  against  him. 
(Id.,  .§  2157.)  The  said  licensing  authorities 
shall,  upon  each  petition,  determine  the  amount 
to  be  paid  for  the  license,  not  less  than  $000 
nor  more  than  $1,200  per  year;  but  licensees  of 
the  same  class  shall  pay  a  uniform  amount  in 
the  city  or  county.  No  license  shall  be  for  less 
than  three  months.  (Id.,  §2158.)  Upon  pay- 
ment of  the  amount  so  determined,  the  Clerk  of 
the  County  Court  or  City  Recorder  shall  issue 
the  license,  which  is  not  transferable.  (Id., 
§  2159.) 

Any  person  licensed,  who  shall  knowingly 
dispose  of  liquor  to  an  Indian,  insane  or  idiotic 
person,  or  to  any  minor,  apprentice  or  employee 
under  21,  or  permit  any  of  said  persons  to' re- 
main in  his  place  of  business  without  consent 
of  th(!  parents,  guardians  or  employer,  shall  be 
fined  $10  to  $100.     (Id.,  §  2160.) 

Any  person  selling  liquor  on  Sunday,  except 
for  medical  purposes  upon  prescription,  or  who 
shall  permit  gaming  on  his  premises  where 
liquor  is  sold,  or  shall  permit  dancing,  drunken- 
ness or  disorderly  conduct  in  his  saloon,  shall 
be  fined  not  less  than  $300,  or  imprisoned  not 
exceeding  six  months,  or  both.  (Id.,  §  2161.) 
Any  married  woman  may  maintain  a  suit  on  the 
seller's  bond  for  any  damages  sustained  by  her- 
self or  her  children  on  account  of  the  traffic. 
(Id.,  §  2162.) 

Liquor  bills  for  quantities  less  than  five  gal- 


lons at  a  time,  not  for  medical,  mechanical  or 
sacramental  puri)oses,  are  not  collectible.  (Id  , 
§  2164.) 

Persons  selling  liquor  without  license  shall  be 
fined  not  more  than  $300,  or  be  imprisoned  not 
exceeding  six  months,  or  both,  and  shall  be 
liable  as  though  licensed.     (Id.,  §  2165.) 

Suits  for  damages  under  $300  may  be  before 
.lustices   of   the  Peace,    and  different    persons 
may  sue  on  the  bond  until  it  is  exhausted.    (Id 
§  2166.) 

This  does  not  authorize  County  Courts  to  in- 
terfere with  the  charter  rights  of  municipalities 
to  tax,  regulate,  restram  and  prohibit  the 
manufacture  and  sale  of  liquor,  or  to  prohibit 
wine-growers  from  expressing  and  selling  on 
the  same  premises  the  pure  juice  of  the  grape 
in  quantities  not  less  than  five  gallons  at  a  time  ; 
and  nothing  herein  impairs  any  numicipal 
right  to  prohibit  manufacture  and  sale.  (Id., 
§  2168.) 

Furnishing  liquor  on  election  day  is  pro- 
hibited.    (Id.,  §§  2169-70.) 

Amusements  and  theatricals  at  a  saloon  on 
Sunday  are  prohibited.  (Id.,  §  4514.)  So  is 
keeping  open  Sunday,  upon  penalty  of  $5  to 
$100.     (Id.,  §  4515.) 

Sale  of  liquors  at  theaters,  and  employing 
women  for  that  purpose,  are  prohibited.  (Id., 
§  4518.) 

Selling  liquor  within  one  mile  of  camp  and 
field  meetings,  except  b}^  one  carrying  on  his 
regular  business,  is  fined  $5  to  $500.  (Id., 
§§  4522-3.) 

Employing  a  female  to  play  any  musical  in- 
strument, dance  or  exhiljit  herself  in  any 
drinking-saloon,  is  fined  not  exceeding  $300,  or 
punished  bv  imprisonment  not  exceeding  three 
months,  or'both.     (Id.,  §§  4524-5.) 

Selling  liquor  to  a  minor  under  16  years  of 
age  is  punishable  by  fine  not  exceeding  $100, 
or  imprisonment  not  exceeding  three  months. 
(Id.,  §  4526.) 

Selling  liquor  to  an  Indian  is  a  misdemeanor 
(Id.,  §  4586)  ;  so  is  adulterating  liquor  for  sale. 
(Id.,  §  4574.) 

Vermont. 

Early  Provisions. — A  law  of  1779  (Laws  of 
Vermont,  1779-86,  p.  331)  provided  that  if 
any  person  were  found  drunken,  so  that  he  was 
thereby  bereaved  and  disabled  in  the  use  of  his 
reason,  appearing  either  in  his  speech,  gesture 
or  behavior,  he  should  forfeit  8s.  A  law  of  the 
same  year  (Id.,  p.  370) provided  that  the  magis- 
trates. Selectmen,  constables  and  Grand  Jury- 
men of  the  towns  might  in  March  annually 
nominate  for  license  a  suitable  person  or  per- 
sons to  keep  houses  of  public  entertainment,  to 
the  next  County  Court,  which  Court  might 
lessen  the  number  or  refuse  license  to  unfit  per- 
sons. The  persons  licensed  were  to  give  bonds 
in  £100  to  obey  the  law.  Persons  idly  haunt- 
ing taverns  were  to  be  posted  therein,  and  no 
liquors  were  to  be  sold  them  under  penalty  of 
£3.  And  if  any  such  person  did  not  leave  off  his 
evil  practices,  he  was  to  find  surety  for  his 
good  behavior,  or  ]5ay  a  fine  of  20s,  or  sit  in 
the  stocks  two  hours.  Selling  without  license 
was  fined  £3,  the  amount  to  be  doubled  with 
each  subsequent  offense,  half  to  the  informer. 


Legislation.] 


351 


[Legislation. 


Licensed  persons  were  recommended  to  prose- 
cute under  the  provisons  of  the  la^v,  and  Gi'and 
Jurymen  were  to  search  for  and  make  present- 
ments against  those  so  selling,  who  might  be 
caused  to  give  bond  in  £10  not  to  sell  without 
license. 

In  1787  tavern-keepers  were  not  allowed  to 
suffer  gaming  about  their  places,  upon  penalty 
of  £o  (half  to  the  informer).  (R.  S.,  Benning- 
ton, 1791,  p.  50.) 

The  law  of  Nov.  2,  1798  (Laws,  1824, 
p.  486),  revised  this  law  (a  revision  in  1787  not 
having  changed  it),  and  imposed  a  license  fee 
of  |1  to  $30,  according  to  profits.  Provisions 
for  tavern  accommodations  for  travellers  were 
added,  but  the  provision  for  posting  frequenters 
was  not  repeated.  Revocation  of  license  for 
not  obeying  the  law,  and  not  keeping  an 
orderly  house,  was  also  provided,  and  the 
penalty  for  selling  without  license  was  made 
$10,  to  be  doubled  with  each  offense.  The 
Selectmen  were  empowered  to  grant  licenses  for 
musters  and  public  occasions. 

In  1802  (Laws,  c.  105),  licenses  to  retail 
wines  and  foreign  spirits  were  authorized  to  be 
given  by  the  County  Courts,  on  payment  of 
$1.50  to  $15.  This  was  repealed  as  to  wines 
by  Laws  of  1817,  c.  141.  The  law  of  1804,  c.  45, 
authorized  the  County  Courts  to  grant  tavern 
licenses  without  nomination  by  the  civil  autliori- 
ties  of  the  town,  as  well  as  upon  such  nomina- 
tion, and  the  penalty  for  selling  without  license 
was  placed  at  $10  for  every  offense.  The  re- 
strictions on  selling  metheglin,  strong  beer,  ale 
and  cider,  in  quantities  not  less  than  one  gallon, 
were  repealed  by  Laws  of  1814,  c.  102.  The 
provision  for  posting  in  taverns  the  names  of 
tipplers  watli  prohibitions  to  sell  to  them  was 
revived,  with  a  fine  of  $7,  by  Laws  of  1821, 
c.  18. 

By  Laws  of  1829,  No.  14,  license  to  sell  do- 
mestic spirits  as  well  as  foreign  was  required, 
but  one  license  covered  both  privileges. 

By  Laws  of  1830,  No.  16,  licenses  were  re- 
quired for  keeping  victualling-houses  and  selling 
beer,  ale  and  cider,  but  without  fee.  The  former 
laws  were  all  repealed  by  Laws  of  1833,  No.  22. 
This  act  provided  for  licenses  to  keep  taverns  or 
retail  liquors,  such  licenses  to  be  granted  by  the 
civil  authorities  of  towns,  as  before  mentioned, 
for  $3  to  $50  for  inn-keepers,  and  $10  to  $100 
for  retailers.  All  the  former  special  provisions 
were  included,  and  the  penalty  for  selling  with- 
out license  was  $10,  to  bedoubled  for  each  subse- 
quent offense.  By  the  Laws  of  1834,  No.  14, 
this  act  was  repealed  and  none  was  substituted 
therefor.  It  would  seem  that  this  repeal  was 
held  to  revive  the  former  law,  for  that  law  was 
revised  in  1840  as  still  in  force. 

The  act  of  1838,  No.  26,  enacted  that  no 
County  Court  or  Judge  thereof  should  grant  a 
license  to  retail  spirits,  except  as  provided  by 
the  law  of  1798. 

The  provisions  as  to  granting  licenses  to  re- 
tailers of  foreign  and  domestic  spirits,  by  the 
County  Courts  directly,  as  revived,  were  re- 
pealed by  Laws  of  1843,  No.  23. 

The  act  of  1844  (Laws,  No.  15)  repealed  c.  83, 
R.  S.,  relating  to  licenses,  and  provided  for 
licenses  to  be  granted  by  an  elective  County 
Board   of    three  Commissioners.     The  license 


fees  were  nominal,  $2  to  $6  for  retailers  and  $20 
for  wholesalers.  Provision  was  made  also  for 
the  licensing  of  one  or  more  persons  in  eacli 
town  to  sell  for  medicinal,  chemical  or  mechani- 
cal purposes  onl3^  The  penalties  imposed  l)y 
the  act  were  generally  $10. 

Local  Option  {\MQ)  and  Prohibition  (1850,  1852). 
— The  act  of  1846,  No.  24,  contained  a  section 
providing  for  an  annual  vote  on  the  question  of 
license  or  no-license  for  the  entire  State,  licenses 
to  issue  to  anyone  of  good  moral  character 
applying,  or  to  designated  persons  in  each 
town,  to  sell  for  the  excepted  purposes  only,  as 
the  vote  should  determine. 

In  1850  (Laws,  No.  30),  former  acts  were  re- 
pealed and  a  short  Prohibitory  act,  authorizing 
one  or  two  licenses  in  each  town,  to  sell  for  the 
excepted  purposes  only,  was  passed.  The  pen- 
alties were  $10  and  $20. 

A  regular  Proliibitory  or  Maine  law  was 
enacted  in  1852,  which  has  been  retained  to  this 
day,  though  it  has  been  considerably  amended. 

The  Laic  an  It  Existed  in  1889. — A  County 
Commissioner  shall  be  chosen  annually  upon  the 
general  county  ticket.  (R.  L.,  1880,  §  3787; 
amended  by 'Laws  of  1886,  No.  35.)  Such 
Commissioner  shall  hold  office  two  years  from 
the  1st  day  of  December  following  liis  election, 
and  shall  receive  for  his  services  $3  per  day  and 
his  expense  account,  not  exceeding  $50  annu- 
ally. (R.  L.,  1880,  §  3790;  aniended  by  Laws 
of  "1886,  No.  35  and  Laws  of  1888,  No.  40.)  If 
such  Commissioner  receive  any  reward  for 
appointing  anyone  Agent  to  sell  licpiors,  he 
shall  forfeit  $100  to  $1,000  and  be  imprisoned 
six  months,  and  the  person  offering  the  same 
shall  be  punished  likewise.  (R.  L.,  1880, 
§  3791.)  The  County  Commissioner  may  ap- 
point an  Agent  for  any  town  in  his  coimty,  to 
sell  intoxicating  liquor  to  be  used  for  medic- 
inal, chemical  and  mechanical  purposes  only. 
No  inn-keeper  or  keeper  of  a  house  of  public 
entertainment  shall  be  appointed  such  Agent. 
(R.  L.,  1880,  §  3792;  amended  by  Laws  of 
1886,  No.  35.)  Such  Agent  shall  receive  a  cer- 
tificate from  the  Commissioner  authorizing 
him  as  the  Agent  of  the  town,  to  sell  liquor  for 
such  excepted  purposes,  but  only  after  he  has 
given  bond  in  $600  to  ob.serve  the  law.  (R.  L., 
1880,  §  3793.)  The  Selectmen  of  the  town 
shall  furnish  the  Agent  liquor  and  fix  the  price 
at  which  it  is  to  be  sold,  as  near  as  may  be  the 
actual  cost  and  expenses  of  sale,  the  money  re- 
ceived to  go  to  the  town.  (R.  L.,  1880, 
§  3794;  amended  by  Laws  of  1882,  No.  46.) 
The  Selectmen  in  fixing  the  compensation  of 
the  Agent  shall  not  make  an  inducement 
to  him  to  increase  his  sales,  upon  penalty 
of  $100  to  $500.  (R.  L.,  1880,  §  3795.)  If 
the  Town  Agent  procures  liquor  and  sells  it 
without  making  a  contract  with  the  Selectmen 
as  to  compensation,  he  shall  be  liable  as  a  com- 
mon seller.  (R.  L.,  1880,  §  8796.)  If  the 
Agent  sells  at  an  exorbitant  profit,  the  Commis- 
sioner, on  application  of  three  voters  of  such 
town,  shall  annul  his  license.  (Id.,  §  8797.) 
When  complaint  is  made  to  the  Commissioner 
that  an  Agent  has  violated  the  terms  of  his 
license,  he  shall  notify  such  Agent,  and  on  hear- 
ing, revoke  his  appointment  and  cause  his  bond 
to^be  prosecuted,      (Id.,  §  3798.)     If  anyone 


Legislation.] 


352 


[Legislation. 


procures  or  attempts  to  procure  any  liquor  of  an 
Agent  by  false  representations,  or  by  any  deceit, 
he  shall  forfeit  $10.  (Id.,  t^  3799;  amended  by 
Laws  of  1888,  No.  39.) 

No  person  shall,  except  as  specially  provided, 
manufacture,  sell,  furnish  or  give  away  spiritu- 
ous or  intoxicating  liquor  or  mixed  liquor  of 
which  a  part  is  spirituous,  or  intoxicating  or 
malt  liquors  or  lager  beer;  and  the  phrase  "  in- 
toxicating liquor "  shall  include  such  liquors 
and  beer  and  fermented  cider.  The  word 
"  furnish  "  shall  apply  to  cases  where  a  person 
knowingly  brings  into  and  transports  within  the 
State  for  another  person  liquor  intended  to  be 
sold  contrary  to  law,  or  to  be  divided  among 
others.  The  words  "give  away  "  do  not  apply 
to  the  giving  away  of  liquor  by  a  person  in  his 
own  private  dwelling,  unless  given  to  a  minor 
other  than  a  member  of  his  own  private  family, 
or  to  a  habitual  drunkard,  or  unless  such  dwell- 
ing becomes  a  place  of  public  resort.  No  one 
shall  furnish  liquor  at  a  raising,  removal  of  a 
building  or  a  public  gathering  for  amu.sement. 
Nothing  shall  prevent  the  manufacture,  sale  and 
use  of  wine  for  the  sacrament,  or  of  cider,  or  of 
liquors  for  medical  purposes  only,  or  of  wine 
from  grapes  and  fruits  of  the  State  not  mixed 
with  alcohol  or  spirituous  liquor,  or  the  manu- 
facture by  anyone  for  his  own  use  of  fermented 
liquor;  but  no  one  shall  sell  fermented  cider  at 
any  place  of  public  resort  or  to  a  habitual 
drunkard.  (R.  L.,  1880,  §  3800;  amended  by 
Laws  of  1882,  No.  41.) 

Payments  for  liquor  sold  unlawfully  may  be 
recovered,  and  no  action  shall  be  had  for  the 
recovery  of  liquor  except  as  sold  or  purchased 
in  accordance  with  this  chapter.  (R.  L.,  1880, 
^  3801.) 

If  anyone  sells  liquor  in  violation  of  law  he 
shall  forfeit  $10;  on  second  conviction  $20  and 
be  imprisoned  one  month,  and  on  third  $20  and 
be  imprisoned  three  to  six  months.  (Id., 
§  3802.)  Justices  have  concurrent  juristliction 
with  the  County  Court  under  the  above  section, 
and  the  Grand  Juror  of  the  town  or  the  State's 
Attorney  may  make  complaint.  (Id.,  §  3803.) 
The  prosecuting  officer  shall  allege  prior  con- 
victions in  his  complaint  and  make  proof  of  the 
same  at  the  trial,  upon  penalty  of  $300  to  $500. 
(Id.,  §  3804.)  On  plea  of  guilty  the  defendant 
may  specify  the  number  and  dates  of  offenses, 
and  such  plea  and  judgment  thereon  is  no  bar 
to  prosecution  for  other  offenses  before  or  after 
that  time.     (Id.,  ^^  3805-7.) 

If  any  person  sells  adulterated  liquor  he  shall 
forfeit  $10  to  $300.     (Id.,  ^  3809. ) 

A  person  who  is  a  common  seller  of  liquor, 
not  being  an  Agent  as  above  provided  for,  shall 
forfeit  $100;  for  other  convictions,  $200,  and  on 
the  third  and  subsequent  convictions  he  shall 
also  be  irapri.soned  four  to  12  months.  (Id., 
^  3810.)  No  person  shall  be  convicted  as  a 
common  seller  unless  the  number  of  sales  ex- 
ceeds five,  or  when  the  number  of  offenses 
proved  exceeds  10,  but  in  such  cases  the  re- 
spondent shall  be  fined  for  each  act  of  selling. 
(Id.,  §3811.) 

If  a  person  is  found  intoxicated  he  shall  pay 
$5,  and  on  second  conviction  $10,  and  on  third 
conviction  $20  with  imprisonment  two  months. 
(Id.,  §  3812;  amended  by  Laws  of  1888,  No.  36.) 


When  a  person  is  so  convicted  the  Court  may 
put  the  respondent  on  his  good  behavior  and 
delay  committing  him  if  for  his  and  the  public's 
best  good.     (R.  L.,  1880,  §  3813.) 

When  a  person  is  so  intoxicated  as  to  disturb 
the  public  or  domestic  peace,  any  officer  may 
apprehend  him  without  warrant  and  keep  him 
in  custody  until  he  is  capable  of  testifying. 
(Id.,  §  3814.)  The  officer  shall  give  notice  of 
such  arrest,  and  of  takina;  disclosure  to  the 
State's  Attorney  or  Gi'and  Juror.     (Id.,  §  3815.) 

The  person  arrested  shall  disclose  the  place 
where  and  person  from  whom  the  liquor  was 
obtained,  or  be  committed  until  he  doe.s,  and 
the  Grand  Juror  or  State's  Attorney  shall  prose- 
cute the  person  accused.  (Id.,  §  3816.)  Upon 
disclosure,  if  the  person  intoxicated  has  been 
before  convicted,  he  shall  be  sentenced  as  for 
the  appropriate  conviction.  (Id.,  §3817.)  On 
such  disclosure  the  costs  thereof  shall  be  taxed, 
but  on  conviction  of  the  person  accused  the  said 
costs  shall  be  taxed  against  him.  (Laws,  1888, 
No.  37.) 

If  any  voter  in  a  town  make  complaint  that 
he  has  reason  to  believe  liquor  is  kept  anywhere 
for  milawful  sale,  the  Justice  shall  issue  a 
warrant  to  search  the  premises  described  and 
seize  liquor  found  therein  (R.  L.,  1880,  §  3818; 
amended  by  Laws  of  1882,  No.  43),  or  any 
officer  may  seize  without  warrant  and  hold  until 
he  can  get  one.  (Id.)  The  officer  shall  summon 
the  owner  of  the  liquor  to  appear  forthwith  be- 
fore the  Justice,  and  if  the  liquor  is  adjudged 
so  unlawfully  kept,  it  shall  be  forfeited  to  the 
town,  or  if  unfit  to  be  sold  by  the  Agent  for  the 
excepted  purposes,  it  shall  be  destroyed.  (R. 
L.,  1880,  §  3819.)  Costs  shall  be  paid  by  the 
town  if  it  accepts  the  liquor.  (Laws,  1888,  No. 
37,  §  5.)  If  the  owner  or  keeper  of  such  liquor 
is  unknown  to  the  officer  it  shall,  upon  being 
adjudged  forfeited,  be  advertised  two  weeks. 
(Ifi.,  §  3820.)  An  officer  upon  information  that 
liquor  is  kept  for  unlawful  sale  in  any  shanty 
or  place  on  or  near  the  groimd  of  a  cattle-show, 
muster  or  public  occasion  of  any  kind,  may 
seize  the  liquor  and  apprehend  the  keeper  and 
take  both  before  a  magistrate,  and  there  make 
written  complaint,  and  upon  proof  of  guilt  the 
defendant  shall  be  sentenced  to  imprisonment 
30  days  and  the  liquor  be  forfeited.  The  claimant 
of  seized  liquors  may  file  his  claim  and  shall 
give  bond  to  prosecute  his  claim,  and  he  may 
appeal  on  bond  to  prosecute  his  appeal.  (Id., 
§§3822-4.)  If  judgment  is  against  the  claim- 
ant he  sliall  pay  costs  and  the  liquor  be  for- 
feited. (Id.,  §  3825. )  So  on  appeal.      (Id., §  3826.) 

When  liquor  seized  by  an  officer  is  taken 
from  his  possession  by  a  writ  of  replevin,  it 
shall  not  be  delivered  to  the  claimant,  but  be  held 
by  the  replevying  officer  until  replevin  suit  is 
determined.  '  (Id.,  §  3827.)  No  proceedings 
except  final  execution  shall  be  delayed  by  a 
replevin  suit.     (Id.,  §  3828.) 

Nothing  shall  prevent  a  chemist,  artist  or 
manufacturer  from  keeping  in  his  place  all  the 
distilled  liquor  he  has  occasion  to  use.  (Id., 
§  3829.) 

In  all  cases  for  the  condemnation  of  liquor 
which  result  in  the  prosecution  and  conviction 
of  the  owner,  the  full  cost  shall  be  taxed  against 
the  owner.     (Laws,  1888,  No.  37.) 


Legislation.] 


353 


[Legislation. 


If  anyone  lirings  within  the  State  liquor  ex- 
cept for  Town  Au'cnts  he  shall  forfeit  $20  and 
on  second  conviction  $50  and  be  imprisoned 
three  to  10  months.  (R.  L.,  1880,  §  3830.)  If 
a  railroad  employee  or  any  common  carrier 
])ring  liquor  into  the  State,  unless  the  liquor  is 
legibly  marked  with  the  name  of  the  person  to 
whom  it  is  sent,  he  shall  be  fined  ,|;25.  (Id., 
t<  3831.) 

Persons  acting  as  agents,  selling  liquor  for 
another,  or  who  get  orders  for  another,  shall 
forfeit  $100,  on  second  conviction  $300,  and  on 
third  $500  and  be  imprisoned  not  more  than  six 
months.     (Id.,  §  3832.) 

Under  these  three  last  sections  it  shall  not  be 
necessary  to  state  the  names  of  principals,  or 
from  whom  defendant  took  orders,  or  whom  or 
how  he  assisted  in  the  sale,  but  complaint  may 
be  in  the  terms  of  the  statute.  (Laws,  1882, 
No.  42.) 

When  a  person  by  means  of  intoxication  in- 
jures the  person  or  property  of  another,  the 
person  who  sold  the  liquor  causing  the  intoxi- 
cation is  liable  in  damages  therefor.  Loss  of 
means  of  support  is  included.  (Id.,  §  3833.) 
When  any  person  is  imprisoned  for  intoxica- 
tion, his  wife  or  children  may  recover  $2  a  day 
of  the  seller  of  the  liquor  or  the  owner  of  the 
premises,  if  the  latter  knew  of  the  traffic  in 
liquor  upon  his  premises.  (Id.,  §  3834; 
amended  by  Laws  of  1886,  No.  30.)  When 
any  judgment  is  rendered  on  §  3834  the  Judge 
shall  order  that  the  defendant  be  confined  in 
close  jail  upon  a  close  jail  execution.  (R.  L., 
1880,  I  3835.) 

Every  drinking-place  used  as  a  place  of  resort 
shall  be  held  a  common  nuisance.  (Id.,  §  3836.) 
When  it  is  proved  liquor  is  kept  or  sold  unlaw- 
fully in  such  a  place,  the  Court  shall  adjudge 
it  a  nuisance,  and  that  it  be  shut  up  and  abated 
and  the  keeper  be  fined  $20  to  $200  or  fined 
not  exceeding  $20  and  imprisoned  one  to  three 
months  (Id.,  §  3837),  and  the  Judge  shall  issue 
order  for  abatement  (Id.,  §  3838),  and  the  same 
place  may  again  be  abated  on  any  subsequent 
conviction.  (Id.,  i^  3839.)  The  place  so  closed 
shall  not  be  opened  except  upon  bond  in  $300 
to  $500,  conditioned  not  to  so  unlawfully  sell, 
upon  penalty  of  $10  per  day.  (Id.,  §  3840.) 
Any  person  may  prosecute  said  bond  if  the 
State's  Attorney  neglects  to  do  so  six  months 
after  being  notified  to  do  so.     (Id.,  §  3841.) 

A  tenant  unlawfully  selling  liquor  on  the 
premises  forfeits  his  rights  thereto.  (Id., 
§  3842.)  A  lessor  knowin<rly  permitting  such 
use  shall  be  fined  $20  to  $200.     (Id.,  §  3843.) 

No  person  engaged  in  the  unlawful  traffic  in 
liquor  shall  sit  on  a  jury  in  any  case  under  this 
chapter.     (Id.,  §  3844.) 

Cases  under  this  chapter  shall  have  prece- 
dence of  trial.     (Id.,  §  3845.) 

Where  previous  convictions  are  alleged  they 
may  be  alleged  in  substance  only.  (Id., 
S  3846.) 

When  an  officer  whose  duty  it  is  to  prosecute 
under  this  chapter  neglects  to  do  so,  he  shall  be 
fined  $20  to  $100.  (Id.,  §  3851.)  A  State's 
Attorney  who  settles  a  case  hereunder  forfeits 
$300  to  $500.  (Id.,  §  3852.)  If  a  town  re- 
funds a  fine  for  violation  of  this  chapter  it 
shall  forfeit  $100.     (Id.,  §  3853.)    One-fourth 


of  the  fines  under  this  chapter  go  to  the  com- 
plainant or  to  the  prosecuting  officer.  (Id., 
§  3854;  amended  by  Laws  of  1886,  No.  4i.) 

No  person  other  than  the  respondent  shall  be 
excused  from  testifying  on  the  ground  of  in- 
crimination, but  the  evidence  shall  not  be  used 
against  him.     (R.  L.,  1880,  §  3856.) 

The  payment  of  the  United  States  special 
tax  is  frima  facie  evidence  of  being  a  common 
seller  and  that  the  premises  are  a  nuisance. 
(Laws,  1888,  No.  35.) 

There  is  a  law  requiring  scientific  temperance 
instruction  in  the  public  schools.  (Laws,  188G, 
No.  33.) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  vote  of  two-thirds  of  the  Senate, 
in  any  decennial  year,  to  be  concurred  in  by  a 
majority  of  the  House  in  the  same  year  and 
also  to  be  approved  by  a  majority  of  each 
House  in  the  next  Legislature;"  a  majority  of 
the  electors  voting  thereon  is  necessary  to 
adoption. 

Virginia. 

Colonial  Provisions. — The  law  of  England 
against  dnmkenness  was  enacted  in  1632.  (1 
Hennings  Stats,  at  Large,  p.  167.) 

In  1644  rates  charged  by  ordinaries  were 
limited.     (Id.,  p.  287.) 

In  1655  the  Commissioners  of  each  county 
were  authorized  to  license  ordinaries.  (Id., 
p.  411.) 

In   1658  those    guilty  of  drunkenness   were 
made  incapable  of  being  witnesses  or  liolding 
office.      One  convicted  three    times    was    ac 
counted  a  common  drunkard.     (Id.,  p.  433.) 

In  1668,  only  two  ordinaries  were  to  be  li- 
censed in  each  county.  (2  Id.,  p.  268.)  None 
were  to  be  allowed  except  at  James  City,  witli 
two  at  ferries  of  York  River,  which  could  sell 
only  beer  and  cider.  Those  selling  contrary  to 
law  were  fined  1,000  lbs.  of  tobacco.  (Id., 
p.  361  [1676].) 

In  1677  the  County  Courts  were  to  grant  Init 
two  licenses  in  each  county,  and  those  to 
taverns.     (Id.,  p.  363.) 

In  1734  licensees  were  to  give  bond  in  10,000 
lbs.  of  tobacco  not  to  suffer  gaming  or  anyone  to 
tipple  longer  than  necessary  on  Sunday,  and 
selling  without  license  was  fined  3,000  lbs.  of 
tobacco,  or  in  default  punished  with  21  lashes 
well  laid  on.  Each  license  cost  85s  and  was 
revoked  for  allowing  such  tippling  or  entertain- 
ing seamen  or  servants.     (4  Id.,  p.  428.) 

In  1779  £50  was. added  to  the  penalties  then 
inflicted  for  keeping  a  tippling-house  contrary 
to  law  (half  to  the  informer) ;  for  a  second  of- 
fense six  months'  imprisonment  was  provided. 
(10  Id.,  p.  145.) 

Early  State  Provisions. — In  1792  a  general 
license  law  was  passed,  including  the  former 
regulations,  requiring  a  bond  in  $150  and  mak- 
ing the  penalty  for  selling  without  license  $30, 
and  six  months'  imprisonment  for  second  of- 
fense (half  of  the  penalties  to  go  to  the  informer). 
(1  Stats,  at  Large,  N.  S.,  p.  142.) 

In  1831  no  license  was  to  be  granted  to  retail 
liquors,  except  in  incorporated  towns,  without 
certificate  from  the  Court  that  the  place  was  fit 
and  convenient;  and  the  Licensing  Court  might 
revoke  license   upon  good    cause   shown,  "on 


Legislation.] 


354 


[Legislation. 


notice  to  the  accused.  Selling  to  slaves  was 
lined  $50.  (Laws,  1831,  c.  24,  amending  Laws 
of  1830,  c.  59. ) 

In  1840  the  Revenue  act  taxed  ordinaries  $18 
and  7  per  cent,  of  the  annual  value  above  $200. 
(Laws,  1839-40,  c.  1.)  This  amount  was  gener- 
ally increased  in  each  annual  Revenue  law  until 
in  1881  it  was  $40  for  all  values  less  than  $100, 
$50  from  tliat  to  $200  and  15  per  cent,  of  the 
excess  in  valuation.     (Laws,  1861,  c.  1.) 

In  1842  (Laws,  c.  6),  a  merchant  who  wished 
to  retail  liquor  was  required  to  get  a  certiticate 
of  good  character  from  the  Court  of  the  cor- 
poration or  county. 

In  1847  (Laws,  'c.  10,  §  32),  selling  liquor  to  a 
slave  without  the  consent  in  writing  of  the 
master  was  fined  $50,  and  a  second  offense 
$100  with  forfeiture  of  license.  Any  master 
giving  consent  in  such  form  that  the  slave 
might  obtain  liquor  to  sell  for  his  own  use  was 
punished  by  fine  not  exceeding  $50.     (Id.,  i^  33.) 

By  Acts  "of  1857  (Laws,  cc.  (32  and  63),  liquor- 
dealers  were  required  to  give  bonds  not  to  sell 
to  slaves  or  free  negroes. 

War  Provisions. — Making  spirituous  or  malt 
liquor  out  of  grain  was  prohibited  and  punished 
by  fine  of  $100  to  $5,000  and  imprisonment  not 
exceeding  12  months,  and  the  distillery  and 
grain  intended  for  such  use  were  forfeited. 
(Laws,  1861-2,  c.  84.)  This  act  was  amended 
60  as  to  except  liquor  for  medical  and  hospital 
purposes.  (Laws,  18S2,  c.  12.)  The  act  next 
preceding  (c.  11)  legalized  the  distillation  of 
alcohol  not  less  than  90  per  cent,  pure,  for 
medical,  chemical  and  manufacturing  purposes 
only,  the  amount  of  the  product  to  be  reported 
to  the  Governor.  This  act  was  repealed  by 
Laws  of  1803,  c.  55. 

By  Laws  of  1863,  c.  54,  the  act  against  distil- 
lation of  grain  was  extended  to  potatoes,  mo- 
lasses and  sugar  ;  and  by  Laws  of  the  called 
session  (1863,  c.  35)  all  contracts  with  the  Con- 
federate Government  for  the  making  of  liquor 
■were  not  allowed  to  be  executed. 

Licenses  were  not  allowed  to  be  granted 
within  any  city  or  town,  or  within  five  miles 
thereof,  or  at  any  depot  station  or  point  on  any 
railroad.  And  sales  without  license  were 
punished  by  forfeiture  of  the  stock  of  liquors 
and  personal  property  used  in  the  conduct  of 
the  business,  besides  former  penalties.  (Laws, 
1863-4,  c.  48.) 

Since  the  War. — After  the  war  the  license  to 
sell  liquor  by  wholesale  and  retail  both  was  put 
at  $100  ;  by  retail  only,  $40.  (Laws,  1865-6, 
c.  3,  S  24.) 

The  famous  Bell-Punch  or  Moffatt  Register 
law  was  first  enacted  in  Virginia  in  1877. 
(Laws,  c.  253.)  It  dispensed  with  a  general  tax 
or  license  fee  and  provided  for  an  instrument 
to  register  each  drink  sold,  and  for  a  tax  of  2^.^ 
cents  per  drink  for  spirituous  and  i<  cent  for 
malt  liquors,  and  at  these  rates  per  half-pint  for 
liquor  sold  in  larger  quantities  up  to  one  gallon. 
Failure  to  comply  with  the  law  was  fined  $20 
to  $100  (one-third  to  the  informer). 

By  Laws  of  1879,  c.  59,  the  tax  per  drink  on 
spirituous  liquor  was  reduced  one  cent,  and  a 
specific  tax  of  $30  on  each  license  in  places  of 
less  tlian  2,000  inhabitants  and  $60  in  larger 
towns,  or  $25  and  $50  for  malt  liquors  alone, 


was  imposed.  The  penalty  of  this  act  was  $50 
to  $100,  as  above.  Both  laws  provided  taxes 
on  wholesale  and  other  licenses.  These  were 
superseded  by  Laws  of  1880,  c.  155. 

The  LaiD  as  It  Existed  in  1889.— ISTo  person 
or  club  shall  sell  intoxicating  liquors  or  any 
mixture  thereof,  alcoholic  bitters,  bitters  con- 
taining alcohol,  or  fruits  preserved  in  spirits 
without  first  obtaining  license.  A  wholesale 
license  shall  authorize  sales  of  five  gallons  or 
more,  or  one  dozen  jugs  or  bottles.  A  retail 
license  authorizes  sale  in  any  quantity  not  ex- 
ceeding five  gallons  (not  to  be  drunk  on  the 
premises).  A  barroom  license  authorizes  sales 
of  liquor  to  be  drunk  on  the  premises.  Ordin- 
aries and  malt  liquor-saloons  may  so  sell,  but 
not  to  be  taken  away. 

Violations  of  this  section  are  punished  by 
fine  of  $100  to  $500  and  at  the  discretion  of  the 
Court  imprisonment  not  exceeding  12  months. 

Nothing  herein  prevents  wholesale  confec- 
tioners from  selling  fruits  preserved  in  ardent 
spirits.     (Laws,  1883-4,  p.  604,  §  1.) 

Applications  to  sell  by  retail  or  keep  a  bar- 
room siiall  be  made  to  the  Commissioner  of 
Revenue  for  the  city  or  coimtv,  who  shall  give 
the  applicant  a  certificate  of  the  same,  and  he 
shall  deposit  the  amount  with  the  Treasurer 
and  may  then  present  such  certificate  with  the 
receipt  "of  the  Treasurer  indorsed  thereon  to 
the  Judge  of  the  county  or  corporation,  who 
shall  hear  evidence  for  and  against  granting  the 
license  and  determine.  Anyone  may  have 
himself  entered  a  defendant  and  contest  the 
license.  If  the  .Judge  is  satisfied  the  applicant 
is  a  fit  person  and  has  a  suitable  place,  he  may 
grant  the  license  upon  bond  given  in  $250  to 
$500  to  abide  by  the  law,  and  thereupon  the 
Commissioner  of  Revenue  shall  issue  the  license. 
Either  party  may  appeal  to  the  Judge  of  the 
Circuit  C!ourt.  After  license  is  granted  the 
Commissioner  shall  make  return  thereof  to  the 
Treasurer  of  the  city  or  county  and  to  the 
Auditor  of  Public  Accounts.  The  Treasurer 
shall  pay  the  amount  over  to  said  Auditor  with- 
in 20  days,  to  the  credit  of  the  State.  If  the 
application  is  finally  refused  the  deposit  shall 
be  refunded.  (Id..  §2.)  The  amount  of  tax 
for  selling  at  wholesale  is  $350,  or  if  malt 
liquors  only  are  sold,  $150.  The  person  desir- 
ing this  license  will  pay  the  amount  to  the  City 
or  County  Treasurer  and  take  his  receipt,  upon 
presentation  of  which  to  the  Commissioner  of 
Revenue  license  shall  be  issued.  (Id.,  §  3.) 
The  sum  to  be  paid  for  retail  license  shall  be 
$75  in  places  of  1,000  inhabitants  or  less,  and 
$175  in  larger  places  ;  but  if  licensee  .sells  undcT 
retail  or  barroom  license,  malt  liquors  only,  in 
places  of  less  than  5,000  inhabitants,  $30.  (Id., 
§  4.)  For  keeping  a  barroom  shall  be  p.iid  $75 
in  places  of  under  1,000  inhabitants  and  $125 
in  larger  ones,  and  15  per  cent,  of  the  rental 
value  "of  the  places  in  each  case.  (Id.,  S  ^^■) 
For  keeping  an  ordinary  for  selling  liquor  to 
be  drunk  on  the  premises  only,  $75  in  places 
of  le,ss  than  2,000  inhabitants  and  $125  in  places 
larger,  and  in  addition  in  both  cases  8,  5  and 
3  per  cent,  of  the  rental  value  oi  the  house  and 
furniture,  according  as  that  value  is  less  than 
$1,000  or  $2,000  or  more  than  $2,000.  (Id., 
gt^  6,  7.)    Any  licensed  wholesale  dealer  may 


Legislation.] 


355 


[Legislation. 


obtain  a  retail  license  for  half  the  regular  fee, 
provided  he  comply  with  tlie  requirements  to 
obtain  it.  So  a  retail  dealer  may  have  a  bar- 
room license  at  half  price,  and  a  barroom  or 
ordinary  licensee  may  have  a  retail  license  at 
half  price  in  addition  to  the  first  license.  (Id., 
g  8. )  The  amount  to  be  paid  by  each  keeper  of 
a  malt  liquor-saloon  shall  be  $40  in  places  of 
1,0(10  inhabitants  or  less,  and  .$60  in  larger 
places.  (Id.,  §  9.)  The  bond  under  ^  2  above 
shall  be  deemed  forfeited  for  failure  to  pay  the 
license  fee  required,  and  at  the  discretion  of  the 
Court  the  license  will  be  forfeited.  (Id.,  §  10.) 
The  amounts  herein  required  are  in  lieu  of 
ta.xes  upon  the  capital  employed.  (Id.,  ^  11.) 
Rectifiers  shall  pay  $150,  but  manufacturers 
may  rectify  their  own  product  without  addi- 
tional license.  (Id.,  §  12.)  Druggists  desiring 
to  sell  liquor  shall  take  out  retail  dealers' 
licenses,  but  this  docs  not  apply  to  liquor  used 
in  preparation  of  medicines,  although  it  does 
apply  to  alcoholic  bitters.  (Id.,  ^^  13.)  Manu- 
facturers or  distillers  who  distil  10  bushels  or 
less  per  day  shall  pay  $30  up  to  $500  ;  up  to 
300  bushels  per  day  at  tlie  rate  of  $200  for  each 
additional  100  bushels  mashed  a  day  ;  and  they 
may  sell  at  wholesale  at  the  manufactory. 
Distillers  of  brandy  from  pomace  or  from  cider 
or  fruits,  up  to  40  gallons,  are  not  required  to 
pay  anything.  Those  distilling  more  than  40 
gallons,  if  they  run  their  distilleries  less  than 
three  months,  must  pay  $10 ;  if  they  run 
less  than  six  montlis,  $20 ;  more  than  six 
months,  $50.  Manufacturers  of  malt  liquor 
shall  pay  $50.  Any  resident  manufacturer  of 
wine  may  sell  his  wine  in  quantities  not  less 
than  one  gallon  without  license.     (Id.,  §  14.) 

The  license  shall  be  conspicuously  posted  in 
the  place  licensed,  on  penalty  of  not  exceeding 
$100.     (Id.,  §  15.) 

This  law  shall  be  given  in  charge  to  the 
Grand  Jury  at  each  term.     (Id.,  §  16.) 

In  order  to  sell  liquor  upon  water-craft, 
except  steamships  plying  the  Atlantic  Ocean, 
licenses  must  be  obtained,  but  at  the  lowest 
rates  provided  herein.     (Id.,  §  16.) 

Violations  of  this  law,  except  as  otherwise 
provided  for,  shall  be  punished  by  fine  of  $50 
to  $100.     (Id.,  §  21.) 

Manufacturers,  like  wholesalers,  are  licensed 
by  the  Commissioners  of  Revenue  upon  receipt 
by  the  Treasurer.     (See  Code,  1887,  §§  533-566.) 

Whenever  one-fourth  of  the  number  voting 
at  the  previous  November  election  in  any  mag- 
isterial district  of  a  county  or  in  any  such  dis- 
trict or  in  a  city  petition  for  a  special  election 
therein  on  the  question  of  licen.ses,  the  Judge  of 
the  county  or  corporation  shall  within  10  days 
order  such  election  to  be  held,  and  notices 
thereof  shall  be  posted  in  every  voting  precinct. 
No  other  such  election  shall  be  held  there  for 
two  years.  (Code,  1887,  §581.)  Notwithstand- 
ing the  election  is  held  for  the  whole  county, 
the  vote  shall  be  by  districts,  and  if  against 
license  in  any  district  no  license  shall  be  issued 
there,  and  if  for  license,  the  contraiy.  (Id., 
§  584.)  Any  town  constituting  a  separate  election 
district  may  in  the  same  manner  procure  an 
election.  (Id.,  §  585.)  No  election  hereunder 
shall  be  within  30  days  of  any  county,  corpora- 
tion, State  or  national  election.     (Id.,  §  586.) 


Selling  in  district.s  voting  no-license  is  punished 
as  selling  without  license.  But  this  does  not 
apply  to  manufacturers.     (Id.,  §  587.) 

A  liquor  license  may  be  revoked  by  the  Court 
giving  it.     (Id.,  §  560.) 

Getting  drunk  is  fined  $1.     (Id.,  §  3798.) 

Opening  a  saloon  or  selling  liquor  therein  on 
Sunday  is  fined  $10  to  $500,  with  forfeiture  of» 
license;  but  tliis  does  not  apply  to  cities  having 
police  regulations   providing    equal    penalties. 
(Id.,  §3804.) 

Selling  liquor  within  three  miles  of  any  camp- 
meeting  or  other  place  of  worship  during  service 
is  fined  $10  to  $20;  for  second  olfense,  the  same 
fine  and  added  imprisonment  10  to  30  days  (Id., 
§  3807),  with  forfeiture  of  liquor  and  vessels 
and  structure  containing  it  (Id.,  §  3808);  but 
this  doesn't  apply  to  licensed  dealers.  (Id., 
§  3809. ) 

Selling  knowingly  to  minors  without  written 
authority  of  parent  is  fined  $10  to  $200.  (Id., 
§3828.) 

Barrooms  shall  be  closed  election  day  from 
sunset  before  to  sunrise  after  the  election. 
During  that  time  no  person  shall  dispo.se  of 
liquors,  upon  penalty  of  not  exceeding  $1,000 
and  imprisonment  not  over  one  year.  (Id., 
§§3846-7.)  Officers  shall  arre-st  per.sons  commit- 
ting or  suspected  of  intending  to  commit  such 
offenses,  and  hold  them  for  examination.  (Id., 
§3848.) 

If  any  Justice  suspect  any  person  of  unlaw- 
fully selling  liquor  he  shall  summon  the  person 
and  witnesses  to  appear  before  him,  and  upon 
finding  sufficient  cause  he  shall  cause  the  State's 
Attorney  to  institute  proceedings  and  shall  bind 
the  offender  to  be  of  good  behavior  for  one 
year.     (Id.,  §  3921.) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  majority  vote  of  ail  the  members 
of  each  House ;  to  be  concurred  in  by  a  majority 
of  each  House  in  the  next  Legislature;  upon 
submission  to  the  people  a  majority  carries  it. 

Washington. 

Early  Provisions. — The  first  Legislature  pro- 
hibited retailing  of  intoxicating  liquor  without 
license  from  the  County  Commissioners,  upon 
penalty  of  $50.  It  prescribed  a  license  fee  to  be 
fixed  at  the  discretion  of  the  Commissioners. 
(Laws,  1854,  p.  339.) 

In  1855  selling  liquor  to  Indians  was  pro- 
hibited under  penalty  of  $25  to  $500,  and  on 
Sunday  on  pain  of  a  fine  of  $75.  (Laws,  1855, 
pp.  30-1.)  The  same  year,  on  p.  26  of  the 
Laws,  was  submitted  a  short  act  prohibiting  the 
manufacture  and  sale  of  liquor,  except  by- 
Agents  appointed  to  .sell  for  medicinal,  mechani- 
cal or  sacramental  purposes. 

A  License  Fee  of  $300  (1857).— In  1857  (Laws, 
p.  31),  applicants  for  license  were  required  to 
present  petitions  signed  by  a  majority  of  the 
adult  white  male  inhabitants  of  the  precinct  and 
to  pay  $300  license  fee. 

Selling  to  minors  after  being  xequested  not  to 
do  so  by  parents  or  guard ians"<Vas  punished  by 
fine  not  over  $1,000  and  imprisonment  not  ex- 
ceeding six  months,  with  revocation  of  license. 
(Laws  of  1859,  p.  128.)  And  to  prevent  the  sale 
of  adulterated  liquor,  inspection  was  provided 
for  by  Laws  of  1859,  p.   332,  and  the  selling  of 


Legislation.] 


35G 


[Legislation. 


such  liquor  was  punished  by  imprisonment  not 
more  than  six  months  and  tine  of  not  over  $500. 
(Id.) 

In  1871  the  County  Commissioners  were 
authorized  to  grant  Hcenses  in  places  where 
there  was  little  business  for  less  than  $300  and 
not  less  than  $100.  And  the  penalty  for  selling 
without  license  was  made  $50  to  $500  and  im- 
prisonment 10  to  90  days.     (Laws,  1871,  p.  58.) 

For  a  few  counties  the  license  law  was  relaxed 
and  the  same  law  was  also  somewhat  f  ortit:ed  by 
scattered  prohibitions  of  sales  on  election  days 
and  to  drunkards. 

In  1885  (Laws,  p.  31)  was  enacted  a  general 
Local  Option  law,  applicable  to  election  pre- 
cincts, upon  petition  of  15  voters  thereof.  This 
law  was  declared  unconstitutional  because  such 
precincts  were  mimicipal  corporations,  to  which 
such  power  could  be  delegated. 

Submission  of  Constitutional  Prohibition  (1889). 
— A  separate  article  prohibiting  the  manufacture 
and  sale  of  liquor  was  submitted  for  adoption 
with  the  State  Constitution,  but  not  adopted. 

The  Law  as  It  Existed  in  1889.— The  Board 
of  County  Commissioners  shall  have  the  sole 
and  exclusive  authority  and  power  to  regulate, 
restrain,  license  or  prohibit  the  sale  of  liquor  in 
counties  outside  of  incorporated  places,  licenses 
in  no  case  to  be  granted  for  less  than  $300  or 
more  than  $1,000,  10  per  cent,  to  go  to  the 
State,  35  per  cent,  to  the  county  school  fund 
and  55  per  cent,  to  the  county  general  fund. 
No  license  to  be  granted  within  one  mile  of  the 
limits  of  any  incorporated  place.  (Laws,  1887-8, 
p.  134,  §  1.)  The  governing  bodies  of  cities, 
towns  and  villages  incorporated  have  authority 
to  grant  licenses  within  the  limits  of  such  places, 
and  if  they  grant  licenses  the  same  shall  be  for 
the  above  amounts,  to  be  divided  as  above, 
except  that  no  school  fund  is  mentioned.  (Id., 
§  2.)  In  granting  the  license  authorized,  the 
proper  authorities  shall  exact  of  the  applicant  a 
bond  in  $1,000  to  keep  an  orderly  house  and  not 
sell  to  minors.  In  case  of  violating  the  terms 
of  license  he  shall  forfeit  it  and  be  subject  to  the 
penalties  for  illegal  selling.  The  authorities 
granting  a  license  have  full  power  to  declare  it 
forfeited  for  such  violations.  (Id.,  §  3.)  Any 
person  selling  liquor  without  license  shall  be 
lined  not  exceeding  $1,000  or  imprisoned  not 
more  than  six  months,  or  both.  (Id.,  §  4.) 
Nothing  herein  allows  anyone  to  dispose  of 
liquor  without  license,  except  by  the  next  sec- 
tion. (Id.,  §  5..)  This  act  does  not  apply  to 
druggists  who  may  dispense  liquors  upon 
physicians'  prescriptions  or  may  sell  pure  alcohol 
for  scientific  or  mechanical  purposes  upon  the 
written  certificate  of  any  reputable  mechanic  or 
scientist  that  he  wants  it  for  specified  purposes 
and  no  others;  and  they  may  sell  pure  grape 
wine  to  any  church  othcers  upon  certificate  that 
it  is  to  be  used  for  sacramental  purposes.  (Id., 
§  6.)  Any  druggist  selling  otherwise  is  liable 
as  for  selling  without  license.      (Id.,  §  7.) 

There  is  a  law.  requiring  scientific  temperance 
instruction  in  tTie  common  schools.  (Laws, 
1889-90,  p.  373,  §45.) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  a  two-thirds  vote  of  all  the  mem- 
bers of  the  two  Houses,  at  one  session;  popular 
vote  to  be  taken  at  the  next  general  election  for 


Representatives,  three  months'  notice  to  be  given. 
A  majority  vote  carries  it. 

West  Virginia. 

Early  Provisions. — The  first  Legislature  of 
the  State  enacted  a  license  law  punishing  sales 
of  liquor  without  license  by  fine  of  $10  to  $100. 
The  license  fee  was  determined  by  the  yearly 
value  of  the  premises  upon  which  the  business 
was  conducted.  The  tax  on  licenses  was  placed 
in  classes,  amounting  practically  to  5  per  cent, 
of  the  rental  value  aforesaid,  no  license  being 
less  than  $5.  (Laws,  1863,  cc.  113,  123.) 
This  is  the  basis  of  the  law  as  it  now  stands. 
The  civil  damage  and  nuLsance  provisions  were 
enacted  in  1873,  and  the  High  License  ones  in 
1885  and  1887.  The  form  of  the  law  is  that  of 
a  tax  law,  all  taxes  being  now  imposed  in  the 
same  chapter. 

Submission  of  Constitutional  Prohibition 
(1888). — A  Prohibitory  Constitutional  Amend- 
ment was  submitted  to  the  people  in  1888  by 
Laws  of  1887,  pp.  230,  179,  and  defeated. 

The  Law  as  It  Existed  in  1889. — Laws  may  be 
passed  regulating  or  prohibiting  the  sale  of  in- 
toxicating liquors  within  the  State.  (Const., 
art.  6,  §  46.) 

No  person  without  a  State  license  shall  keep 
a  hotel,  eating-house  or  restaurant,  or  furnish 
intoxicating  drinks  at  a  theatre,  or  sell  or  keep 
for  sale  spirituous  liquors,  wine,  porter,  ale  or 
beer.  All  mixtures,  preparations  or  liquids  that 
will  produce  intoxication,  whether  patented  or 
not,  shall  be  deemed  spirituous  liquors.  (Laws, 
1889,  c.  29,  §  1,  amending  Code,  1887,  cc.  33 
and  33.  Violations  hereof,  except  where  other- 
wise provided,  are  punished  by  fine  of  $10  to 
$100,  and  at  discretion,  by  imprisonment  not 
exceeding  three  months.  (Laws,  1889,  c.  29, 
§  3.)  This  does  not  require  a  license  to  sell 
malt  liquors  in  addition  to  one  to  sell  spirituous, 
nor  prohibit  a  druggi.st  without  license  from 
selling  spirituous  liquor  and  wine  for  medicinal 
purposes  or  alcohol  for  medicinal,  scientific  or 
mechanical  purposes.  (Id.,  §  4.)  If  a  druggist 
sell  such  liquor  otherwise,  he  shall  be  fined  $10 
to  $100  ;  and  if  any  person  not  a  druggist  sell 
liquor  without  license  upon  or  along  any  of  the 
boundary  rivers  of  the  State,  he  shall  be  fined  as 
above  and  imprisoned  30  to  60  days.  (Id.,  §  5.) 
In  any  prosecution  against  a  druggist,  if  the 
sale  is  proven,  it  is  presumed  unlawful  sale 
without  contrary  proof.  No  sale  by  a  druggist, 
except  of  alcohol  for  mechanical  or  scientific  pur- 
poses, shall  be  made  except  upon  prescription 
in  writing  of  a  physician  in  good  standing  and 
not  of  intemperate  habits,  specifying  the  name 
of  the  person  and  the  liquor  to  be  supplied  him, 
and  that  the  same  is  absolutely  necessary  as  a 
medicine  for  such  person,  and  is  not  to  be  used 
as  a  beverage.  Not  more  than  one  sale  shall  be 
made  on  a  prescription.  The  production  of 
such  a  prescription  rebuts  the  presumption  aris- 
ing from  proof  of  sale,  if  the  jury  believe  the  sale 
was  made  in  good  faith,  believing  the  prescrip- 
tion true.  (Id.,  §  7.)  If  a  physician  give  such 
a  prescription  falsely,  he  shall  be  fined  $50  to 
$300.  Every  prescription  shall  be  filed  and  be 
subject  to  the  inspection  of  the  Prosecutin^g 
Attorney,  any  Grand  Juror  and  any  relative  of 


ILegislation.] 


357 


[Legislation. 


any  person  sold  to,  on  penalty  of  $10  to  $100. 
(I(i.,  §  7.) 

A  liotel  or  tavern  license  shall  always  be  re- 
voked if  it  appear  that  the  principal  object  in 
obtaining  the  same  was  not  to  provide  lodgings 
and  diet  for  travellers,  but  to  facilitate  selling 
liquor.  (Id.,§  8.)  Hotel  licenses  are  taxed  ac- 
cording to  the  yearly  rental  value  of  the  prem- 
ises occupied.     (Id.,  §  9.) 

State  licenses  shall  be  issued  only  when 
authorized  by  the  County  Coui"t,  or  within  an 
incorporated  place  only  as  authorized  by  the 
Council  thereof  under  the  chai'ter  ;  provided 
that  no  license  to  sell  liquor  shall  be  issued  for 
a  place  within  two  miles  of  such  an  incorporated 
place  in  which  there  is  no  license,  without  con- 
sent of  the  Council  thereof.  (Id.,  §  10.)  Per- 
sons desiring  licenses  shall  apply  for  certificates 
to  the  Assessor  of  the  proper  district,  and  if  the 
business  is  to  be  in  an  incorporated  place  a 
resolution  of  the  Council  authorizing  the  license 
must  be  delivered  to  the  As.sessor ;  if  not  in  an  in- 
corporated place  a  copy  of  such  an  order  from 
the  County  Court  must  be  delivered.  The 
Assessor  shall  thereupon  deliver  the  applicant  a 
certificate  of  the  license,  and  the  amount  to  be 
paid,  which  certificate,  with  the  receipt  of  the 
proper  ofiicer  for  the  State  tax  written  thereon, 
.shall  be  sufficient  licen.se.  (Id.,  §  11.)  An 
Assessor  may  obtain  a  license  in  the  same  way 
from  the  Clerk  of  the  County  Court.  (Id., 
§  12.)  Where  the  Council  of  a  city,  village  or 
town  is  authorized  by  charter  to  forbid  the 
liquor  business,  a  State  license  will  not  author- 
ize a  person  to  engage  in  it.  (Id.,  §  13.) 
Neither  the  County  Court  nor  municipal 
authorities  may  grant  a  license  without  being 
satisfied  the  licensee  is  not  of  intemperate  habits. 
(Id.,  §  14.) 

If  any  person  having  a  State  license  to  sell 
liquor  sells  to  any  minor,  person  of  unsound  mind 
or  one  intoxicated  or  in  the  habit  of  becoming 
so,  or  permits  any  such  persons  to  drink  to  in- 
toxication on  his  premises,  or  sells  on  Sunday, 
he  shall  be  fined  $20  to  $100.  (Id.,  §  16.)  A 
sale  of  such  liquors  by  one  per.son  for  another 
is  a  sale  by  both,  and  both  may  be  indicted 
jointly  or  separately.     (Id.,  §  17.) 

All  houses  or  places  where  liquors  are  sold 
illegally  are  public  nuisances  and  may  be 
abated  upon  conviction  of  the  owner,  and  any 
Court  of  Equity  may  by  injunction  restrain  or 
abate  the  same  upon  bill  tiled  by  any  citizen. 
(Id.,  §  18.)  The  owner  of  such  house  or  place 
who  sells  or  permits  knowingly  any  liquor  to  be 
sold  therein  unlawfully,  may  be  indicted  for 
keeping  a  nuisance,  and  upon  conviction  he  shall 
be  fined  $20  to  $100  and  at  discretion  imprisoned 
10  to  30  days,  and  judgment  shall  be  given 
that  the  place  be  abated  and  closed.  (Id., 
§19.) 

Every  husband,  wife,  child,  parent,  guard- 
ian, employer  or  any  other  person  injured  in 
person  or  property  or  means  of  support  by  any 
intoxicated  person  or  in  consequence  of  the  intox- 
ication of  any  person,  shall  have  a  right  of  action 
againt  the  person  or  persons  selling  the  liquor 
that  caused  intoxication  and  the  owner  of  the 
premisses  on  which  liquor  was  sold  to  his 
knowledge.  The  unlawful  sale  of  liquor  on 
leased  premises  forfeits  the  lease.     Landlords 


have  their  action  against  tenants  for  all 
losses  imder  this  .section.     (Id.,  §  20.) 

If  the  sale  of  liquor  is  carried  on  in  such 
manner  that  the  person  so  selling  cannot  be 
identified,  the  officer  charged  M-ith  the  execu- 
tion of  a  w^arrant  under  the  23d  section  may 
break  open  the  place  to  arrest  or  identify  the 
person.     (Id.,  §  21.) 

No  license  shall  issue  to  sell  liquor  without 
bond  in  $3,500  to  obey  the  law  and  pay 
all  damages  and  costs  recovered  against  the 
licensee  under  this  chapter,  until  the  penalty  of 
the  bond  is  exhausted.     (Id.,  §  22.) 

Every  Justice  of  the  Peace,  upon  information 
under  oath  that  liquors  are  unlawfully  sold  in 
any  named  place,  shall  issue  his  warrant  re- 
quiring the  person  suspected  to  be  brought  be- 
fore him  for  examination,  or  the  place  to  be 
searched  and  the  parties  found  therein  to  be  so 
brought  before  him,  and  requiring  that  the  wit- 
ne.sses  named  be  summoned;  and  if  there  is  prob- 
able cause,  the  accused  and  the  material  wit- 
nesses shall  be  bound  over  to  the  next  Circuit 
Court,  and  the  accused  be  bound  not  to  break 
the  law  in  the  meantime.     (Id.,  §  23.) 

The  licensing  authority,  for  good  cause 
shown,  may  revoke  a  license  upon  petition  in 
writing  of  any  inhabitant,  given  upon  reasona- 
ble notice  to  and  in  the  hearing  of  the  accused. 
(Id.,  §24.) 

Every  license  .shall  specify  the  place  of  busi- 
ness, and  business  may  be  conducted  at  no 
other  place.  (Id.,  §  25.)  The  licensing  au- 
thority may  authorize  the  transfer  of  license  to 
another  place  by  endorsement  thereon.  (Id., 
§26.)  No  person  may  assign  his  license  to 
another  witliout  assent  of  the  licensing  au- 
thority and  a  new  bond  by  the  transferee.  (Id., 
§  27. )  Each  license  shall  expire  April  30,  and 
if  granted  for  less  than  a  year  the  tax  shall  be 
proportionate  to  the  time  it  has  to  run.  (Id., 
§  29.)  Every  person  claiming  to  hold  a  State 
license  shall  produce  the  same  for  inspection 
whenever  required  to  do  so  by  the  Prosecuting 
Attorney,  Sheriff,  Justice,  Collector  or  Assessor, 
upon  penalty  of  $10.     (Id.,  §  33.) 

Every  hotel,  eating-house  or  restaurant  shall 
pay  3  per  cent,  of  the  yearly  value  of  the 
premises.  (Id.,  §  53.)  Distillers  and  brewers 
shall  pay  $125  to  $550  according  to  volume  of 
product.  (Id.,  §§  54-59.)  Licenses  to  sell 
liquor  at  theatre  cost  $150  (Id.,  §  60) ;  licenses 
to  retail  all  liquors,  $350  (Id.,  §  61);  licenses  to 
wholesale  all  liquors,  $350,  in  addition  to  all 
other  taxes.  (Id.,  §  62.)  These  State  license 
rates  may  be  increased  at  the  pleasure  of 
cities,  towns  or  villages,  which  are  empowered 
to  impose  taxes  in  every  case  in  which  a  State 
license  is  required.  (Code,  1887,  c.  47,  §  33; 
passed  1882,  c.  92.) 

No  retailer  shall  sell  more  than  five  gallons 
at  a  time  (Id.,  §  63),  and  no  wholesaler  shall 
sell  less.     (Id.,  §64.) 

Apple  and  peach  brandy  distilled  in  the  State 
from  fruit  grown  therein  may  be  sold  by  the 
distiller  in  quantities  of  five  gallons  or  over  by 
paying  a  license  tax  of  $100.  (Id.,  §65.)  Li- 
censes to  sell  at  retail  domestic  wines,  ale,  beer 
and  drinks  of  like  nature  only  cost  $100.  (Id., 
§  66.) 

Treating  with  liquor  on  election  day  is  fined 


Legislation.] 


358 


[Legislation. 


$10  to  $50,  and  if  by  a  candidate  lie  forfeits  office 
if  elected.  (Code,  IH^il,  c.  5,  §  10.)  Liquor 
places  shall  be  closed  and  no  one  shall  sell 
liquor  on  election  day,  upon  penalty  of  $50 
to  $100.  (Id.,  §  11.)  If  any  person  be  drunk 
at  or  near  an  election  place,  he  shall  be  fined 
$10  to  $50  and  shall  give  security  for  his  good 
behavior  six  mouths,  or  be  imprisoned  five  to 
20  days.  (Id.,  §  12.)  Selling  liquor  within 
two  miles  of  a  carnp-meeting  or  within  half  a 
mile  of  any  other  religious  meeting,  except  by 
persons  engaged  in  regular  business,  is  fined  $10 
to  $50.     (Id.,  c.  149,  fc^§  20,  21.) 

If  any  person  get  drunk  he  shall  be  fined  $1. 
(Id.,  §  15.) 

The  nature  of  alcoholic  drinks  and  narcotics, 
and  their  effects  upon  the  human  system  in 
connection  with  physiology  and  hygiene,  shall 
be  taught  in  the  common  schools,  and  no  certi- 
ficate shall  be  granted  to  any  teacher  not  quali- 
fied.    (Laws,  1889,  c.  3.) 

WiscoJisin. 

Early  Provisions. — By  the  laws  of  1838,  p. 
384  (republished  in  1867),  there  was  laid  on 
tavern  license  a  tax  of  $5  to  $50,  and  on  retail- 
ing liquors  a  tax  not  less  than  $100;  and  it 
seems  that  the  County  Commissioners  might 
grant  licenses,  but  there  were  no  rules  in  the 
matter. 

By  Laws  of  1850,  c.  139,  no  person  was  al- 
lowed to  retail  liquor  until  he  had  executed  a 
bond  in  $1,000  to  pay  all  damages  that  the 
community  or  individuals  might  sustain  by 
reason  of  his  vending  liquors,  to  support  all 
paupers,  widows  and  orphans  made  or  helped  to 
be  made  by  said  traffic,  and  to  pay  the  ex- 
penses of  all  prosecutions  growing  out  of  or 
justly  attributable  to  his  selling.  Married 
women  might  sue  in  their  own  names  for  dam- 
ages to  themselves  and  children.  No  suit  could 
be  maintained  for  bills  for  liquor  sold  at  retail, 
or  on  notes  or  evidences  of  debt  for  the  same. 
On  trial  of  a  suit  hereunder  for  anything  grow- 
ing out  of  intoxication  it  was  necessary  only  to 
prove  that  defendant  had  sold  or  given  liquor 
that  day  or  the  day  before  to  the  person  intoxi- 
cated. The  authorities  of  a  county  or  place 
where  any  habitual  drunkard  was  a  public 
charge  might  sue  anyone  who  had  been  in  the 
habit  of  selling  such  person  liquor  within  six 
months.  Any  liquor-dealers  against  whom 
judgments  were  obtained  hereunder  nu'ght 
compel  contributions  from  all  dealers  who  had 
sold  liquors  to  the  person  in  question.  Those 
selling  liquor  without  giving  bonds  were  fined 
$50  to  $500  and  imprisoned  10  days  to  six 
months.  All  charter  powers  to  grant  license 
were  repealed,  as  well  as  the  chapter  of  the 
laws  ]3roviding  therefor. 

This  law  was  repealed  by  Laws  of  1851, 
c.  162,  which  gave  County  Supervisors  and 
municipal  authorities  the  right  to  grant  license 
for  $100  upon  bond  in  $500  to  keep  an  orderly 
house  and  obey  the  law.  The  penalty  for  sell- 
ing without  license  was  $100.  Any  member  of 
a  Municipal  Board  might  notify  all  licensed 
persons  not  to  sell  to  spendthrifts  who  were  ex- 
cessive drinkers,  or  to  habitual  drunkards. 

In  1853  (Laws,  c.  101)  the  (juestion  of  a  Pro- 
hibitory liquor  law  was  submitted  to  the  peo- 


ple.    A  draft  of  such  law  was  not  proposed, 

and  no  such  law  was  enacted. 

In  1859  selling  liquor  on  Sunday  and  election 
day  was  prohibited  by  fine  of  not  exceeding  $5. 
(Laws,  1859,  c.  115.) 

It  was  provided  by  Laws  of  1862,  c.  275, 
that  an  Indian  found  drunk  should  be  hekl 
until  he  informed  against  the  seller. 

Selling  to  minors  was  fined  $20  to  $100  by 
laws  of  1866,  c.  36. 

Liquor-sellers  were  disqualified  to  be  Jus- 
tices of  the  Peace  by  Laws  of  1867,  c.  105. 

Making  or  selling  adulterated  liquor  was 
punished  by  fine  of  $100  or  imprisonment  one 
year,  or  both.     (Laws,  1867,  c.  162.) 

In  1872  a  short  license  law,  with  civil  damage 
provisions,  made  the  penalty  for  selling  unlaw- 
fully $50  to  $100  and  imprisonment  20  to  50 
days.     (Laws,  1872,  c.  127.) 

The  liquor  laws  were  codified  by  the  act  of 
1874,  c.  179.  The  penalty,  however,  was  re- 
duced to  a  fine  of  $10  to  $40  or  imprisonment 
20  to  60  days.  This  law  remains  the  basis  of 
the  law  as  it  now  stands  though  acts  of  1885, 
1887  and  1889  have  much  amplified  many 
sections. 

The  Law  as  It  Existed  in  1889.— The  Town 
Boards,  Village  Boards  and  Common  Councils 
of  the  respective  towns,  villages  and  cities  may 
grant  licenses  under  this  chapter  to  sell  liquor 
in  quantities  less  than  one  gallon  (to  be  drunk 
on  the  premises),  on  payment  of  $100  in  a  town 
having  within  its  boundaries  no  village  with  a 
population  of  500  or  more  ;  in  other  towns 
$200,  and  for  such  license  to  sell  liquor  not  to 
be  drunk  on  the  premises  (except  for  pharma- 
cists), $200. 

Application  for  license  shall  state  the  kind  of 
license  wanted  and  give  a  designation  of  the 
premises.  Such  licenses  shall  be  in  force  until 
the  first  Tuesday  in  May  unless  sooner  revoked 
by  the  licensing  authority.  The  above-men- 
tioned bodies  shall  meet  on  the  third  Tuesday 
of  April  to  act  upon  such  application.  (R.  S., 
1889,  §  1548.)  The  said  Boards  may  grant  to 
any  registered  pharmacist  a  permit  to  retail 
liquors  for  medicinal,  mechanical  or  scientific 
purposes  only  (not  to  be  drunk  on  the  premises) 
for  $10.  Such  pharmacist  shall  keep  a  book  in 
which  to  enter  the  details  of  every  sale,  which 
book  shall  be  open  to  the  inspection  of  the 
Board,  and  a  copy  thereof  must  be  filed  with 
the  Municipal  Clerk  each  third  Tuesday  in 
April.     (Id.,  I  1548ffl.) 

On  applications  of  12  citizens  to  the  Muni- 
cipal Clerk,  he  shall  order  an  election  for  the 
third  Tuesday  in  September  to  ascertain 
whether  licenses  shall  be  raised  from  $100  to 
$250  or  $400,  or  from  $200  to  $350  or  $500  re- 
spectively, the  ballots  to  be  :  "To  be  paid  for 
license,  $ ."  The  sum  favored  by  the  high- 
est number  of  voters  shall  be  the  sum  to  be  re- 
quired the  next  license  year.  (Id.,  §  15486.) 
That  sum  shall  remain  fixed  until  the  next 
election.     (Id.,  §  1548c.) 

Every  applicant  for  license  shall  file  a  bond 
in  $500  to  keep  an  orderly  house,  allow  no 
gaming,  not  sell  to  a  minor  except  upon 
order  of  parent  or  guardian,  or  to  persons  in- 
toxicated, or  to  habitual  drunkards,  to  observe 
the  law  and  to  pay  damages  recovered  under 


Legislation.] 


359 


[Legislation, 


§  1560.  (Id.,  §  1549.)  Any  person  selling 
without  license  or  permit  shall  be  fined  $50  to 
f  100  or  be  imprisoned  three  to  six  months,  and 
on  second  conviction  shall  he  punished  by  both 
fine  and  imprisonment.     (Id.,  §  1550.) 

Any  person  makinu;  a  false  statement  to  a 
pharmacist  to  obtain  liquor,  or  any  such  phar- 
macist not  complying  with  this  chapter, 
shall  be  fined  $10  to  $40,  and  on  second  con- 
viction $40  to  $100  or  be  imprisoned  30  days  to 
three  months.     (Id.,  §  1550rt.) 

Upon  complaint  to  any  Justice  of  the  Peace 
hj  any  person  that  he  has  reason  to  believe  any 
offense  has  been  committed  against  this  law, 
the  Justice  shall  issue  a  warrant  to  arrest  the 
accused  and  summon  witnesses  to  appear  at  the 
trial.  (Id.,  §  1551.)  The  District  Attorney  on 
notice  shall  appear  and  prosecute.  (Id.,  §  1552.) 
Every  Supervisor,  Trustee,  Alderman,  Justice 
or  police  officer  who  shall  know  of  an  offense 
shall  make  complaint  against  the  offender, 
upon  penalty  of  $25.     (Id.,  §1553.) 

If  any  person  by  excessive  drinking  misspends 
or  wastes  his  estate  or  injures  his  health  or  safety 
or  that  of  his  family,  his  wife,  the  Supervisor, 
Aldermen,  Trustees,  or  County  Superinten- 
dent of  the  Poor  may  in  writing  forbid  all  li- 
censed persons  selling  to  him  for  a  year;  and 
sinu'lar  notice  not  to  sell  to  any  habitual  drunk- 
ard may  be  given  by  the  above-named  persons, 
except  the  first  and  last.  (Id.,  §  1554.)  Such 
autlioriti'^s  may  renew  such  prohibition  at  the 
end  of  the  year,  and  those  disregarding  any 
such  prohibition  shall  be  fined  $50.  (Id., 
§§  1555,  1550.)  The  person  to  whom  such  sales 
have  been  prohibited  may  be  arrested  on  com- 
plaint of  above  officers  and  brought  before  a 
.Justice  to  testify  from  whom  and  how  he  ob- 
tained licjuor,  and  he  may  be  committed 
until  he  so  testifies.  It  shall  not  be  necessary 
to  allege  any  facts  showing  that  the  person  to 
^vhom  the  liquor  was  sold  was  one  to  whom 
sales  might  be  forbidden.  (Id.,  §  1550.)  Any 
person  seJing  or  dealing  in  liquor  in  evasion  of 
the  law,  or  selling  to  minors  or  intoxicated  per- 
sons, or  selling  within  one  mile  of  an  insane 
hospital,  is  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor.  (Id., 
§  1557.) 

Upon  complaint  of  any  resident  that  any 
licensed  person  violates  the  law,  the  proper 
Board  shall  issue  a  summons  to  such  accused 
person  to  appear  some  day  within  10  days  to 
show  cause  why  his  license  shall  not  be 
revoked.  (Id.,  §  1558.)  If  the  accused  do  not 
appear  he  shall  be  considered  guilty,  or  if  found 
guilty  on  hearing,  his  license  shall  be  revoked 
and  he  be  disqualified  for  license  one  year. 
(Id.,  §  1559.)  On  certiorari  of  such  revocation 
to  the  Circuit  Court  or  on  appeal  from  such 
Court,  there  shall  be  no  suspension  of  the  order 
of  revocation  during  pendency.  But  in  any 
such  case  on  10  days'  notice  to  the  other  party, 
the  licensee  may  liave  the  Circuit  Court  hear 
the  matter  at  any  Court  in  its  circuit,  or  have  a 
Judge  hear  the  same  at  chambers.  (Id., 
§  1559a.) 

Any  person  injured  in  person,  property  or 
means  of  support  in  consequence  of  the  intoxi- 
cation of  a  minor  or  habitual  drunkard,  shall 
have  an  action  for  all  damages  against  any  per- 
Bon  who  has  been  notified  by  the  municipal 


authorities  or  by  the  husband,  wife,  parent, 
relative,  guardians  or  persons  in  care  of  such 
minor  or  habitual  drunkard  not  to  sell  to  him. 
(Id.,  §  1560.) 

Any  person  found  in  a  public  place  drunk  so 
as  to  disturb  others  or  not  to  be  able  to  care  for 
himself,  shall  be  fined  not  exceeding  $10  or  be 
imprisoned  not  more  than  five  days;  but  cities 
and  villages  may  provide  a  different  punish- 
ment.    (Id.,  §  1561.)' 

Moneys  derived  from  licenses  shall  go  to  tho 
support  of  the  poor.  (Id.,  §  1562.)  In  any 
action  by  any  town  against  a  village  for  license 
moneys,  it  is  sutficienl;  defense  that  the  villago 
has  spent  the  mone}'  for  support  of  the  poor. 
(Id.,  §  1562a.) 

All  places  where  liquor  is  sold  unlawfully  arc 
nuisances  and  on  conviction  of  the  keei^er  shall 
be  shut  up  and  abated.     (Id.,  §  1563.) 

Nothing  herein  sliall  permit  any  city  or  vil- 
lage to  reduce  the  license  fees  below  the  statu- 
tory limit.     (Id.,  §  1563a.) 

If  anyone  sell  liquor  on  Sunday  or  election 
day,  he  shall  be  fined  $5  to  $25  or  imprisoned 
not  exceeding  30  days,  or  both.     (Id.,  §  1564.) 

Giving  away  liquor,  or  any  other  device  to 
evade  the  law,  is  unlawful  selling.  Any  person 
convicted  of  a  misdemeanor  under  this  chapter, 
not  othei'wise  provided  for,  shall  be  fined  $50. 
In  any  prosecution  hereunder  it  is  not  necessary 
to  state  the  kind  or  quantity  of  liq\u)r  sold,  or 
the  person  to  whom  sold.     (Id.,  §  1565.) 

Whenever  10  per  cent,  of  the  voters  in  any 
municipality  at  the  last  general  election  for 
Governor  present  to  the  Clerk  a  petition  praying 
therefor,  said  Clerk  shall  order  an  election  on 
the  first  Tuesday  of  April  next  to  submit  the 
question  of  license.  Notice  shall  b(!  given  as 
for  judicial  elections,  and  the  result  shall  stand 
until  another  election.  (Id.,  §  1565a.)  Tho 
ballot  shall  be  "For  License"  or  "Against 
Licapse,"  and  no  license  shall  be  granted  in  that 
municipality  contrary  to  the  vote,  Itut  in  no 
case  shall  license  be  granted  to  a  keeper  of  a 
house  of  ill-fame.  (Id.,  t^  1565jc.)  The  elec- 
tion shall  be  held  and  votes  canvassed  as  pro- 
vided for  by  the  general  election  law,  and  re- 
sult shall  be  certified  and  entered  upon  the 
books  of  the  town,  village  or  city  as  required 
by  law.  (Id.,  g  1565fZ.)  If  after  vote  against 
license  anyone  shall  deal  in  liquor  in  such 
place,  he  shall  be  fined  $50  to  $100  or  be  im- 
prisoned three  to  six  months,  and  for  second 
conviction  both.     (Id.,  §  1565e.) 

Nothing  in  this  act  shall  affect  the  sale  of 
liquor  for  the  above-excepted  purposes  by  phar- 
macists.    (Id.,  ^5  156.5f. ) 

Selling  liquor  to  Indians  is  forbidden  by 
§i<  1566-9. 

No  election  shall  be  held  in  a  liquor-selling 
place  or  place  adjoining  thereto.     (Id.,  §  15a.) 

Any  jailer  or  person  who  shall  give  a  prisoner 
liquor,  except  upon  the  certificate  of  a  physi- 
cian, or  who  shall  have  liquor  in  a  prison  for 
such  purpose,  shall  be  fined  not  exceeding 
$100.     (Id.,  §  4497.) 

Selling  liquor  within  two  miles  of  any  camp 
or  other  religious  meeting  (except  at  a  regularly 
licensed  place),  without  permission,  is  fined  $5 
to  $50,  and  the  liquor  is  forfeited.    (Id. ,  §  4598. ) 

Adulterating  liquor  is  fined  not  exceeding 


Legislation.] 


360 


[License. 


$100  or  punished  by  imprisonment  not  exceed- 
ing six  montlis,  and  the  liquor  is  forfeited.  (Id., 
§  4600.) 

No  Justice's  Court  shall  be  held  in  a  saloon, 
upon  penalty  of  $25.     (Id.,  §  3570. ) 

Claims  for  liquor  are  not  allowed  in  the 
Probate  Court.     (Id.,  §  3841.) 

There  is  a  law  requiring  scientific  temperance 
instruction  in  the  public  schools.  (R.  S.,  1H89, 
§  447a,  passed  1885,  Laws,  c.  327.) 

An  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  may  be 
proposed  by  majority  vote  of  the  two  Ho\ises  ; 
to  be  concurred  in  by  a  majority  of  each  House 
in  the  next  Legislature.  A  majority  vote  of 
the  people  carries  it. 

Wyoming. 

The  first  ses.sion  of  the  Legislature,  in  1869 
(Laws,  c.  18),  regulated  licenses  in  the  same 
form  as  now,  but  the  license  fee  required  was 
$100,  or  $50  at  any  point  10  miles  from  any 
city,  town  or  railway  station;  and  selling  uulaw- 
i'uUy  was  punished  by  a  fine  of  double  the 
amount  of  license  and  imprisonment  for  three 
months  (half  to  the  informer). 

The  Lmc  as  It  Existed  in  1889. — Licenses 
shall  be  furnished  and  the  moneys  for  the  same 
collected  by  the  Sheriff,  who  shall  not  know- 
ingly permit  any  one  to  transact  any  business 
requiring  license  without  one.  (R.  S.,  1887, 
t^  1433.) 

No  one  shall  sell  spirituous,  malt  or  fermented 
liquors,  or  wines  in  less  quantities  than  five 
gallons  without  license,  upon  penalty  of  $150 
(half  to  the  informer).  All  persons  engaged  in 
selling  liquor  by  the  barrel,  case  or  original 
package,  and  selling  in  quantities  not  less  than 
five  gallons,  shall  pay  a  license  fee  of  $175. 
This  does  not  apply  to  the  manufacture  of  ale 
and  beer  or  to  the  sale  at  the  manufactory  in 
quantities  of  one  keg  or  upwards.  (Id.,  §  1442.) 
Such  license  shall  not  authorize  sales  in  more 
than  one  place,  except  upon  license  for  all  such 
places.     (Id.,  §  1443.) 

Whenever  any  person  with  a  retail  liquor 
license  permits  any  disorder,  drunkenness  or 
unlawful  games  or  violations  of  law  in  his 
place,  he  shall  forfeit  his  license,  which  cannot 
be  renevv^ed  for  three  months.     (Id.,  §  1444.) 

Retail  liquor  licenses  shall  pay,  at  or  within 
five  miles  of  any  railway  station,  or  town,  city, 
village  or  place  within  five  miles  of  a  rail- 
way,' $300;  in  other  places,  $100.    (Id.,  §  1453.) 

Any  person  selling  liquor  without  license 
shall  be  fined  not  exceeding  $1,000  or  imprisoned 
not  exceeding  six  months,  or  both.  (Id., 
§  1455.) 

Keeping  a  liquor  place  open  or  selling  liquor 
on  Sunday  or  election  day  shall  be  punished  by 
fine  of  $25  to  $100,  or  imprisonment  not  exceed- 
ing three  months,  or  both.  (Id.,  §  1034; 
amended  by  Laws  of  1888,  c.  86.) 

Liquors  shall  not  be  sold  in  any  jail,  or  con- 
veyed to  any  person  confined  therein,  or  fur- 
nished to  any  prisoner,  except  upon  prescrip- 
tion of  a  physician.     (R.  S.,  1887,  §  1373.) 

[The  law  above  summarized  was  the  Terri- 
torial law,  as  it  existed  at  the  time  [1890]  of  the 
admission  of  Wyoming  into  the  Union.] 

Wilbur  Aldrich. 


License. — License  always  implies  the 
legalization  of  a  portion  of  the  liquor 
traffic.^  It  aims  also  to  repress  a  i:)ortion 
of  that  traffic.  It  contains  thus  both  a 
sanction  and  a  condemnation  of  the 
saloon.  It  is  a  statutory  authorization  of 
a  part  of  the  traffic.  It  is  also  in  theory 
a  statutory  limitation  of  another  part  of 
the  traffic.  It  is  this  double  character  of 
license  which  causes,  even  among  intelli- 
gent voters,  so  much  confusion  of  thought 
concerning  it.  But  it  is  highly  import- 
ant to  emphasize  the  fact  that  license 
represses  one  portion  of  the  traffic  only 
at  the  expense  of  sanctioning  another 
portion  of  it. 

This  simple  analysis  of  the  definition 
of  license  answers  most  of  the  argu- 
ments in  defense  of  it.  The  question  is 
asked  whether  10  saloons  are  not  better 
than  15.  The  reply  is  that  they  are  not 
if  the  15  can  be  reduced  to  10  only  by  def- 
initely giving  the  sanction  of  Government 
to  the  10.  Are  not  10  murders  better 
than  20?  No,  if  the  20  can  be  re- 
duced to  10  only  by  a  statutory  au- 
thorization of  the  10.  Is  not  half  a 
loaf  better  than  no  bread  ?  No,  if  the 
half-loaf  can  be  had  only  on  condition 
that  it  be  first  saturated  with  poison, 
and  this  by  the  authority  of  the  whole 
community.  Did  not  Moses  license  polyg- 
amy and  so  attempt  to  limit  its  range  ? 
Yes,  but  not  at  the  expense  of  assuming 
that  the  divine  sanction  was  given  to 
polygamy  within  the  actual  range  to 
which  it  was  limited.  Of  two  evils  must 
we  not  choose  the  less  ?  No,  if  in  choos- 
ing the  less  we  are  required  to  do  evil 
ourselves.     Of  two  evils  choose  neither. 

License  makes  the  community  itself  a 
rumseller.  It  has  now  become  disrepu- 
table for  the  individual  to  be  a  rumseller. 
Comparatively  few  native  Americans  en- 
gage in  the  retail  liquor  traffic.  The 
foremost  Christian  denominations,  such 
as  the  Methodist  and  Presbyterian,  ex- 
clude liquor-sellers  from  church  mem- 
bership.      But    license,    high    or    low, 


>  Bouvier.  in  his  Law  Dictionary,  define?  license  as  "a 
right  given  by  some  competent  autlioritv  to  do  an  act  whidi 
without  such  authority  would  lie  illegal."  The  text  of 
the  document  giving  a  license  usually  reads  :  "License  is 

hereby  given  by  authority  of  tlie  city   of  to  A.   B. 

to  keep  a  saloon  and  to  sell."  etc.  All  this  shows  tliat 
license  means  legalization  of  a  portion  of  the  liquor  traitic. 
A  tax,  on  the  contrary,  confers  no  authority  on  him  who 
pays  it.  Bouvier  defines  a  tax  as  "a  contribution  im- 
posed by  Government  on  individuals  for  the  service  of  the 
State."  It  is  futile,  therefore,  to  contend  that  license  is 
simply  a  tax  upon  the  traffic  and  only  a  limitation  of  it 
and  not  an  authorization  of  a  portion  of  it. 


License.]                                               361  [License. 

makes  the  State  a  liquor-seller.    As  Hor-  ized  without  sin."     It  may  not  be  a  sin 

ace  Greeley  was  accustomed  to  say,  it  is  in  itself  to  light  a  match,  but  it  is  a  sin 

disreputable  enough  for  the  individual,  in  its  circumstances   to  liglit  a   match 

under  the  pressure  of  personal  wants,  to  carelessly  in  a  powder  magazine.     The 

become  a  liquor-seller;  but  for  the  whole  actual     saloon     manufactures    paupers, 

State  to  become  such  and  this  with  no  criminals,  widows,  orphans,  madmen  and 

necessity,  but  from  pure  greed  and  cow-  lost  souls,  and  license  of  the  actual  saloon 

ardice,  is  infamous.  makes  the  community   itself  a  partici- 

The  actual  saloon  of  our  day  is  noto-  pator  in  this  wickedness, 
riously  a  school  of  crime,  an  ally  of  anar-  License  proceeds  upon  self-contradict- 
chy,  a  fountain  of  social  misery,  a  source  ory  principles.  It  sanctions  the  traffic 
of  heavy  taxation,  a  cesspool  of  political  with  one  hand  and  condemns  it  with  the 
corruption.  License  makes  the  whole  other.  In  the  days  of  the  American  con- 
community  a  partner  in  the  business  of  flict  with  slavery.  Government  treated 
the  actual  saloon.    To  that  business,  with  slave-holding  as  a  crime  north  of  Mason 


& 


these  results,  license  gives  governmental  and  Dixon's  line.     All  the  power  of  the 

sanction,   and  so   a  legal  respectability.  Government  was  to  be  brought  to  bear 

But  the  actual  saloon  in  most  cases  has  against    it    there.      One    hair's-breadth 

infamous  allies.     The  gambling-hell  and  south    of    that    line,    however,   slavery 

the  brothel  and  the  gilded  High  License  changed  its  character  and  was  to  be  per- 

saloon    usually    go    together    in    great  mitted.     All  the  powers  of  the  Govern- 

cities.     As  Prof.    Herrick   Johnson   has  ment  were  to  be  exercised  to  defend  it 

said  in  an  epigram  not  soon  to  be  for-  there.     History  has  now  proved  that  a 

gotten :  "  Low  license  asks  for  your  son ;  policy  thus  divided  against  itself  could 

High  License  for  your  daughter  also."  not  prosper.    Under  a  license  system  Gov- 

High  License  tempts  the  saloon  to  make  ernment  treats   the   liquor  traffic   as  it 

alliance  with  the  gambling-hell  and  the  once   did   slavery.     The    license   fee   is 

brothel  so  as  to  raise  funds  to  pay  the  Mason  and  Dixon's  line.     On  one  side  of 

High  License  fees.     This  temptation  is  that   line    Government     condemns    the 

rarely  resisted.     License  of  the  saloon,  traffic.     A  hair's-breadth  across  the  line, 

therefore,  may  easily  amount  in  effect  to  on  the  other  side.  Government  defends  it. 

a  license  of  gambling  and  harlotry.     It  is  These  principles  are  self-contradictory, 

assumed  in  this  discussion  that  the  wick-  A   house   divided   against  itself  cannot 

edness  of  licensing  these   allies  of   the  stand. 

saloon  is  admitted.     But  the  community  License  forces  the  saloon  into  politics, 

that  fosters  the  liquor  traffic  by  giving  disciplines   the    enemy   and    so    is    the 

it  legalization  does  practically  make  it-  source   of   untold   political    corruption, 

self   largely   responsible   for   the    usual  The  licensed  liquor  traffic  corrupts  the 

allies  of  the  traffic.  police  force  and  the  lower  Courts  and  is 

Liquor-selling,  it  is  sometimes  said,  is  the  chief  source  of  municipal  misrule, 

not  a  sin  in  itself.    But  the  business  of  the  which  is  the  principal  peril  of  free  insti- 

actual  saloon  is  what  is  in  question.     We  tutions. 

think  that  this  is  a  sin  in  itself,  fully  License  apparently  brings  a  revenue 
Justifying  the  exclusion  of  the  liquor-  to  the  State  and  so  entrenches  tlie  traffic 
seller  from  church  membership,  as  it  now  behind  the  cupidity  of  short-sighted  tax- 
does  in  the  leading  evangelical  denomi-  payers.  It  is  true  that  it  robs  Peter  to 
nations.  But  certainly  the  business,  even  pay  Paul,  but  it  does  not  pay  Paul.  The 
if  it  were  not  a  sin  in  itself,  is  a  sin  in  expenses  which  the  traffic  brings  upon 
its  circumstances.  The  wickedness  of  all  the  community  greatly  exceed  any  profit 
forms  of  license  is  proved  by  the  wicked-  arising  from  license  fees.  But  this  fact 
ness  notoriously  resulting  from  the  busi-  is  overlooked  by  average  voters.  The 
ness  of  the  actual  saloon  of  our  day.  To  money  there  appears  to  be  in  license  is  , 
make  the  community  a  partner  in  that  a  temptation  to  the  State  and  a  chief 
business  and  its  results  by  license,  high  or  source  of  the  political  power  of  the 
low,  is  not  only  the  worst  social  economy  saloon. 

but  also  ethical  wickedness.     The  actual  License  does  not  for   any   length  of 

liquor  traffic,  as  the  Methodist  Church  time  diminish  the  amount  of  sales  of 

officially  declares.  "  can  never  be  legal-  liquor,  although  for  a  while  it  may  dim- 


License.]                                                 3G2  [Light  Liquors. 

inisli  the  number  of  places  in  which  of  practical  experience  for  hundreds  of 
liquor  is  sold.  But  the  large  establish-  years  and  found  wanting.  The  present 
ments  often  own  the  small  ones  and  foster  power  of  the  liquor  traffic  and  the  cur- 
the  illegal  trade  of  the  latter.  The  gilded  rent  intemperance  of  our  time  have 
saloons  want  the  low  dives  kept  open  to  grown  up  under  it.  Over  against  this 
,  receive  the  refuse  constituency  of  the  indisputable  fact  is  to  be  placed  the  fact 
'  former.  When  the  drunkard  becomes  a  which  is  equally  indisputable,  that  no- 
noisy  and  loathsome  sot  he  is  turned  license  and  Prohibition,  whenever  fairly 
out  of  this  up23er  into  the  lower  grade  of  weighed  in  the  balances,  have  been  most 
saloons.  significantly  approved  by  their  practical 

License  gives  the  traffic  legal,  indus-  results, 
trial,  political  and  social  respectability  License  is  condemned  as  wickedness 
and  so  increases  the  power  of  the  saloon  by  the  chief  Christian  denominations  of 
to  tempt  the  respectable  classes  and  low-  our  time.  The  celebrated  declaration  of 
ers  and  corruj^ts  the  temperance  senti-  the  Methodist  Church  in  its  General 
ment  of  the  community  at  large.  The  Conference  of  1888  may  now  fairly  be 
city  Government  of  Omaha,  under  High  said  to  represent  the  opinion  of  the 
License  of  the  saloons,  has  sunk  to  so  most  enlightened  and  religiously  earnest 
low  a  level  that  it  now  derives  a  large  portions  of  Christendom  at  large,  so  that 
revenue  from  arrangements  nearly  ap-  in  citing  it  here  we  summarize  scores  of 
preaching  the  licensing  of  houses  of  un-  equivalent  declarations  from  other  re- 
reportable  infamy.  ligious  bodies  :  "  The  liquor  traffic  can 
License  25i't)liibits  Prohibition,  for  it  never  be  legalized  without  sin.  License, 
always  provides  for  the  continuance  of  high  or  low,  is  vicious  in  principle  and 
the  traffic.  The  revenue  which  the  mis-  powerless  as  a  remedy."  It  is  gross  in- 
led  voter  suffers  the  State  to  obtain  from  consistency  for  church  members  to  vote 
High  License,  although  it  by  no  means  for  license  and  then  exclude  licensed 
covers  the  damages  inflicted  by  the  traffic  rumsellers  from  church  membership, 
and  is  collected  from  the  victims  of  the  Joseph  Cook. 

saloons  and  their  families,  operates  as  a  ,^       ,            .  .          ^       .        ,. 

^„i^T K^„   i  _,  u„^i,;k;^-;^„       rru„  i,-    i  FFor  tlie  provisions  oi  various  liceiise  acts, 

golden  bar  to  Prohibition.     The  higher  ^^,^  legislation.     For  comparative  results  un- 

the  license  fee  the  iiigher  and  stronger  der  licen.se  and  Proliibition,  see  High  License 

is  this  bar.  It  is  notorious  that  the  policy  and  Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 
of  license  is  favored  by  politicians  as  a 

means  of  defeating  Prohibition.  The  Light  Liquors. — A  term  applied,  in 
Chicago  T'ni^^j^  every  justly  says:  "High  general,  to  all  the  fermented  beverages, 
License,  reasonably  and  2)roperly  enforc-  and  particularly  to  the  weaker  ones, 
ed,  is  the  only  barrier  against  Prohibi-  Practically  all  the  ordinary  beers,  wines 
tion  in  tlie  present  temper  of  the  people  and  ciders  consumed  l)y  the  common  peo- 
in  almost  every  State  of  the  Union."  In  pie  in  the  United  States,  varying  in  al co- 
January,  1889,  the  Omaha  l^ee  said:  holic  strength  from  3  to  15  or  18  per 
"  The  only  effective  way  to  block  Prohib-  cent.,  are  regarded  as  "  light  liquors." 
ition  is  to  enforce  rigidly  High  License."  Since  the  use  of  distilled  spirits  be- 

License  is  generally  approved  by  the  came  widespread,  there  has  been  a  dis- 

liquor  traffic  itself.  position  among  many  persons   to  look 

License,  so  far  as  it  produces  appa-  upon  these  milder  beverages  as  relatively 
rently  good  results,  owes  its  seeming  less  harmful,  and  to  discriminate  in 
success  to  its  restrictive  features.  The  favor  of  them  and  even  encourage  their 
Brooks  law  in  Pennsylvania,  for  exam-  consumption  by  precept  and  legislation. 
})le,  transferred  the  power  to  grant  li-  In  the  American  colonial  period  the 
censes  in  Philadelphia  and  Allegheny  dangers  of  whiskey,  gin  and  rum  were 
from  corrupt  political  Boards  to  the  clearly  recognized,  and  numerous  stat- 
Judges  of  reputable  Courts.  The  Judges  utes  were  enacted  restricting  or  pro- 
granted  licenses  much  more  cautiously  hibiting  their  sale  to  Indians  and  others, 
than  the  politicians  had  done,  and  gave  Although  it  sometimes  happened  that 
full  force  to  the  prohibitive  elements  of  these  statutes  applied  nominally  or  in- 
the  law.  directly   to   beer   and    wine   also,    there 

License  has  been  weighed  in  the  scales  seems  to  have  been  little  perception  of 


Light  Liquors.] 


3G3 


[Light  Liquors. 


the  evils  of  tlie  lighter  drinks.  The  Pro- 
hibitory law  of  Oglethorpe  in  Georgia 
(1733-4"3)  was  directed  against  distilled 
liquors  entirely  ;  and  under  this  philan- 
thropic measure  the  beer  and  wine 
traffic  was  actually  favored.  At  the  out- 
set of  the  temperance  reform  there  were 
a  few  far-seeing  men  who  understood 
that  ultimately  no  exceptions  in  behalf 
of  particular  alcoholic  beverages  could 
be  made  consistently  ;  but  spirits  were 
first  attacked,  and  in  most  of  the  earliest 
temperance  societies  the  members  were 
under  no  obligation  to  abstain  from  beer 
and  wine.  The  history  of  the  move- 
ment in  the  British  Isles  shows  that  a 
similar  tendency  prevailed  there  ;  even 
the  expediency  and  value  of  Father 
Mathew's  total  abstinence  work  were 
questioned  by  many  who  had  been  en- 
gaged for  years  in  efforts  to  reclaim 
drunkards,  and  who  sincerely  believed 
that  indiscriminate  warfare  against  all 
kinds  of  liquors  would  be  injudicious  if 
not  illogical.  (See  Edgar,  Johx.)  In 
nearly  all  the  countries  of  Continental 
Europe,  where  the  temperance  agitation 
is  still  in  its  primitive  stages,  opposition 
to  malt  and  vinous  drinks  seems  not  to 
be  suggested  or  contemplated,  even  by 
the  men  specially  anxious  for  reform; 
although  where  Good  Templar  and 
other  radical  organizations  have  been  in- 
troduced (notably  in  the  Scandinavian 
nations)  there  is  a  growing  sentiment 
against  every  species  of  intoxicants. 

This  preference  for  beer  and  wine  is 
one  of  the  manifestations  of  the  "  mod- 
eration "  theory.  Conservative  persons 
hesitate  to  sweep  away  the  institutions 
and  customs  of  ages,  yet  perceiving  the 
necessity  of  improvement  seek  refuge 
in  alluring  compromises.  Their  general 
acceptance  of  the  "  light  liquors  "  argu- 
ment has  given  to  the  liquor  legislation 
of  the  19th  Century  one  of  its  most 
striking  features.  Discriminations  in 
favor  of  the  manufacturers  and  sellers 
of  beer,  wine  and  cider  have  been  pro- 
vided for  in  most  of  the  license  laws  of 
the  United  States,  and  have  been  in- 
serted in  a  number  of  Prohibitory 
statutes.  The  scope  and  effectiveness  of 
Prohibition  in  Michigan,  Iowa,  Massa- 
chusetts and  other  States  have  at  differ- 
ent times  been  modified  by  provisions 
for  licensing  those  persons  dealing  in 
malt  liquors,  or  malt  and  vinous  liquors, 


exclasively.  At  present  (1890)  none  of 
the  State  Proliibitory  laws  exempt  the 
common  retail  sale  of  any  of  the  light 
liquors  ;  but  the  New  Hampshire  law  is 
built  partly  upon  the  old  model,  since  it 
permits  the  manufacture.  In  some  of 
the  States  (especially  those  of  the  South) 
where  Local  Option  is  the  prevailing 
policy,  there  are  express  exceptions  of 
native  Avines.  An  enumeration  of  the 
license  acts  in  which  comparatively  easy 
terms  are  or  have  been  made  for  beer 
and  wine-sellers,  would  necessitate  cita- 
tions from  the  statutes  of  almost  every 
State  of  the  Union.  The  existing  law 
of  Massachusetts  fixes  a  license  rate  of 
only  1250  a  year  for  the  sale  of  "  malt 
liquors,  cider  and  light  wines  containing 
less  than  15  per  cent,  of  alcohol,  to  be 
drunk  on  the  premises,"  but  requires  the 
payment  of  11,000  a  year  by  those  who 
sell  "  liquors  of  any  kind,  to  be  drunk 
on  the  premises  ; "  the  Illinois  law, 
while  establishing  a  minimum  annual 
rate  of  1500  for  retailers  of  all  liquors, 
l^ermits  the  retailing  of  malt  liquors  for 
$150, — etc. 

But  the  tendency  of  recent  legislation 
has  been  steadily  toward  abandoning 
these  discriminations.  States  like  Michi- 
gan and  Ohio  have  abolished  the  special 
low  beer-license  rate.  In  most  of  the 
High  License  States — Minnesota,  Ne- 
braska, Pennsylvania,  Missouri  and 
others, — beer  and  wine  are  compelled 
to  stand  on  the  same  footing  with 
whiskey.  And  with  each  year  the 
advocacy  of  "light  liquors"  is  re- 
garded with  increasing  im]mtience  by 
the  temperance  people.  A  few  veteran 
conservatives,  whose  disinterestedness  is 
not  questioned  and  whose  sincerity  is 
respected,  still  adhere  to  the  old  opinions. 
But  it  is  well  understood  that  in  the 
organized  temperance  work  as  now  con- 
ducted there  is  no  toleration  for  the 
claims  made  by  the  champions  of  beer 
and  wine.  The  hostility  with  which  the 
recent  efforts  of  Miss  Kate  Field  to 
popularize  California  wines  have  been 
met,  is  evidence  of  the  strength  of  feel- 
ing; and  the  discovery  that  Miss  Field's 
labors  were  liberally  rewarded  by  the 
California  Viticultural  Commission  was 
not  reassuring.' 

The  refusal  to  except  beer  and  wine 

1  See  the  Voice  for  Dec.  6,  1888,  Jan.  3,  Jan.  24,  July  4, 
Aug.  1  and  Aug.  29,  1889. 


Light  Liquors.] 


364 


[Light  Liquors. 


from  the  general  condemnation  pro- 
nounced against  alcoholic  stimulants  is 
based  on  extended  and  varied  experience. 
A  study  of  history  does  not  encourage 
the  belief  that  intemperance  will  dis- 
appear or  play  no  important  part  where 
these  lighter  drinks  are  the  only  intoxi- 
cating beverages  available.  In  the  nations 
of  antiquity  (excepting,  probably,  China, 
and  possibly  one  or  two  other  remote 
Oriental  countries),  distillation  was  un- 
known ;  yet  drink  seduced  and  wrecked 
rulers  and  people  alike,  was  a  prominent 
subject  for  sages,  historians  and  poets 
(see  HisTOKicAL  and  Philosophical) 
and  was  a  chief  contributor  to  the  cor- 
ruption, decay  and  ruin  of  the  most 
glorious  and  admirable  types  of  civiliza- 
tion. Neither  were  distilled  liquors  in 
use  in  mediseval  times ;  but  the  accounts 
of  the  drunkenness  that  prevailed  in  those 
ages  are  abundant  and  appalling. 

It  is  claimed  by  the  persons  who  recom- 
mend light  liquors  that  in  the  great  wine 
and  beer-drinking  nations  of  the  present 
day  the  evils  of  intemperance  are  com- 
paratively slight.  The  grounds  for  this 
claim  are  not  stated  with  definiteness  ; 
and  those  who  seek  the  truth  will  dis- 
cover many  satisfactory  reasons  for  hold- 
ing the  contrary  view.  From  the  stand- 
point of  the  beer  and  wine  advocates,  the 
most  temperate  nations  are  those  in 
which  the  per  capita  consumption  of 
spirits  is  smallest.  Applying  this  test  to 
France,  the  principal  wine-producing 
country,  we  find  from  estimates  made  by 
the  Chief  of  the  United  States  Bureau  of 
Statistics  (based  on  original  official  data 
exclusively)  that  the  consumption  of 
spirits  per  capita  in  France  in  1885 
was  1.34  gallon,  while  in  the  United 
States  the  per  capita  consumption  of 
spirits  was  1.18  gallon  in  1887  (see  p. 
135)  ;  a  statistical  volume  issued  by 
the  French  Government,  ("Annuaire 
Statistique  de  la  France "  for  1888) 
shows  that  in  the  period  from  1850  to 
1885  the  annual  per  capita  consumjition 
of  spirits  in  France  increased  more  than 
200  per  cent.  (See  p.  184.)  Applying 
the  same  test  to  the  United  Kingdom  and 
Germany,  the  leading  beer  nations,  it  is 
seen  from  the  same  estimates  of  the 
Chief  of  our  Bureau  of  Statistics  that  the 
consumption  of  distilled  liquors  per 
ca})ita  is  not  very  much  less  in  these 
countries  than  in  the  United  States.     On 


the  other  hand  the  Dominion  of  Canada, 
which  consumes  less  beer  and  wine  than 
any  other  country  for  which  statistics  are 
given,  shows  a  smaller  per  capita  con- 
sumption of  sjiirits  than  France,  Eng- 
land or  Germany ;  ^  and  it  is  worthy  of 
remark  in  this  connection  that  Canada  is 
a  northern  country,  lying  in  latitudes 
where  spirits  are  supposed  to  be  in 
greatest  request. 

There  is  much  direct  evidence  of  the 
great  and  growing  popularity  of  sj^irits 
in  all  the  countries  where  malt  and  vinous 
liquors  are  plentiful  and  cheap.  The  fre- 
quent discussions  of  this  subject  by  med- 
ical and  other  Avriters  seem  to  leave  no 
ground  for  controversy.  The  attention 
given  to  it  at  the  recent  "  International 
Conferences  Against  the  Abuse  of  Alco- 
holic Liquors,"  held  in  various  Conti- 
nental cities,  also  shows  the  magnitude  of 
the  evil.  The  development  of  the  spirit 
traffic  goes  on  steadily  in  every  nation  of 
beer  and  wine-drinkers.  This  fact  cer- 
tainly discourages  belief  in  the  practica- 
bility of  efforts  to  popularize  the  lighter 
liquors. 

But  the  question  whether  a  national 
taste  for  beer  and  wine  tends  to  hold  the 
appetite  for  spirits  in  check  is  not  the 
essential  one.  Where  the  mild  drinks 
are  distinctly  preferred  by  the  people,  is 
drunkenness  a  comparatively  rare  vice, 
and  are  the  evils  springing  from  the  use 
of  alcoholic  beverages  comparatively  in- 
significant ?  The  dogmatic  affirmative 
answers  given  by  some  American  platform 
speakers  are  not  justified  by  the  delib- 
erate testimony  presented  by  competent 
observers  in  beer  nations  like  England, 
Germany  and  Austria,  and  wine  countries 
like  France,  Italy  and  Spain.  Undoubt- 
edly there  is  a  large  element  of  the  pop- 
ulation in  each  of  these  countries,  no- 


>  The  official  figures  are  as  follows: 

For  the  Year  1887. 
Per  Capita  Consumption. 

Wine, 
Gallons. 

Beer. 
Gallo/ib. 

Spirits, 
Gallons. 

France       

26.74  > 

.38 
(«) 
.10 

(a) 
32.88 
24.99 

3.50 

1.242 

.98 

1.09 

.84 

United  Kingdom 

Canada - 

1  For  1886.      =  For  1885.    (a)  No  data. 

These  tiirure.'!  are  from  the  quarterly  report  of  the 
United  States  Bureau  of  Statistics  for  the  three  months 
ending  March  31,  1889. 


liight  Liquors.] 


365 


[Light  Liquors. 


tably  among  the  peasantry,  that  cannot 
be  charged  with  gross  intemperance ;  but 
a  broad  view  is  not  cheering.     Since  the 
dawn  of  her  history,  beer  has  been  the 
favorite  drink  of  England;  yet  the  fear- 
ful prevalence  and  results  of  intemper- 
ance there  have  been  described  in  the 
strongest  language  by  the  most  eminent 
Englishmen  of  all  periods.     More  than 
two   centuries   ago  Sir   Matthew   Hale, 
Lord  Chief -Justice  of  England,  declared 
that  from  his  careful  observations  as  a 
Judge,  extending  over  20  years,  he  had 
come  to  the  conclusion  that  four-fifths 
of  all  the  cases  of  offenses  against  the 
law  were  "the  issues   and  products  of 
excessive   drinking."     This  was   before 
the  traffic  in  distilled  spirits  had  reached 
alarming  proportions.     And  Lord  Chief- 
Justice  Coleridge,  speaking  in  our  own 
day,  when  beer  is  still  so  esteemed  by  the 
English  that  the  annual  per  capita  con- 
sumption of  this  beverage  is  one-third 
greater  in  the  United  Kingdom  than  in 
Germany,  said,  in  1881,  from  the  bench 
of   the   Supreme   Court,   that   "Judges 
were   weary   with   calling  attention    to 
drink  as  the  principal  cause  of  crime, 
but   lie  could  not  refrain  from   saying 
that  if  they  could  make  England  sober 
they  would  shut  up  nine-tenths  of  the 
prisons."     (For  a  valuable  summary  of 
notable  facts  and  utterances  concerning 
intemperance  in  England,  see  the  "  Foun- 
dation of  Death,"  pp.  2-2G-75.)     In  the 
other  European  countries  to  which  we 
have  particularly  alluded,  the  reputation 
of  the  masses  for  sobriety  and  for  free- 
dom from  the  various  ills  with  which 
intemperance  is  always  associated  is  not 
of  a  high  order.     In  the  cities  of  the 
United    States    Americans    have    con- 
stantly before  their  eyes  the  suggestive 
fact  that  the  freest  drinkers  as  well  as 
the   most   wretched   sufferers   from   in- 
temperance, and  the  most  frequent  of- 
fenders against  law  and  order,  are  ]ier- 
sons  of  foreign  birth ;  and  that  a  very 
considerable  number  of  these  persons  are 
immigrants  from  the  leading  wine  and 
beer  nations. 

In  1887  Mr.  Albert  Griffin  made  an 
exhaustive  analysis  of  arrests  for  six 
years  in  New  York  (Jity  for  49  different 
offenses.  He  divided  these  offenses  into 
two  classes  :  (1)  Those  due  to  sudden 
passion,  mere  impulse,  etc.,  not  attribu- 
table specially  to  deliberation  ;  (2)  Those 


due  to  deliberation  more  than  to  sudden 
passion  or  mere  impulse.  He  then 
selected  and  tabulated,  under  these 
heads,  all  the  offenses  committed  by 
(1)  persons  of  Irish  birth,  and  (2)  per- 
sons of  German  birth.  The  results 
derived  were  thus  stated:' 


Irish. 

Germans. 

Population  in  1880 

198.595 
91,548 

1  to  13 
87,390 

1  to  13.6 
4,158 

1  to  286 

163,48-2 
26,349 

1  to  37 
20,407 

1  to  48 
5.492 

1  to  165 

Total  offenses  from  1881  to  1886 

Average  yearly  offenses,  ratio 

to  population 

Tota  unpremeditated  offenses . 

Average  yearly  unpremeditated 
offenses,  ratio  to  population. 

Total  deliberate  offenses 

Average  yearly  deliberate  of- 
fenses, ratioto  population  .. 

Mr.  Griffin  also  found  that  during 
these  six  years  there  were  16  attempts  at 
suicide  among  the  Irish  and  31  among 
the  Germans. 

The  interest  of  this  analysis  is  en- 
hanced when  it  is  remembered  that  of 
all  the  citizens  of  the  United  States  the 
Irish-born,  as  a  class,  are  the  freest 
whiskey-drinkers,  and  the  German-born 
are  the  greatest  beer-drinkers.  While 
the  whiskey-drinkers  are  shown  to  have 
committed  more  unpremeditated  offenses, 
proportionately,  than  the  beer-drinkers, 
the  latter  were  responsible  for  a  larger 
proportion  of  the  deliberate  crimes. 
The  following  comment  was  made  by 
Mr.  Griffin  : 

"The  Irish  have  never  been  considered  an 
especially  law-abiding  people,  but  the  Germans 
have.  The  former  have  much  to  depress  them, 
and  are  proverbially  reckless  and  improvident ; 
while  the  latter  ai-e  equally  noted  for  general 
Intelligence,  prudence  and  thrift.  Under  these 
circum.stances  the  Germans  ought  to  be  especi- 
ally strong.  ...  I  do  not  believe  that  the 
Germans,  as  a  race,  are  naturally  more  crimin- 
ally disposed  and  law-defying  than  others,  and 
I  am  strongly  of  the  opinion  that  at  least  a  part 
of  the  reason  for  the  facts  cited  is  to  be  found 
in  the  beverage  they  consume  so  much  of.  .  .  . 
Carefid  observers  assert  that  it  is  more  brutal- 
izing in  its  effects  than  either  spirituous  or 
vinous  liquors,  in  partial  proof  of  which  they 
point  to  the  disproportionately  large  number  of 
German  names  among  the  perpetrators  of  espec- 
ially atrocious  crimes  published  in  the  daily 
papers.  .  .  .  This  idea  is  still  further  sup- 
ported by  the  undeniable  fact  that  Anarchism 
in  this  country  is  a  German  fungus,  born  and 
nurtured  in  beer-saloons  and  nowhere  else. " 

The   results    of    legislative  discrimi- 


1  For  the  figures  in  detail,  8ee  ' 
tionist  for  1888,"  pp.  80-1. 


The  Political  Proliibi- 


Light  Liquors.] 


366 


[Light  Liquors. 


nations  in  favor  of  the  light  liquors 
have  uniformly  been  unsatisfactory.  A 
memorable  experiment  was  instituted 
in  England  in  1830,  when  the  so-called 
Beer  act  went  into  effect.  This  measure 
permitted  the  sale  of  beer  without  li- 
cense and  without  restrictions,  provided 
stronger  liquors  were  not  vended  in 
connection  with  beer  :  the  retail  trade 
in  beer  was  made  practically  free.  The 
consequences  of  this  discrimination  have 
been  thus  related  : 

"'The  idea  entertained  at  that  time,'  says 
the  liondon  Times,  '  was  that  free  trade  in  beier 
would  gradually  wean  men  from  the  tempta- 
tions of  the  reiiular  tavern,  would  promote  the 
consumption  of  a  wholesome  national  beverage 
in  place  of  ardent  spirits,  would  break  down 
the  monopoly  of  the  old  license-houses,  and  im- 
part, in  short,  a  better  character  to  the  whole 
trade  ....  Tlie  results  of  this  experiment  did 
not  confirm  the  expectations  of  its  promoters. 
The  sale  of  beer  was  increased;  but  the  sale 
of  spirituous  liquors  was  not  diminished.' 

"  It  had  been  in  operation  but  a  few  weeks 
when  Sidney  Smith  wrote  :  '  The  new  Beer  bill 
has  begun  its  operations.  Everybody  is  drunk. 
Those  who  are  not  singing  are  sprawling.  The 
sovereign  people  are  in  a  beastly  state.' 

"  In  one  year  the  number  of  beer-shops  in- 
creased 30,000,  without  any  diminution  of  the 
spirit-stores.  In  a  short  time  the  quantity  of 
distilled  liquors  consumed  was  much  larger 
than  the  gain  in  the  consumption  of  beer.  The 
oiticial  reports  to  Parliament  show  that 

"  '  During  the  10  years  preceding  the  passage 
of  the  Beer-house  act,  the  quantity  of  malt  used 
for  brewing  was  268,139,889  bushels;  during 
the  10  years  immediately  succeeding,  the  quan- 
tity was  344,143,550  bushels,  showing  an  in- 
crease of  28  per  cent.  During  the  lO  years 
1821-30,  the  quantity  of  British  spirits  con- 
sumed was  57,970,963  gallons,  and  during  the 
next  10  years  it  rose  to  76,797,365  gallons — an 
iflcrease  of  32  per  cent. 

"'The  licenses  for  the  sale  of  spirits — of 
which,  in  1830,  48,904  were  granted — numbered 
in  1833,  50,828,  being  an  "increase  of  1,924. 
In  Sheffield  300  beer-shops  were  added  to  the 
old  complement  of  public  houses;  and  it  is  a 
striking  fact  that  before  the  second  year  had 
transjiired  not  less  than  110  of  the  keepers  of 
these  houses  had  applied  for  spirit  licenses,  to 
satisfy  the  desire  for  ardent  s]-)irits.' 

"There  could  be  no  more  startling  demonstra- 
tion of  the  folly  on  which  the  Beer  act  was 
based, — the  expectation  that  'free  beer' would 
diminish  the  demand  for  ardent  spirits.  Con- 
cerning these  beer-houses  Lord  Brougham  said 
in  1839,  in  the  House  of  Lords: 

"  'To  what  good  was  it  that  the  Legislature 
should  pass  laws  to  punish  crime,  or  that  their 
Lordships  should  occupy  themselves  in  finding 
out  modes  of  improving  the  morals  of  the  pe(> 
pie  by  giving  them  education  ?  What  could  be 
the  use  of  sowing  a  little  seed  here  and  plucking 
up  a  weed  there,  if  these  beer-shops  were  to  be 
continued  that  they  might  go  on  to  sow  the 


seeds  of  immorality  broadcast  over  the  land, 
gei-minating  the  most  frightful  produce  that 
ever  had  been  allowed  to  grow  up  in  a  civilized 
country,  and,  he  was  ashamed  to  add,  under 
the  fostering  care  of  Parliament,  and  throwing 
its  baleful  influences  over  the  whole  com- 
munity?'"' 

All  the  American  attempts  to  reduce 
drunkenness  by  encouraging  the  exclus- 
ive sale  of  malt  and  vinous  liquors  have 
been  signal  failures.  By  nearly  all  per- 
sons except  a  few  theorists  it  is  recog- 
nized that  there  is  no  possibility  of 
separating  the  beer  and  wine  traffic  from 
the  spirit  traffic,  or  giving  the  former  an 
appearance  of  superior  respectability  and 
decency.  The  vast  majority  of  persons 
who  frequent  the  saloons  are  not  abstain- 
ers from  distilled  spirits;  and  as  a  rule 
the  saloon-keeper  who  has  no  whiskey 
for  sale  must  be  content  with  bttt  a  small 
patronage.  Even  under  the  discriminat- 
ing law  of  Massachusetts,  which  ^lermits 
the  retail  sale  of  beer  and  wine  for  $250 
per  year  but  charges  11,000  per  year  for 
the  privilege  of  retailing  whiskey,  the 
large  indttcement  held  out  to  beer  and 
wine-sellers  is  not  taken  advantage  of  to 
any  important  extent.  The  beer-brewers 
and  not  the  whiskey-traders  are  respon- 
sible for  the  systematic  planting  of 
saloons  in  the  great  cities,  and  thus  for 
stimulating  the  whole  retail  business  in 
the  most  artful,  painstaking  and  demoral- 
izing way.  (See  Liquor  Traffic.)  The 
shops  which  are  essentially  retail  agencies 
for  the  brewery  are,  with  few  exeeqitions, 
the  foulest  and  most  dangerous  dens 
existing ;  and  they  are  the  favorite  places 
of  rendezvous  for  harlots,  blackguards, 
gamblers  and  criminals.  The  wiiie  inter- 
est in  America,  wherever  it  is  powerful 
enough  to  dominate  the  retail  liquor 
trade,  shows  itself  to  be  wholly  offensive. 
The  advocates  of  "  liglit  wines "  favor 
High  License,  rigid  restrictions,  discrimi- 
nation against  spirits  and  an  elegant 
respectability;  but  in  California,  where 
the  wine  men  have  full  control,  one  of 
the  lowest  license  rates  prevailing  any- 
where exists,  the  restrictions  are  feeble 
(even  sales  on  Sunday  being  permitted 
by  law — a  permission  conceded  by  only 
one  other  important  State),  no  attempt  is 
made  to  limit  the  traffic  in  whiskey  and 
the  wine-shops  are  Avithout  redeeming 
features. 


1  AU'oliol  in  IlistoryCNew  York,  1887),  by  Richard  Eddy, 
D.D.,  pp.  358-9. 


Light  Liquors.] 


36': 


[Lincoln,  Abraham. 


If  a  chief  object  of  the  present  reform 
moveaient  is  to  diminish  temjjtations  it 
seems  needless  to  discuss  seriously  the 
<2;eneral  proposition  that  wine  and  beer 
are  in  themselves  less  harmful  than 
spirits.  The  merits  of  this  proposition 
depend  upon  the  part  practically  played 
l)y  wine  and  ))eer  in  the  alcoholic  scheme. 
It  is  undoubted  that  these  beverages,  and 
not  spirits,  are  the  great  tempters  of  the 
young,  the  innocent  and  the  ignorant. 
The  records  of  prisons,  infirmaries  and 
other  institutions  show  that  the  vast 
majority  of  the  inmates  began  their 
careers  of  intemperance  as  beer  or  wine 
drinkers. 

But  from  a  strictly  scientific  point  of 
view  there  is  ample  authority  for  ranking 
beer  and  wine  with  the  worst  intoxicants. 
The  Scientific  American,  April  19,  1879, 
printed  an  article  credited  to  the  Quar- 
terly Journal  of  Inebriety,  as  follows: ' 

"For  some  years  past  a  decided  inclination 
has  been  apparent  all  over  the  country  to  give 
up  the  use  of  whiskey  and  other  strong  alcohols, 
using  as  a  subtitute  beer  and  other  compounds. 
This  is  evidentlj^  founded  on  the  idea  that  beer 
is  not  harmful  and  contains  a  large  amount  of 
nutriment;  also  that  bitters  may  have  some  med- 
ical quality  which  will  neutralize  the  alcohol  it 
conceals,  etc. 

' '  Tliese  theories  are  witliout  confirmation  in  the 
observations  of  physicians  and  chemists.  The  u.se 
of  beer  is  found  to  produce  a  species  of  degene- 
ration of  all  tlie  organism,  profound  and  decep- 
tive. Fatty  deposits,  diminished  circulation, 
conditions  of  congestion,  perversion  of  func- 
tional activities,  local  inflammations  of  both  the 
liver  and  the  kidneys  are  constantly  present. 
Intellectually  a  stupor  amounting  almo.st  to 
])aralysis,  arrests  the  reason,  changing  all  the 
higher  faculties  into  mere  animalism,  sensual, 
selfish,  sluggish,  varied  only  witli  paroxysms  of 
anger  that  are  senseless  and  brutal.  In  appear- 
ance the  beer-drinker  may  be  the  picture  of 
health,  but  in  reality  he  is  most  incapable  of 
resisting  disease.  A  slight  injury,  a  severe  cold, 
or  shock  to  the  body  or  mind,  will  commonly 
jirovoke  acute  disease,  ending  fatally.  Com- 
pared with  inebriates  who  use  different  kinds  of 
alcohol  he  is  more  incurable,  more  generally 
diseased.  Tlie  constant  use  of  beer  every 
day  gives  the  system  no  recuperation  but 
steadily  lowers  the  vital  forces.  It  is  our  obser- 
vation that  beer-drinking  in  this  country  pro- 
duces the  very  lowest  form  of  inebriety,  closely 
allied  to  criminal  insanity.  The  most  danger- 
ous class  of  ruttians  in  our  large  cities  are  beer- 
drinkers.  It  is  asserted  by  competent  au- 
thority that  the  evils  of  lieredity  are  more  posi- 
tive in  this  class  than  from  other  alcoholics. 

•  This  article  has  been  widely  copied,  and  in  some 
books  on  the  drink  question  (notably  the  "  Foundation  of 
Death,"  p.  140)_,  the  Scienlific  American  is  named  as  the 
journal  in  which  it  was  bria;inally  published.  This  is 
erroDeous,  as  indicated  above. 


Recourse  to  beer  as  a  substitute  for  other  forms 
of  alcohol  merely  increases  the  danger  and 
fatality.  Public  sentiment  and  legislation 
should  comprehend  tliat  all  forms  of  alcohol 
are  dangerous  when  used." 

And  Dr.  Norman  Kerr  says  in  his 
"  Inebriety  "  (pp.  G(J-7)  : 

"  Beer-drinkers  are  specially  liable  to  struct- 
ural alteration  and  enlargement  of  the  liver, 
often  complicated  with  dropsy,  and  to  rheuma- 
tism, gout  and  rheumatic  gout.  Disordered 
digestion  and  sluggisli  circulation  are  also  fre- 
quently present.  So  far  from  being  innocent 
and  healthful  articles  of  diet,  beer,  stout  et  lioc 
genus  omne,  are  noxious  and  unwholesome  lux- 
iiries,  with  no  practical  food  value,  and  by 
their  vitiation  of  the  blood  a  fertile  cause  of  de- 
generation, disease  and  death.  Among  the 
sequelae  of  beer-drinking  are  an  impeded  and 
loaded  circulation,  embarrassed  respiration, 
functional  perversions,  hepatic  and  renal  con- 
gestions, with  a  stupor  tending  toward  paraly- 
sis and  a  diminished  as  well  as  weighted  vital- 
ity which  invites  disease  and  easily  succumbs 
to  its  ravages.  Manv  beer  inebriates  are  sub- 
jects of  this  form  of  inebriety,  though  they 
rarely  if  ever  die  boisterous  in  their  cups. 
They  lead  what  may  be  called  an  '  intemperate ' 
life — drinkers  to  excess,  al])eit  not  what  arc 
commonly  called  "(h-unkards. '  They  are  beer- 
soakers,  human  sponges  with  an  enormous  ca- 
pacity for  the  al)sorption  of  malt  liquor.  Of 
the  cases  which  have  been  under  my  own  ob- 
servation, while  one  gallon  a  day  has  been  a 
moderate  allowance,  I  have  known  eight  gal- 
lons consumed  in  one  period  of  24  hours.  The 
general  average  per  day  has  been  one-lialf  gal- 
lon. I  have,  however,  seen  intractable  disease 
and  premature  death  result  from  less  than  a 
quarter  of  this  quantity  drunk  daily  over  a  term 
of  years.  Psychologically,  the  beer  habit  has 
in  the  long  i"un  a  depressing  effect,  even  when 
taken  in  fairly  '  moderate'  quantities.  Lager  beer, 
which  by  many  is  declared  to  be  a  temperate, 
safe  and  wholesome  drink,  is  by  no  means  so. 
Its  daily  imbibition,  long-continued,  tends  to 
melancholy,  ending  occasionally  in  self-desti^uc- 
tion.  There  is  also  no  small  proportion  of  th^ 
cases  of  the  general  paralysis  of  inebriety  aris- 
ing from  beer.  Such  wines  as  port  and  sherry 
are  so  fortified  that  they  might  fairly  be  classed 
as  spirits.  Gout  and  dyspepsia  are  their  respec- 
tive concomitants.  Champagnes  are  most  tiiily 
painful  in  the  process  of  '  tapering  off.'  I  know 
of  no  distress  and  discomfort  from  any  kind  of 
drink  at  all  approaching  the  miseries  of  the  day 
after  a  debauch  on  champagne." 

[See  also  Longevity.] 

Lincoln,  Abraham,  sixteenth  Pres- 
ident of  the  United  States  ;  born  on  a 
farm  near  Hodgensville  in  La  Eue  (at 
that  time  Hardin)  County,  Ky.,  Feb,  12, 
1809:  shot  bv  an  assassin  in  Ford's 
Theatre  at  Washington,  D.  C,  April  14, 
18G5,  and  died  the  next  day. 

Throughout  his  career  Lincoln  was  a 


Ijiucoln,  Abraham.] 


368 


[Lincoln,  Abraham. 


total  abstainer  ;  and  his  sympathy  with 
the  most  radical  temperance  ideas  and 
the  demand  for  the  severest  legislation 
was  strong  and  apparently  underwent  no 
change.  This  can  be  demonstrated  as 
satisfactorily  as  any  other  claim  respect- 
ing the  tendency  of  his  less  conspicuoiTS 
non-otficial  utterances  and  actions.  But 
since  his  total  abstinence  and  Prohibi- 
tion sentiments  were  delivered  in  local 
and  uninfluential  meetings,  in  the  ob- 
scurity of  the  West,  during  a  period  of 
his  life  when  no  special  significance  at- 
tached to  his  views;  since  the  anti-liquor 
work  in  which  he  took  part  was  wholly 
educative  and  had  no  political  develop- 
ments, and  since  the  temperance  cause 
suffered  almost  complete  eclipse  in  the 
years  of  his  national  prominence,  most 
of  his  biographers  have  failed  to  give 
special  attention  to  this  feature  of  his 
record.  It  has  always  been  known  to 
those  particularly  interested  in  total  ab- 
stinence that  Lincoln  was  a  supporter  of 
their  principles ;  but  no  effort  was  made 
to  ascertain  the  strength  and  extent  of 
his  sympathy  until  recent  bold  forgeries 
by  the  unscrupulous  defenders  of  the 
drink  traffic  led  to  investigation. 

In  the  very  exciting  Local  Option 
contest  in  Atlanta,  Ga.,  in  1887,  the  anti- 
Prohibitionists,  as  a  means  of  influenc- 
ing the  large  negro  vote,  issued  a  flaming 
circular  picturing  Lincoln  in  the  act  of 
striking  the  chains  from  a  slave,  while 
underneath  were  printed  these  words: 
"  Prohibition  will  work  great  injury  to 
the  cause  of  temperance.  ...  A  Pro- 
hibitory law  strikes  a  blow  at  the 
very  principles  on  which  our  Gov- 
ernment was  founded." '  Similar  ut- 
terances were  attributed  to  him  in 
various  newspapers  (notably  the  Sioux 
Falls  Leader)  in  the  North  and  South 
Dakota  Amendment  campaigns  of  1889,^ 
and  in  a  pamphlet  entitled  "  Prosperity, 
and  How  to  Obtain  It,"  which  was  cir- 
culated by  the  so-called  "  State  Business 
Men's  and  Bankers'  Association  "  in  Ne- 
braska in  1890.^  These  were  submitted 
/  by  the  Voice  to  Mr.  John  G.  Nicolay, 
Lincoln's  private  secretary  and  biograph- 
er, and  he  pronounced  them  spurious.'' 
The  following  facts  and  quotations 
have  been  gathered  from  various  sources, 
and  leave  no  room  for  doubt: 


1  See    the  Voice,  Jan.  19,  1888.    "  Ibid,  Aug.  15,  1889. 
3  Ibid,  Sept.  4, 1890.  "  Ibid,  Aug.  15,  1889,  and  Sept.  4,  1890. 


In  his  youth,  when  about  17  years  old, 
Lincoln  prepared  an  article  on  "  Tem- 
perance," which  was  shown  to  Rev.  Aaron 
Farmer,  a  Baptist  preacher,  and  by  him 
furnished  to  an  Ohio  newspaper  for  pub- 
lication.' On  Feb.  22,  1842,  he  deliver- 
ed an  address  before  the  Washingtonian 
Temperance  Society  of  Sj)ringfield,  111.,' 
in  which  he  said : 

"  Whether  or  not  the  workl  would  be  vastly 
benefited  by  a  total  and  final  banishment  from 
it  of  all  intoxicating  drinks,  seems  to  me  not 
now  an  open  question.  Three-fourths  of  man- 
kind confess  the  afl[irmative  with  their  tongues  ; 
and,  I  believe,  all  the  rest  acknowledge  it  in 
their  hearts.  Ought  any,  then,  to  refuse  their 
aid  in  doing  what  the  good  of  the  whole  de- 
mands ?  .  .  .  There  seems  ever  to  have  been 
a  proneness  in  the  brilliant  and  warm-blooded 
to  fall  into  this  vice — the  demon  of  intemper- 
ance ever  seems  to  have  delighted  in  sucking 
the  blood  of  genius  and  generosity.  What  one 
of  us  but  can  call  to  mind  some  relative,  more 
promising  in  youth  than  all  his  fellows,  who 
has  fallen  a  victim  to  his  rapacity  '?  He  ever 
seems  to  have  gone  forth  like  the  Egyptian 
angel  of  death,  commissioned  to  slay,  if  not  the 
first,  the  fairest  born  of  every  family.  Shall  he 
now  be  arrested  in  liis  desolating  career  ?  .  .  . 
If  the  relative  grandeur  of  revolutions  shall 
be  estimated  by  the  great  amount  of  human 
misery  they  alleviate  and  the  small  amount  they 
inflict,  then,  indeed,  will  this  be  the  grandest 
the  world  shall  ever  have  seen.  Of  our  po- 
litical revolution  of  '76  we  are  all  justly  proud. 
-  .  .  But  ...  it  .  .  .  had  its  evils  too.  .  .  . 
Turn  now  to  the  temperance  revolution.  In  it 
we  shall  find  a  stronger  bondage  broken,  a  viler 
slavery  manumitted,  a  greater  tyrant  deposed — 
in  it  more  of  want  supplied,  more  disease 
healed,  more  sorrow  assuaged  ;  by  it  no  or- 
phan's starving,  no  widow's  weeping.  .  .  . 
And  what  a  natural  ally  this  to  the  cause  of 
political  freedom  ;  with  such  an  aid  its  march 
cannot  fail  to  be  on  and  on,  till  every  son  of 
earth  shall  drink  in  rich  fruition  the  sorrow- 
quenching  draughts  of  perfect  liberty.  .  .  . 
And  when  the  victory  shall  be  complete,  when 
there  shall  be  neither  a  slave  nor  a  drunkard  on 
the  earth,  how  proud  the  title  of  that  land 
which  may  truly  claim  to  be  the  birth-place  and 
the  cradle  of  both  those  revolutions  that  shall 
have  ended  in  that  victory  !  How  nobly  dis- 
tinguished that  people  who  shall  have  planted 
and  nurtured  to  matiu-ity  both  the  political  and 
moral  freedom  of  their  species  ! " 

W.  H.  Herndon,  for  many  years  Lin- 
coln's law  partner,  writes  of  the  circitm- 
stances  attending  the  delivery  of  this 
address : 

"Early  in  1842  he  entered  into  the  Washing- 

>  Life  of  Lincoln,  by  William  H.  Herndon  and  Jesse 
W.  Weik  (Chicat;o,  1889),  vol.  1,  p.  01.  Also  Ward  II. 
Lamon's  "  Life  of  Lincoln  "  ^Boston,  1872),  pp.  68-9. 

2  It  was  oricinally  printed  in  the  Springfield  Jovrnal, 
and  is  reprinted  in  the  "  Lincoln  Memorial  Volume"  (pp. 
84-97),  edited  by  O.  H.  Oldroyd  (New  York,  1882). 


Lincoln,  Abraham.] 


369 


[Ijincoln,  Abraham. 


tonian  movement  organized  to  suppress  the  evils 
of  intemperance.  At  the  request  of  the  Society 
he  delivered  an  admirable  address,  on  Washing- 
ton's Birthday,  in  the  Presbyterian  Church.  .  .  . 
I  .  .  .  remember  well  how  one  paragraph 
of  Lincoln's  speech  offended  the  church  mem- 
bers who  were  present.  Speaking  of  certain 
Christians  who  objected  to  the  association  of 
drunkards,  even  with  the  chance  of  reforming 
them,  he  said:  'If  they  [the  Christians]  believe 
as  they  profess,  tliat  Omnipotence  condescended 
to  take  on  himself  the  form  of  sinful  man,  and 
as  such  to  die  an  ignominious  death  for  their 
sakes,  surely  they  wall  not  refuse  submission  to 
the  infinitely  lesser  condescension,  for  the  tem- 
poral and  perhaps  eternal  salvation  of  a  large, 
erring  and  unfortunate  class  of  their  fellow- 
creatures.  Nor  is  the  condescension  very  great. 
In  my  judgment  such  of  us  as  have  never  fallen 
victiius  have  been  spared  more  from  the  absence 
of  appetite  than  from  any  mental  or  moral 
superiority  over  tlioxe  who  have.  Indeed,  I  be- 
lieve if  we  take  habitual  drunkards  as  a  class 
their  heads  and  their  hearts  will  bear  an  advan- 
tageous comparison  with  those  of  any  other 
class.'  The  avowal  of  these  sentiments  proved 
to  be  an  unfortunate  thing  for  Lincoln.  The 
professing  Christians  regarded  the  suspicion 
suggested  in  the  first  sentence  as  a  reflection  on 
the  sincerity  of  their  belief,  and  the  last  one  had 
no  better  effect  in  reconciling  them  to  his  views. 
I  was  at  the  door  of  the  church  as  the  people 
passed  out,  and  heard  them  di.scussing  the 
speech.  Many  of  them  were  open  in  the  ex- 
pression of  their  displeasure.  '  It's  a  shame,'  I 
heard  one  man  say,  '  that  he  should  be  permitted 
to  abuse  us  so  in  the  house  of  the  Lord.'  The 
truth  was,  the  Society  was  composed  mainly  of 
the  roughs  and  drunkards  of  the  town,  who  had 
evinced  a  desire  to  reform.  Many  of  them  were 
too  fresh  from  the  gutter  to  be  taken  at  once 
into  the  society  of  such  people  as  worshipped  at 
the  church  where  the  speech  was  delivered. 
Neither  was  there  that  concert  of  effort  so  uni- 
versal to-day  between  the  churches  and  temper- 
ance societies  to  rescue  the  fallen.  The  whole 
thing,  I  repeat,  was  damaging  to  Lincoln,  and 
gave  rise  to  the  opposition  on  the  part  of  the 
churches  which  confronted  him  several  years 
afterward  when  he  became  a  candidate  against 
the  noted  Peter  Cartwright  for  Congress.  The 
charge  these  bore,  that  in  matters  of  religion  he 
was  a  skeptic,  was  not  without  its  supporters, 
especially  when  his  opponent  Avas  himself  a 
preacher.  But  nothing  daunted,  Lincoln  kept 
on  and  labored  zealously  in  the  interests  of  the 
temperance  movement." ' 

It  is  to  this  period  in  Lincoln's  career 
that  Mr.  Lamon  refers  in  his  "  Life  of 
Lincohi "  when  he  says  (p.  480)  that 
"for  many  years  he  [Lincoln]  was  an 
ardent  agitator  against  the  nse  of  intoxi- 
cating beverages,  and  made  speeches  far 
and  near  in  favor  of  total  abstinence. 
Some  of  them  were  printed,  and  of  one 
he  was  not  a  little  proud." 

In  1852  Lincoln  joined  an  organization 

J  Hemdon'8  "Life  of  Lincoln,"  vol.  2,  pp.  260-3. 


of  the  Sons  of  Temperance,  in  Spring- 
field, 111.  In  1853  a  lectttre  entitled  "  A 
Discourse  on  the  Bottle — Its  Evils  and 
the  Remedy"  was  delivered  in  Spring- 
field by  Rev.  James  Smith.  A  request 
for  the  publication  of  this  address,  ou 
the  ground  that  its  general  circulatiou 
would  be  beneficial,  was  signed  by  a 
number  of  persons,  including  Lincoln, 
who  thus  endorsed  such  sentiments  as 
the  following,  which  it  contained  : 

"The  liquor  traftic  is  a  cancer  in  society,  eat- 
ing out  its  vitals  and  threatening  destruction  ; 
and  all  attempts  to  regulate  it  will  not  only 
prove  abortive  but  aggravate  the  evil.  No, 
there  must  be  no  more  attempts  to  regulate  the 
cancer  :  it  must  be  eradicated  ;  not  a  root  must 
be  left  behind,  for,  until  this  be  done,  all  cla.s.ses 
must  continue  exposed  to  become  the  victims  of 
strong  drink.  .  .  .  The  most  effectual  [remedy] 
would  be  the  passage  of  a  law  altogether 
abolishing  the  liquor  traffic,  except  for  me- 
chanical, chemical,  medicinal  and  sacramental 
purposes,  and  so  framed  that  no  principle  of 
the  Constitution  of  the  State  or  of  the  United 
States  be  violated."  ' 

Several  accounts  have  been  written  of 
Lincoln's  refusal  to  furnish  intoxicating 
liquors  to  the  Committee  which  visited 
him  at  his  home  in  Springfield,  June  19, 
18G0,  to  formally  notify  him  of  his  nomi- 
nation for  President  by  the  Republican 
Convention  in  Chicago  the  day  before. 
Dr.  J.  G.  Holland  says  : 

"Mr.  Ashmun,  the  President  of  the  Conven- 
tion, at  the  head  of  a  Committee,  visited  Spring- 
field to  apprise  Mr.  Lincoln  officially  of  his 
nomination.  In  order  that  the  ceremony  might 
be  smoothly  performed,  the  Committee  had  an 
interview  with  Mr.  Lincoln  before  the  hour  ap- 
pointed for  the  formal  call.  They  found  him 
at  a  loss  to  know  how  to  treat  a  present  he  had 
just  received  at  the  hands  of  some  of  his  con- 
siderate Springfield  friends.  Knowing  Mr. 
Lincoln's  temperate  or  rather  abstinent  habits, 
and  laboring  under  the  impression  that  the 
visitors  from  Chicago  would  have  wants  beyond 
the  power  of  cold  water  to  satisfy,  these  friend.s. 
had  sent  in  sundry  hampers  of  wines  and 
liquors.  These  strange  fluids  troubled  Mr.  Lin- 
coln, and  he  frankly  confessed  as  much  to  the 
members  of  the  Committee.  The  Chairman  at 
once  advised  him  to  return  the  gift  and  to  offer 
no  stimulants  to  his  guests,  as  many  would  he 
present  besides  the  Committee.  Thus  relieved, 
he  made  ready  for  the  reception  of  the  com- 
pany according  to  his  own  ideas  of  hospitality."* 

F.  B.  Carpenter,  in  his  little  book, 
"  Six  Months  at  the  White  House  with 
Abraham  Lincoln "  (Xew  York,  18GG), 
declares  in  the  Introduction  that  he  has 

'  See  the  roice,  Aus;.  29,  1889. 

2  HollaiKrs    "Life   of  Lincoln"    (Springfield,    Mas8.» 
1866),  pp.  23&-9. 


Lincoln,  Abraham,] 


370 


[Lincoln,  Abraham. 


satisfied  himself  of  the  correctness  of  all 
the  statements  to  whicli  he  gives  pub- 
licity ;  and  on  p.  125  he  reprints  the 
following  from  the  Portland  Press  : 

"After  this  ceremony  bad  passed  [the  notifi- 
cation of  nomination  and  Lincoln's  reply],  Mr. 
Lincoln  remarked  to  the  company  that  as  an 
appropriate  conclusion  to  an  interview  so  im- 
portant and  interesting  as  that  which  had  just 
transpired,  he  supposed  good  manners  would 
require  that  he  should  treat  the  Committee  with 
something  to  drink  ;  and  opening  a  door  that 
led  into  a  room  in  the  rear  he  called  out, 
'  Mary  !  Mary  ! '  A  girl  replied  to  the  call,  to 
whom  Mr.  Lincoln  spoke  a  few  words  in  an 
undertone,  and,  closing  the  door,  returned 
again  to  converse  with  his  guests.  In  a  few 
minutes  the  maiden  entered,  bearing  a  large 
waiter  containing  several  glass  tumblers,  and  a 
large  pitcher  in  the  midst,  and  placed  it  upon 
the  centre-table.  Mr.  Lincoln  arose,  and 
gravely  addressing  the  company  said  :  '  Gentle- 
men, we  must  pledge  our  mutual  healths  in  the 
most  healthy  beverage  which  God  has  given  to 
man.  It  is  the  only  beverage  I  have  ever  used 
or  allowed  in  my  family,  and  I  cannot  con- 
scientiously depart  from  it  on  the  present  oc- 
casion. It  is  pure  Adam's  ale  from  the  spring.' 
And  taking  a  tumbler  he  touched  it  to  his  lips 
and  pledged  them  his  highest  respects  in  a  cup 
of  cold  water.  Of  course  all  his  guests  were 
constrained  to  admire  his  consistency  and  to 
join  in  his  example." 

The  Voice  for  Oct.  10,  1889,  printed  in 
facsimile  an  autograph  letter  which  had 
never  before  been  published,  written  by 
Lincoln  to  J.  Mason  Haight,  in  which 
Lincoln  referred  to  this  incident  as  fol- 
lows : 

"Private  and  Confidential. — Spring- 
field, III.,  June  11,  1860. — J.  Mason  Haight, 
Esq. — My  Dear  Sir  :  I  think  it  would  be  im- 
proper for  me  to  write  or  say  anything  to  or  for 
the  public  upon  the  subject  of  which  you  in- 
quire. I  therefore  wish  the  letter  I  do  write 
to  be  held  as  strictly  confidential.  Having  kept 
house  16  years,  and  having  never  held  the 
'  cup '  to  the  lips  of  my  friends  then,  my  judg- 
TTieut  was  that  I  should  not,  in  my  new  posi- 
tion, change  my  habits  in  this  respect.  What 
•actually  occurred  upon  the  occasion  of  the 
Committee  visiting  me  I  think  it  would  be 
Jaetter  for  others  to  say. — Yours  respectfully, 

"A.  Lincoln." 

Sept.  29,  18G3,  a  deputation  from  the 
'Grand  Division  of  Sons  of  Temperance 
of  the  District  of  Columbia  waited  upon 
President  Lincoln,  and  submitted  some 
recommendations  in  behalf  of  promoting 
temperance  in  the  army.  In  his  resjionse 
the  President  said  :  ^ 

"  As  a  matter  of  course,  it  will  not  be  possible 

•  Specially  transcribed  for  this  work  hy  J.  K.  Bridsje, 
917  French  street,  Washington,  D.  C,  from  the  official 
report  published  at  the  time  by  the  Sons  of  Teiui>eraiice. 


for  me  to  make  a  response  coextensive  with  the 
address  which  you  have  presented  to  me.  If  I 
were  better  known  than  I  am,  you  would  not 
need  to  be  told  that  in  the  advocacy  of  the  cause 
of  temperance  you  have  a  friend  and  sympa- 
thizer in  me.  When  I  -was  a  young  man— long 
ago, — before  the  Sons  of  Temperance  as  an  or- 
ganization had  an  existence,  I  in  an  humble 
way  made  temperance  speeches,  and  I  think  I 
may  say  that  to  this  day  I  have  never  by 
my  example  belied  what  I  then  said.  In  regard 
to  the  suggestions  which  you  make  for  the  pur- 
pose of  the  advancement  of  the  cause  of  tem- 
perance in  the  army,  I  cannot  make  particular 
responses  to  them  at  this  time.  To  prevent  in- 
temperance in  the  army  is  even  a  part  of  the 
articles  of  war.  It  is  part  of  the  law  of  the 
laud,  and  was  so,  I  presume,  long  ago,  to  dis- 
miss officers  for  drunkenness.  I  am  not  sure 
that,  consistently  with  the  public  service,  more 
can  be  done  than  has  been  done.  All,  there- 
fore, that  I  can  promise  you  is  (if  you  will  be 
pleased  to  furnisli  me  with  a  copy  of  your  ad- 
dress) to  have  it  submitted  to  the  proi:)er  de- 
partment and  have  it  considered  whether  it 
contains  any  suggestions  which  will  improve 
the  cause  of  temperance  and  repress  the  cause 
of  drunkenness  in  the  army  any  better  than  it 
is  already  done.  I  can  promise  no  more  than 
that.  I  think  that  the  reasonable  men  of 
the  world  have  long  since  agreed  that  intemper- 
ance is  one  of  the  greatest  if  not  the  very  great- 
est of  all  evils  amongst  mankind.  That  is  not  a 
matter  of  dispute,  I  believe.  That  the  disease 
exists,  and  that  it  is  a  very  great  one,  is  agreed 
upon  by  all." 

As  President,  Lincoln  inaugurated  or 
approved  a  number  of  measures  Prohib- 
itory in  character;  and  the  friendship 
that  he  manifested  causes  the  English 
temperance  historian.  Dr.  Dawson  Burns, 
to  remark  that  in  his  assassination  "  the 
friends  of  temjierance  had  a  special  reason 
for  regret,  as  this  crime  deprived  them 
of  the  moral  support  of  one  who  had  for 
many  years  been  a  personal  example  of 
the  practice  they  desired  should  become 
universal.  In  his  official  capacity  he  had 
also  given  a  sanction  to  all  measures 
which  could  advance  the  movement  in 
the  army  and  the  nation  at  large.'" 
In  18G1  "Generals  Butler,  McClellan  and 
Banks  issued  orders  excluding  all  liquors 
from  their  respective  commands ;  and  on 
Aug.  5  of  the  same  year  the  President 
signed  an  act  of  Congress  providing 

"That  it  shall  not  be  lawful  for  any  person 
in  the  District  of  Columbia  to  sell,  give  or 
administer  to  any  soldier  or  volunteer  in  the 
.service  of  the  United  States,  or  any  person 
wearing  the  uniform  of  such  soldier  or  volun- 
teer, any  spirituous  liquor  or  intoxicating  drink; 
and  every  person  offending  against  the  provi- 
sions of  this  act  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a 

»  Temperance  History,  vol.  2,  p.  61. 


Liqueurs.] 


O  I    i 


[Liquor  Traffic. 


misdemeanor,  and  upon  conviction  thereof, 
before  a  magistrate  or  Court  having  criminal 
jurisdiction,  sliall  be  puuislied  by  a  tine  of  $25 
or  imprisonment  for  80  days."  (U.  S.  Statutes 
at  Large,  vol.  13,  c.  44.) 

By  an  act  of  Congress  signed  by  Presi- 
dent Lincoln  March  19,  18G2,  the  Inspec- 
tors-General of  the  army  were  constituted 
a  board  of  officers  to  prepare  a  list  or 
schedule  of  the  articles  sold  by  sutlers 
to  the  officers  and  soldiers  in  the  vol- 
unteer service,  "provided  always  [as  to 
this  list  or  schedule]  that  no  intoxicating 
liquors  shall  at  any  time  be  contained 
therein,  or  the  sale  of  such  liquors  be  in 
any  way  authorized  by  said  board."  (U, 
S.  Statutes  at  Large,  vol.  12,  c.  47,  §  1.) 
As  a  result  of  the  agitation  of  temperance 
reformers,  supported  by  the  urgent  re- 
commendations of  such  men  as  Eear- 
Admiral  Foote  and  Captains  Dupont, 
Hudson  and  Stringham  of  the  navy,  an 
act  of  Congress,  with  the  following  pro- 
vision enforcing  the  total  prohibition  of 
the  use  of  spirituous  liquors  in  the  navy 
for  beverage  purposes,  was  signed  by  the 
President  July  14,  1862  : 

"And  be  it  further  enacted.  That  from  and 
after  the  1st  day  of  September,  1863,  the  spirit 
ration  in  the  navy  of  the  United  States  shall 
forever  cease,  and  thereafter  no  distilled  spirit- 
uous liquors  shall  be  admitted  on  board  of  ves- 
sels of  war  except  as  medical  stores,  and  iipon 
the  order  and  under  the  control  of  the  medical 
officers  of  such  vessels,  and  to  be  used  only  for 
medical  purposes.  From  and  after  the  said  1st 
day  of  September  next  there  shall  be  allowed 
and  paid  to  each  person  in  the  navy  now  entitled 
to  the  spirit  ration  five  cents  per  day  in  com- 
mutation and  lieu  thereof,  which  shall  be  in 
addition  to  their  present  pay."  (U.  S.  Statutes 
at  Large,  vol.  13,  c.  164,  §  4.) 

President  Lincoln  was  also  one  of  the 
12  signers  of  the  Presidential  temperance 
declaration.    (See  Delavan,  Edward  C.) 

Liqueurs.— Spirituous  drinks  and 
flavors  compounded  from  alcohol  and 
various  aromatic  substances,  herbs,  etc., 
by  special  processes.  Liqueurs  are  of 
as  many  varieties,  almost,  as  wines. 
Chartreuse,  curacoa,  maraschino,  bene- 
dictine,  ratafia,  absinthe,  vermouth  and 
kirschenwasser  are  among  the  best- 
known.     (See  Spirituous  Liquors.) 

Liquor. — When  used  in  a  general  way, 
without  designating  the  particular  bev- 
erage, this  word  applies  to  alcoholic 
drinks  of  all  kinds. 


Liquor  Traffic. — In  one  respect 
the  early  American  temperance  agitators 
labored  under  conditions  decidedly  less 
Tinfavorable  than  those  existing  at  the 
present  time  :  they  were  not  opposed 
by  a  thoroughly  organized,  resourceful, 
cunning,  vigilant,  politically  powerful, 
wealthy  and  carefully  entrenched  liquor 
traffic.  In  those  days  the  manufacturers 
and  vendors  of  liquor,  though  perhaps 
more  numerous  in  proportion  to  the  total 
population  than  are  the  makers  and  deal- 
ers of  to-day,  were  almost  entirely  inde- 
pendent of  one  another,  having  no  strong 
societies  and  no  authorized  leaders,  and 
making  few  united  efforts  to  counteract 
the  reform  movement  or  to  control 
politics  and  legislation.  Moreover,  the 
retail  traffic  was  then  conducted  chiefly 
in  inns  and  groceries,  as  a  branch  of 
other  and  reputable  lines  of  trade  :  the 
saloon  of  to-day  was  scarcely  suggested 
by  the  drinking  establishments  of  the 
first  half  of  the  century,  and  the  rum- 
sellers  had  little  of  that  "enterprise" 
which  is  now  so  conspicuous  and  so  bale- 
ful. Prejudice,  indifference  and  indi- 
vidual appetite  were  serious  obstacles  to 
temperance  progress  ;  but  though  the 
antagonism  of  the  drink-traffickers  was 
also  to  be  contended  with,  this  was  not 
a  concentrated  or  well-directed  antago- 
nism, and,  so  far  as  its  practical  influence 
upon  public  policy  was  concerned,  was 
scarcely  more  formidable  than  the  unor- 
ganized opposition  of  other  citizens  of 
equal  number. 

PAST   AND   PRESENT. 

In  the  social  history  of  the  United 
States  in  the  lOtli  Century  there  is  hardly 
anything  so  remarkable  as  the  change 
effected  in  the  character  and  conduct  of 
the  liquor  traffic  during  the  40  years 
from  1850  to  1890.  The  idea  of  dram- 
selling  is  no  longer  associated  witli  the 
thought  of  unpretentious  and  carelessly- 
managed  taverns  and  general  stores  ; 
these  establishments  cut  no  figure  in  the 
retail  liquor  system  now.  In  every  city  and 
nearly  every  town  above  the  hamlet 
rank,  probably  at  least  95  per  cent,  of 
the  retail  liquor  business  is  done  in 
places  fitted  up  and  operated  for  the  ex- 
clusive or  principal  purpose  of  selling 
intoxicants — places  affording  few  or  no 
conveniences  for  the  public,  in  which 
none  of  the  necessaries  of  life  are  kept  for 


Liquor  Traffic] 


72 


[Liquor  Traffic. 


sale  to  the  people  at  large  ;  places  which 
no  decent  woman  can  enter,  unescorted, 
under  any  circumstances,  and  where  no 
child  or  youth  can  safely  be  permitted 
to  set  foot.  I'hese  establishments,  so  far 
as  they  serve  other  purposes  than  the 
distribution  of  drink,  do  so  only  Avith 
the  design  of  catering  to  the  incidental 
wants  and  vices  of  drinkers  and  increas- 
ing the  attractions  of  which  the  drink- 
ing-bar  is  the  center  ;  restaurants  are 
found  in  connection  with  some  saloons 
and  certain  kinds  of  food  are  obtainable 
in  nearly  all  of  them,  tobacco  and  non- 
alcoholic beverages  are  invariably  kept, 
billiards,  pool-tables,  cards  and  other 
gambling  paraphernalia  are  almost 
always  present,  prostitutes  are  harbored 
or  encouraged  in  most  instances,  and 
newspapers  and  music  are  frequently 
provided,  only  as  associated  and  con- 
tributing features  of  the  one  absorbing 
vocation  of  liquor-selling.  This  voca- 
tion is  driven  with  an  energy  and  a  wan- 
tonness of  Avhich  there  were  few  ex- 
amples in  former  years,  while  the  tradi- 
tional "■  mine  host "  has  given  way  to  the 
foreign-born  saloon-keeper,  who  is  with- 
out standing  in  respectable  society  and 
is  commonly  ranked  with  the  lowest  and 
criminal  classes.  The  characteristic  tap- 
room shows  a  lavishness  and  skill  of  ex- 
penditure suggestive  of  ample  capital, 
and  the  dealers  cheerfully  pay  license 
fees  that  are  sometimes  as  large  as  a  fair 
annual  income  ;  in  fact  these  license 
fees,  in  a  number  of  States,  probably 
range  higher  than  the  actual  profits  of 
the  small  retail  rumseller  in  the  old  days. 
The  present  compact  organization  and 
prodigious  political  strength  of  the  traffic 
are  even  more  instructive  evidences  of  the 
great  change  that  has  been  wrought. 
The  insignificant  part  played  by  the 
liquor  interest  in  the  Prohibitory  agita- 
tion of  40  years  ago  seems  grotesque 
when  viewed  by  the  light  of  existing 
conditions.  To-day  it  is  counted  among 
the  impossibilities  to  pass  a  Prohibitory 
statute  through  any  Legislature  without 
waging  prolonged  and  arduous  battl-es 
with  the  "  rum  power,"  whose  resources 
appear  to  be  inexhaustible;  but  in  the 
decade  besrinninsf  with  1850  it  was  with 
no  great  difficulty  that  Legislatures  were 
persuaded  to  enact  the  Maine  law.  The 
former  inactivity  and  weakness  of  the 
traffic  can  be  explained  only  by  saying 


that  the  early  license  systems  did  not  en- 
courage brisk  competition  in  the  trade,  i 
or  excite  rivalry  and  enterprise,  or  hold  ' 
out  to  a  select  few  the  prospects  of  large 
profits,  or  erect  the  liquor  Ijusiness  into 
a  place  of  peculiar  prominence.  The 
license  rates  were  low,  and  more  import- 
ant than  that  there  were  no  serious 
efforts  made  to  increase  them.  This  fact 
is  of  great  importance;  for  if  the  ex- 
penses incidental  to  conducting  a  licensed 
establishment  had  been  subject  to  sud- 
den and  material  change  by  legisla- 
tive imposition  of  increased  license 
charges,  organization  would  no  doubt 
have  been  perfected  without  delay  and 
the  revolution  in  the  traffic  would  have 
been  accomplished  more  speedily.  While 
the  dealers  naturally  regarded  the  total 
abstinence  and  Prohibition  work  with 
disgust  and  fear,  the  license  privileges 
which  they  held  were,  on  account  of  the 
low  rates  and  practical  free  trade  then 
prevailing,  not  specially  valuable.  The 
manufacture  of  liquor  was  not  taxed  by 
the  Federal  Government,  the  brewing 
"  industry  "  was  in  its  infancy,  whiskey 
was  cheap  and  small  stills  were  numer- 
ous, large  investments  of  capital  were  ex- 
ceptional, and  the  liquor-makers  did  not 
find  it  necessary  to  employ  political 
influence  and  watch  the  details  of  na- 
tional legislation. 

FEDERATION   AXD    CONCENTRATION. 

Organization  of  the  United  States 
Brewers'  Association  (18G'2).  —  The 
United  States  Brewers'  Association  was 
organized  at  a  meeting  of  representative 
brewers,  held  in  New  York,  Nov.  1'2, 
1862.  In  the  summer  of  that  year  (July 
1)  Congress  had  passed  an  act  to  take 
effect  in  September,  1862,  levying  taxes 
on  domestic  liquors,  including  a  tax  of 
$1  per  barrel  on  beer.  This  was  done  to 
meet  the  expenses  occasioned  by  the  Civil 
AVar.  Thus  the  beginning  of  practical 
organized  action  was  almost  simulta- 
neous with  the  first  interference  by  the 
general  Government  in  the  affairs  of  the 
"trade."^     The  brewers  apparently  did 

1  In  Washiiiiiton's  Administration  taxes  were  laid  by 
Congress  upon  distilled  liquors,  and  the  Pennsylvania 
distillers  promptly  showed  tlieir  resentment  by  risini;  in 
armed  rebellion.  "Strictly  speaking,  this  famous  insurrec- 
tion was  the  first  manifestation  of  the  banded  liquor 
power  in  American  history.  But  it  was  merely  a  sedi- 
tious outbreak,  which  spent  its  force  in  a  brief  time.  The 
etfective  ori;anization  and  political  influence  of  the  drink 
traffic  as  now  understood  date  from  1862,  the  year  in 
which  the  Interna!  Revenue  act  was  passed. 


Liquor  Traffic] 


373 


[Liquor  Traffic. 


not  foresee  the  advantages  that  they 
would  derive  from  the  new  system ;  for 
at  their  first  convention  they  objected  to 
the  tax  and  took  steps  to  secure  a  reduc- 
tion. Despite  the  Government's  necessi- 
ties the  brewers'  demands  were  so  re- 
spectfully listened  to  that  by  the  act  of 
March  3,  18G3,  the  tax  on  beer  was  re- 
duced from  II  to  GO  cents  per  ban-el; 
and  although  the  11  tax  was  subse- 
quently restored  (April  1,  1804),  this  re- 
storation was  not  seriously  opposed  by 
the  brewers,  and  the  $1  rate  has  been 
left  undisturbed  until  the  present  time 
(1891).  Taxation  of  the  liquor  traffic 
for  revenue  purposes  has  indeed  been 
the  uninterrupted  policy  of  the  Federal 
Government  since  1862;  and  the  pursu- 
ance of  this  ])olicy  has  necessarily  im- 
plied possible  changes  in  important  mat- 
ters of  detail.  The  need  of  continued 
organization  and  of  unflagging  attention 
to  politics  has  therefore  been  constantly 
recognized  by  the  brewers,  and  their 
national  Association  has  become  a  very 
formidable  power.  In  October,  1877,  it 
was  made  an  incorporated  body  under 
the  laws  of  New  York  State.  The  clos- 
est relations  have  been  established  be- 
tween its  officers  and  the  authorities  in 
charge  of  the  Internal  Revenue  Depart- 
ment (see  United  States  Government 
AND  the  Liquor  Traffic),  and  its  in- 
fluence in  Congress  and  throughout  the 
country  has  been  felt  many  times  and  in 
many  ways.  During  the  28  years  of  its 
existence  the  quantity  of  beer  brewed 
in  the  United  States  has  increased  won- 
derfully: only  2,000,625  barrels  were 
produced  in  the  fiscal  year  ending  June 
30,  1803;  but  there  were  25,119,853  bar- 
rels manufactured  in  1888-9.  Reports 
made  at  the  United  States  Brewers'  Con- 
vention in  1888  showed  that  78.4  per 
cent,  of  the  whole  beer  product  of  1887-8 
was  made  by  members  of  the  Associa- 
tion. 

Creation  of  the  Orf/anized  Wliiskei/ 
Power. — The  act  of  July  1,  1862,  taxed 
distilled  spirits  as  well  as  beer,  and  the 
consolidation  of  the  whiskey  interest 
began  soon  after  the  passage  of  that 
measure.  From  the  original  tax  of  20 
cents  per  gallon  on  spirits  the  tax  was 
increased  (March  7,  1804)  to  00  cents 
per  gallon,  and  again  (June  30,  1864)  to 
|l.50  per  gallon,  and  again  (Dec.  22, 
1864)  to  12  per  gallon  ;  after  the  war  it 


was  reduced  to  50  cents  (June  20,  1868), 
then  raised  to  70  cents  (June  6,  1872), 
and  finally  (March  3,  1875)  fixed  at  the 
present  rate  of  90  cents.  The  heavy 
tax,  together  with  the  elaborate  regula- 
tions prescribed  for  distilleries,  had  the 
effect  of  concentrating  the  manufactur- 
ing business,  bringing  large  investors 
into  it  and  substituting  for  the  old  and 
not  very  vigilant  or  enterprising  dis- 
tillers a  band  of  keen-witted  and  aggres- 
sive individuals,  whose  characteristics 
gave  an  entirely  new  significance  to  the 
name  "  whiskey  men."  The  distil- 
lers have  never  revealed  their  organized 
national  strength  with  the  frankness  and 
formality  exhibited  by  the  brewers  ;  tliey 
have  not  held  annual  public  conventions, 
and  they  evidently  wish  to  have  it  be- 
lieved that  they  are  bound  together  by 
loose  ties.  But  it  is  apparent  to  watch- 
ful observers  that  the  whiskey  power  is 
quite  as  carefully  disciplined  for  practi- 
cal purposes  and  quite  as  arrogant  as 
the  beer  power.  It  is  prepared  at  all 
times  to  send  to  Washington  skilful 
lobbyists  with  unlimited  resources,  it 
has  procured  extraordinary  concessions 
from  the  highest  executive  officers  of  the 
Government,  and  it  has  special  repre- 
sentatives in  both  Houses  of  Consjress — 
men  of  commanding  ability  and  great 
influence. 

T/ie  Wine  Manufacfi/rery. — The  third 
branch  of  liquor  manufacture,  the  wine 
interest,  has  not  until  recently  at- 
tained prominence.  AVine  ])roduction 
in  the  United  States  has  always  been 
confined  to  a  few  localities  where  natural 
conditions  are  particularly  favorable  to 
grape  culture;  and  this  circumstance, 
with  the  preference  shown  for  foreign 
wines  and  the  uninviting  quality  of  the 
native  product,  has  hitherto  prevented 
the  wine-makers  from  taking  rank  with 
the  whiskey  men  and  beer-brewers.  But 
there  has  been  a  marked  advance  in  the 
last  few  years:  while  only  1,860,008  gal- 
lons of  domestic  wine  were  produced  in 
1860,  3,059,518  gallons  in  1870  and  17,- 
404,098  gallons  in  1885,  the  production 
in  1888  was  31,030,523  gallons.' ,  Wealthy 
and  shrewd  men  have  obtained  control 
of  the  vineyards  of  California,  and  by 
untiring  efforts  have  persuaded  the  Stj^te 


1  Estimates  of  W.  F.  Swilzler.  Chief  of  the  T'nited 
States  Bureau  of  Statistics  under  President  Cleveland, 
(See  p.  129.) 


1 


I 


A' 


Liquor  Traffic] 


374 


[Liquor  Trsiffic. 


I 


to  enact  laws  specially  fostering  the  wine 
interest  and  giving  those  connected  with 
it  an  importance  not  enjoyed  by  any 
other  agricultural  or  commercial  class, 
to  create  an  official  "  Viticultural  Com- 
mission," to  guarantee  the  purity  of 
California  wines  and  to  industriously 
seek  purchasers  for  them  throughout  the 
country.  Thus  the  cheap  and  crude 
stuff  produced  in  California,  which 
could  not  win  its  way  on  its  merits,  has 
been  rapidly  pushed  to  the  front  by  the 
same  means  that  have  enabled  the  brew- 
ers and  distillers  to  strengthen  their  hold 
upon  the  public — by  organization  and 
systematic  management. 
■  TJie  English  Brewery  Syndicates. — Of 
equal  importance  with  the  tendency 
toward  federation  is  that  looking  to 
proximate  monopolization  of  the  liquor- 
manufacturing  interests.  In  the  brew- 
ing "trade"  this  latter  tendency  has 
had  striking  development.  Extensive 
purchases  of  American  breweries  have 
been  made  by  English  syndicates,  whose 
public  operations  were  begun  in  1888. 
The  profits  of  brewing  properties  in  the 
United  States  have  always  been  large, 
and  the  reports  made  by  agents  of  British 
capitalists  soon  created  an  active  demand 
for  them  on  the  London  market.  Several 
great  companies  were  organized,^  and 
the  result  is  the  practical  consolidation 
for  corporate  purposes,  by  the  manipu- 
lation of  a  few  Englishmen  and  with- 
in a  few  months'  time,  of  82  brew- 
ing and  malting  establishments,  valued 
at  more  than  $81,000,000,'  and  pro- 
ducing in  the  aggregate  about  one-sixth 
of  airthe  malt  liquor  manufactured  in 
this  country.  The  following  details  of 
English  syndicate  purchases  are  com- 
piled from  a  table  printed  in  the 
Breioers'  Journal  (New  York)  for  Dec. 
1,  1890: 

Number  of  breweries  and  malting  houses 
])Oughtby  the  English  syndicates  to  that  date,  82. 

The  sales  of  these  establishments  for  the  year 
ending  May  1,  1890,  aggregated  4,461, 1''"?  bar- 
rels.    These    82  concerns    had  been    reorgan- 


1  The  principal  English  syiidioates  interested  are  the 
City  of  London  Contract  Corporation,  the  Executors' 
Trustees'  Securities  Company  and  the  London  Debenture 
Corporation.  (Stated  on  tlie  autliority  of  A.  E.  J.  Tovey, 
editor  of  the  Breircrs^  .loiiriutl.) 

2  It  is  un(Joubted,  however,  that  the  breweries,  as  floated 
on  the  London  nnuket,  liave  )jeen  very  much  over-capital- 
ized, the  object  beins,  as  in  all  such  instances,  to  enrich 
the  negotiators  or  stock-jobbers  without  regard  to  the 
subsequent  rates  of  dividends  to  investors.  It  is  of  course 
impoBsible  to  estimate  the  extent  of  the  over-capitaliza- 
tion. 


Ized  into  23  new  companies.  Thus  23  com- 
panies were  made  to  transact  the  business  for- 
merly done  by  82  breweries.  In  the  city  of 
St.  Louis  alone,  19  breweries  were  consolidated 
into  one. 

Cities  in  which  purchases  have  been  made  by 
the  English  syndicates :  Baltimore,  4  (con- 
solidated into  two)  ;  Rochester,  3  (consolidated 
into  one) ;  Philadelphia,  1  ;  Chicago,  7  (con- 
solidated into  two)  ;  Cincinnati,  1,  and  Au- 
rora (Ind.),  1  (consolidated  into  one) ;  Denver, 
2  (consolidated  into  one) ;  Detroit,  5  (consoli- 
dated into  two) ;  New  York,  4,  Newark,  .'5  and 
Albany,  1  (consolidated  into  three) ;  Peoria,  4, 
Joliet,  1  and  Wilmington  (111.),  1  (consolidated 
into  one) ;  Indianapolis,  3  (consolidated  into 
one);  Boston,  4,  Lawrence  (Mass.),  1  and 
Portsmouth  (N.  H.).  1  (consolidated  into  two); 
8t.  Louis,  19  (consolidated  into  one) ;  San 
Francisco,  7,  San  Jose,  1,  Oakland  (Cal.),  1 
and  West  Berkeley  (Cal.),  1  (consolidated  into 
one);  Springlield  (O.),  2  (consolidated  into 
one)  ;  Washington,  1. 

The  stated  values  of  the  shares  and  bonds  of 
the  82  enumerated  establishments  is  £16,663,000 
(.$81,148,810,  reckoning  a  pound  sterling  at 
$4.87).^ 

Of  the  23  brewery  companies  (as  reorganized) 
every  one  represents  a  stated  investment  of  more 
than  $500,000  and  only  six  are  capitalized  at 
less  than  $1,000,000;  while  eight  are  rated  at 
about  $4,000,000  and  one  has  a  value  of  nearly 
$14,000,000. 

Of  the  brewery  companies  for  which  the  last 
annual  dividends  are  given,  one  paid  as  high  as 
16  per  cent.,  four  paid  15  per  cent,  and  only 
one  paid  less  than  10  per  cent. 

In  these  English  syndicate  transactions 
a  majority  of  the  brewery  stock  (in 
nearly  all  instances  two-thirds)  was  sub- 
scribed by  the  foreign  capitalists,  who 
thus  obtained  a  controlling  interest  in 
each  case.  A  minority  of  the  stock  (as  a 
rule,  not  in  excess  of  one-third)  was 
taken  by  the  former  American  owners, 
who  were  also  bound  by  the  terms  of 
the  contracts  to  operate  the  breweries 
for  at  least  three  years.''  Only  the 
choicest  properties,  from  the  investor's 
point  of  view,  have  been  sought  by 
British  capitalisvs,  and  naturally  the 
combinations  effected  are  formidable  in 
all  respects.  It  is  noticeable,  however, 
that  the  greatest  breweries  of  the  country, 
like  the  Anheuser-Busch  of  St.  Louis, 
the  Pabst  of  Milwaukee  and  George 
Ehret's  of  New  York,  have  not  suc- 
cumbed to  the  syndicates;  the  leading 
breweries,  with  few  exceptions,  are  still 
conducted   by    independent   comj)anies. 


3  See  p.  380. 

1  Stated  on   the  authority  of  A.  E.  J.  Tovey,  editor  of 
the  Brewers'  Journal. 


Liquor  Traffic] 


375 


[Liquor  Traffic. 


The  syndicates  have  acquired  many  es- 
tablishments of  the  second,  third  and 
fourth  ranks,  and  by  consolidating  them 
have  created  companies  that  rival  the  old- 
est and  strongest  ones  formerly  existing. 
The  dominating  influence  previously 
enjoyed  in  the  markets  of  the  country 
by  a  few  breweries  is  therefore  threat- 
ened by  the  sudden  appearance  of  new 
competitors,  and  a  more  thorough  con- 
centration is  logically  indicated.  Yet 
the  monopoly  movement  has  by  no 
means  brought  the  brewing  interest  in 
general  under  "  trust "  dictation ;  and  it 
cannot  even  be  said  that  a  majority  of 
the  beer  product  is  controlled  by  a  hand- 
ful of  autocratic  individuals.  The  half- 
dozen  English  syndicates,  as  already 
shown,  produce,  in  the  aggregate,  about 
4,500,000  barrels  annually;  the  Anheu- 
ser-Busch Brewing  Association  of  St. 
Louis  sold  62G,G93  barrels  in  the  fiscal 
year  1889-90;  the  Pabst  Brewing  Com- 
pany of  Milwaukee  sold  608,231  barrels; 
the  Joseph  Schlitz  Brewing  Company 
of  Milwaukee,  418,834  barrels,  and 
George  Ehret  of  New  York,  394,027  bar- 
rels. These  are  the  largest  producers,  and 
their  combined  output  is  about  G,500,- 
000  barrels,  leaving  more  than  21,000,- 
000  barrels  manufactured  by  some  2,000 
smaller  concerns.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
significance  of  recent  monopolization  un- 
dertakings is  not  to  be  discredited.  They 
have  not  only  created  powerful  corpora- 
tions but  have  stimulated  speculation 
and  competition  on  a  great  scale  through- 
out the  "  trade,"  and  demonstrated  to 
all  individual  brewers  the  commercial 
advantage  of  intelligent  combination. 

Distillers'  Combinations.  — Although 
there  has  been  no  similar  absorption  of 
distilleries  by  English  or  other  syndi- 
cates, the  business  of  distilLng  is  practi- 
cally conducted  by  "'  pools  "  and  "•  trusts  " 
clothed  with  arbitrary  power.  Several 
distinctions  must  be  held  in  view  in 
speaking  of  the  trade  management  of 
this  branch  of  liquor  manufacture.  In 
the  United  States  distilleries  are  of  three 
classes — those  using  grain,  those  using 
molasses  and  those  using  fruit.  In  the 
year  ended  June  30,  1889,  there  were 
1,440  grain  distilleries  (of  which  1,267 
were  operated),  producing  87,887.456  gal- 
lons of  spirits ;  10  molasses  distilleries  (all 
of  which  were  operated),  producing  1,471,- 
054  gallons  and  3,126  fruit  distilleries  (of 


which  3,072  were  operated),  producing 
1,775,040  gallons.^  Thus  nearly  the  entire 
product  of  spirituous  liquors  came  from 
the  grain  distilleries.  This  is  accounted 
for  by  the  comparative  cheapness  and 
greater  availability  of  grain.  Fruit, 
which  is  perishable,  is  very  expensive  or 
wholly  unobtainable,  except  during  a  few 
months  of  the  year;  and  the  fruit  dis- 
tilleries are  operated  solely  for  supplying 
a  limited  demand  for  apple,  peach  and 
grape  brandy ;  therefore  while  the  num- 
ber of  these  establishments  is  large 
then*  aggregate  output  is  small.  Molasses 
as  a  distiller's  material  yields  nothing 
but  rum,  and  as  the  demand  for  this 
article  is  not  extensive  the  molasses 
stills  are  relatively  unimportant.  From 
other  points  of  view,  also,  the  fruit  and 
molasses  concerns  are  to  be  examined 
apart  from  the  grain.  The  fruit  dis- 
tillers are  practically  exempt  from  Gov- 
ernment supervision  and  the  proprietors 
are  not  kept  within  narrow  liounds  by 
elaborate  revenue  law  restrictions;  the 
easy  conditions  under  which  they  are 
permitted  to  run  encourage  jiroduction 
in  a  small  way  and  are  responsible  for 
the  great  number  of  petty  stills;  as  a 
natural  sequence,  fruit  distillation  is 
conducted  indiscriminately  and  no  ef- 
forts are  made  to  regulate  it  by  trade 
concentration."  The  molasses  distilleries, 
with  but  two  exceptions,  are  located  in 

'  It  must  be  borne  in  mind,  in  looking  at  the  flffures 
under  the  head  of  fruit  distillation,  that  the  liberty  allowed 
to  distillers  of  this  class  by  the  Federal  laws  invites  and  is 
naturally  attended  by  frauds  on  the  revenue.  Since  it  is 
not  required  that  the  processes  of  fruit  distillation  shall 
be  under  the  eye  of  a  Government  officer,  the  fruit  dis- 
tiller is  able,  if  so  disposed,  to  understate  the  amount  of 
his  product  and  thus  put  on  the  market  a  great  deal  of 
illicit  spirits  of  which  no  record  appears  in  the  Internal 
Revenue  returns.  Indeed,  it  has  been  stated  and  sworn 
to  by  the  man  probably  best  qualified  to  speak  on  the  sub- 
ject, that  the  fruit  distillers  systematically  pursue  the 
practices  hinted  at.  W.  H.  Thomas  of  Louisville,  Ky., 
in  testifying  before  a  Congressional  Committee  in  1888, 
said:  "  I  handle  and  sell  and  am  the  agent  for  more  apple 
and  peach  brandy  distillers  than  any  §0  men  in  the  coun- 
try, and  am  pretty  well  posted  on  the  subject.  The  rea- 
son they  (the  fruit  distillers)  do  not  want  the  bonded  period 
on  apjile  and  iieach  brandy  is  that  the  distiller  very  sel- 
dom, if  ever,  cares  for  it.  When  he  manufactures  his 
brandy  it  is  worth  as  much  money  when  it  is  two  months 
old  as  when  it  is  two  or  three  years  old.  .  .  .  He  has  no 
storekeeper  to  watch  him.  He  has  got  the  advantage, 
which  he  takes  to  his  own  interest,  and  he  pays  the  tax 
on  only  about  one-third  of  what  he  niakes.^'  (Ileport  of 
the  "  Whiskey "  Investigating  Committee  of  the  50th 
Congress  [1st  session],  p.  39.)  Apparently,  therefore,  the 
volume  of  fruit  spirits  produced  in  1889  was  three  times 
as  great  as  the  figures  above  indicate. 

2  More  than  one-half  the  fruit  spirits  produced  is  dis- 
tilled in  the  State  of  California.  The  brandy  busniess, 
like  the  wine  business,  is  under  the  general  direction  and 
fostering  care  of  the  Viticultural  Commission  in  that 
State.  The  Eastern  fruit  distillers,  at  least  in  particular 
States,  co-operate  more  or  less  harmoniously.  But  appar- 
ently no  formal  combinations  of  general  scope  have  beeu 
effected. 


Liquor  Traflfic] 


376 


[Liquor  Traffic. 


the  State  of  Massachusetts;  and  since 
there  are  only  10  of  these  distilleries  in 
the  country,  their  common  interests  are 
easily  adjusted  when  questions  of  trade 
policy  arise.  Thus  the  fruit  and  molas- 
ses distilleries  stand  by  themselves ;  and 
the  present  inqviiry  applies  essentially 
to  the  grain  establishments  manufactur- 
ing Avhiskey,  alcohol  and  other  articles 
for  which  there  is  widespread  demand, 
and  producing  more  than  96  per  cent,  of 
all  the  ardent  spirits. 

Here  again  an  understanding  of  im- 
portant distinctions  is  necessary.  Grain 
distillation  on  a  large  scale  is  almost 
entirely  confined  to  the  Northern  States 
and  four  or  five  other  States  lying  on  the 
border  between  North  and  South.  Omit- 
ting Kentucky,  Missouri,  Maryland,  Vir- 
ginia and  West  Virginia,  less  than  3  per 
cent,  of  the  87,887,45(3  gallons  of  tax- 
paid  grain  spirits  produced  in  the  fiscal 
year  1888-9  Avas  manufactured  in  the 
South;  and  nearly  four-fifths  of  this  3 
per  cent,  was  distilled  in  Tennessee  and 
North  Carolina.  This  is  explained,  no 
doubt,  by  the  fact  that  the  grain  used  in 
distillation  is  nearly  all  raised  in  the 
North,  and  there  are  few  important  grain 
markets  in  the  South,  It  is  true  that 
there  is  a  considerable  number  of  small 
grain  stills  in  that  section,  and  probably 
a  larger  number  of  illicit  or  "  moon- 
shine" distilleries;  but  leaving  out  the 
States  named,  grain  distillation  is  carried 
on  to  so  limited  an  extent  in  the  South 
that  the  persons  engaged  in  it  are 
hardly  taken  into  account  by  the 
"trade"  at  large,  and  cut  no  figure  in 
the  great  combinations  that  have  been 
set  up. 

A  very  sharp  line  of  trade  division 
separates  the  representative  Northern 
and  Southern  distilling  interests.  In  the 
North,  with  the  exception  of  some  so- 
called  "fine  whiskey"  made  in  Pennsyl- 
vania and  possibly  a  little  manufactured 
in  other  States,  the  entire  product  is  raw 
alcohol,  condensed  spirits,  etc.,  which  is 
marketed  as  soon  as  produced  and  used 
altogether  for  compounding,  adulterat- 
ing, blending,  fortifying  and  in  other 
ways  manipulating  beverage  spirits  and 
wines,  and  for  mechanical  and  similar 
pvirposes.  On  the  other  hand,  in  the 
representative  distilling  States  of  the 
South,  Kentucky  and  Maryland — for' 
Missouri,   from   the   distillers'   point  of 


view,  is  counted  as  a  part  of  the  North, 
— most  of  the  product  is  bourbon  or  rye 
whiskey,  Avhich  is  intended  for  sale  as  a 
high-priced  and  choice  beverage  and  is 
generally  retained  in  the  bonded  ware- 
houses for  the  full  period  of  three  years, 
in  order  to  give  it  the  ripeness  of  age, 
before  it  is  ofl'ered  for  consumption. 
The  grain  spirits  of  the  North  and  South 
are  therefore  radically  different,  and  the 
distinctive  product  of  each  section  is 
subject  to  separate  control. 

An  investigation  into  the  trade  affairs 
of  the  distillers  was  undertaken  by  a 
Committee  of  the  National  House  of 
Eepresentatives  in  July  and  .  August, 
1888.  The  most  prominent  representa- 
tives of  the  Kentucky  and  the  North- 
ern interests  testified.  It  was  shown 
that  the  producers  of  "  fine  "  whiskey  in 
Kentucky  had  suffered  severely  from 
overproduction  in  certain  years  and 
been  forced  to  devise  means  for  regulat- 
ing the  output.  The  overproduction 
Avas  especially  great  in  1881  and  1883, 
about  32,000,000  gallons  of  "  fine  "  whis- 
key having  been  made  in  the  State  in 
each  of  those  years  ;  whereas,  according 
to  the  testimony  of  J.  M.  Atherton  of 
Louisville,  the  average  yearly  demand 
for  Kentuckv  goods  was  not  in  excess 
of  12,000,000  to  14,000,000  gallons.^ 
This  immense  quantity  of  "fine" 
whiskey  glutted  the  market;  it  could 
not  be  sold  in  the  United  States,  yet, 
under  the  Internal  Kevenue  laws,  taxes 
on  the  whole  of  it,  at  the  rate  of  90  cents 
per  gallon,  had  to  be  paid  within  three 
years.  Relief  was  sought  by  exporta- 
tion. Many  millions  of  gallons  were 
shipped  to  foreign  countries,  in  the  hope 
that  a  market  could  be  created  there,  but 
nobody  Avould  take  the  American  liquor. 
In  1883  the  Kentucky  production  of 
"  fine  "  Avhiskev  was  only  0,000,000  gal- 
lons, and  in  1884  7,000,000  gallons ;  but 
in  1885,  1886  and  1887  the  quantities 
distilled  were,  respectively,  10,000,000, 
16,000,000  and  16,000,000  gallons.  Mean- 
Avhile  the  exported  goods  were  coming 
back.  To  put  an  end  to  the  embarrass- 
ment distillers  representing  90  per  cent, 
of  the  producing  capacity  of  Kentucky 
held  a  meeting  at  Louisville  on  June  9, 
1887,  and  agreed  that  not  a  gallon  should 
be  manufactured  by  the  establishments 

'  Report  of  the  "  Whiskey  "  Investigation  by  the  House 
Committee  in  1888,  p.  4. 


Liquor  Traf&c] 


[Liquor  Traffic. 


represented  during  the  year  beginning 
witii  July  1, 1887.  This  had  the  desired 
effect,  and  in  that  year  only  3,5()0,()()0 
gallons  of  "  fine  "  whiskey  were  distilled 
in  the  State.'  The  remedy  thus  applied 
can  be  made  available  in  all  future 
emergencies.  The  Kentucky  distillers 
have  discovered  the  expediency  of  united 
action,  and  are  prepared  to  adopt  any 
measures  that  will  promote  the  general 
prosperity  and  efficiency  of  their  "  trade." 
They  hold  aloof  entirely,  however, 
from  the  great  organization  of  spirit- 
distillers  at  the  North,  and  are  not 
even  associated  with  the  producers  of 
so-called  "fine"  whiskey  in  Pennsyl- 
vania. Maryland  and  other  States.  These 
last-mentioned  producers,  in  turn,  ap- 
parently have  no  formal  connection  with 
other  branches  of  the  "trade";  and, 
like  the  spirit-distillers  of  the  South  out- 
side of  Kentucky,  do  not  seem  to  operate 
under  any  definite  limitations.  But 
these  comparatively  independent  "  fine  " 
whiskey  distillers  of  Pennsylvania  and 
Maryland  produce,  in  the  aggregate,  not 
more  than  4,5()(),0()0  gallons  annually, 
which  is  only  about  5  per  cent,  of  the 
whole  quantity  of  grain  spirits  manufac- 
tured in  the  country. 

As  the  Kentucky  manufacturers  repre- 
sent nearly  the  entire  "  fine "  whiskey 
interest,  so  the  Illinois  and  Ohio  dis- 
tillers represent  the  great  producers  of 
alcohol  and  raw  spirits.  In  the  North- 
ern States  (including  Missouri  and  Penn- 
sylvania but  not  including  Maryland), 
probably  from  85  to  90  per  cent,  of  the 
55,00(),()0()  or  00,000,000  gallons  of  grain 
spirits  distilled  in  that  section  in  the 
fiscal  year  1888-9  was  alcohol  and  crude 
liquor,  not  subjected  to  the  "ageing" 
process  but  thrust  upon  the  market  for 
immediate  consumption.  In  the  Con- 
gressional investigation  already  alluded 
to  it  was  found  that  these  Northern 
spirit-distillers,  at  a  meeting  held  in 
Chicago  on  the  10th  of  May,  1887,  had 
banded  themselves  into  a  "  trust,"  known 
as  the  Distillers  and  Cattle-Feeders' 
Trust,  which  within  a  single  vear's  time 
had  become  powerful  enough  to  control 
all    but    10   or    15   per  cent,   of  all  the 


'  Ibid,  p.  6. 

This  ii^  Mr.  Atherton's  estimate  ;  and  the  fitrures  for  the 
other  years  as  given  aliove  are  also  Mr.  Atherton's.  But 
the  Internal  Revenue  report  for  1888  (p.  59)  places  the  pro- 
duct of  bourbon  and  rye  whiskey  in  Kentucky  iu  the  tiscal 
year  1887-8  at  4,043,617  gallous. 


spirits  (apart  from  bourbon  and  rye 
whiskey)  produced  in  the  country — not 
omitting  the  South.  The  following  is 
an  extract  from  the  testimony  of  J.  B. 
Greenhut  of  Peoria,  President  of  the 
Trust  : ' 

"  Q.  How  much  alcohol  i.s  made  outside  of 
your  association  in  this  country  '^—A.  Strictly 
speaking,  of  alcohol  and  spirits  I  presume 
probably  10  or  15  per  cent. 

"  Q.  You  embrace  all  except  10  or  15  per 
cent,  of  alcohol  as  distinguished  from  whis- 
key '? — A.  Well,  we  also  produce  whiskey. 

"  Q.  A  little,  not  much? — A.  Considerable 
comparatively. 

"  Q.  About  what  per  cent,  of  j'our  total 
output  is  whiskey? — A.  I  should  judge  about  15 
per  cent. ' 

"  Q.  Where  is  the  remaining  10  or  15  per 
cent,  [of  alcohol,  spirits,  etc.,  produced  out- 
side the  Trust]  made  ? — A.  It  is  scattered  ; 
Chicago,  Cincinnati,  and  some  in  New  York,  and 
in  Indiana  and  Kentucky,  and  some  here  and 
there  ;  and  I  think  a  little  of  it  in  Tennessee, 
and  there  is  a  good  deal  also  made  that  we 
know  nothing  of  tiiat  does  not  pay  the  tax — 
moonshine  whiskey." 

This  Trust,  according  to  President 
Greenhut,  was  organized  for  precisely 
the  same  object  that  the  Kentucky  dis- 
tillers had  in  view  when  they  made  their 
agreement  in  1887— to  prevent  overpro- 
duction and  bring  about  intelligent  co- 
operation. In  the  years  1878-81  there 
sprang  up  an  extensive  demand  in  foreign 
countries  for  American  alcohol  and 
spirits  ;  and  to  take  advantage  of  the 
profitable  export  trade  that  seemed  to 
be  opening  up,  many  new  distilleries 
were  built  and  the  producing  capacity 
of  the  "trade"  was  increased  to  great 
proportions.  But  in  1882  the  German 
Government  passed  an  act  granting  a 
bounty  on  all  spirits  exported  by  Ger- 
man distillers  ;  and  this  measure  at  once 
rained  the  American  export  business. 
Then  the  large  spirit-distillers  in  the 
United  States  recognized  that  combina- 
tion was  advisable  in  order  to  diminish 
the  producing  capacity,  prevent  over- 
production, maintain  prices  and  insure 
profits.  The  various  distilling  prop- 
erties  were  purchased  outright  by   the 


=  Ibid,  p.  72. 

5  The  '•  whiskey  "  produced  by  the  Trust  is,  however, 
of  the  vilest  quality.  There  is  no  pretense  of  •■  ageins;  " 
it,  in  order  to  eliminate  the  fusel  oil  and  other  impurities, 
and  nearly  all  of  it  is  practically  of  no  higher  grade  than 
raw  spirits.  For  example,  more  than  3.8(X).000  gallons 
produced  in  Indiana,  in  the  tiscal  year  1888-9,  is  classed 
by  the  Internal  Revenue  report  for  that  year  (p.  78)  as 
"  whiskey  "  and  "  spirits  and  whiskey  ;  "  but  Indiana  is 
not  known  to  the  "  trade  "  as  one  of  the  States  in  which 
any  considerable  amount  of  honest  whiskey  is  distilled. 


Liquor  Traffic] 


378 


[Liquor  Traffic. 


Trust  (certificates  of  stock  in  the  Trust 
being  given  to  the  former  owners),  and 
the  Trust  obtained  arbitrar}^  control  over 
each  establishment,  with  power  to  dictate 
its  production  or  to  suspend  it  entirely. 
At  the  time  of  the  investigation  (accord- 
ing to  President  Greenhut)  the  capital 
of'the  Trust  amounted  to  130,000,000.1 
In  the  early  part  of  1890  the  Trust  was 
converted  into  an  incorporated  company, 
under  the  laws  of  Illinois,  taking  the 
name  of  the  Distilling  and  Cattle-Feed- 
ing Company.  This  change  was  deemed 
prudent  as  a  means  of  protecting  the 
organization  from  possible  anti-trust  leg- 
islation or  judicial  decisions.  Its  power 
has  steadily  increased,  and  apparently 
it  is  now  able,  if  it  chooses  to  do  so,  to 
control  the  manufacture,  the  price  and 
the  sale  of  every  gallon  of  grain  spirits, 
excepting  the  so-called  "  fine  "  whiskey. 

The  federation  and  concentration  of 
the  brewers,  distillers  and  wine-makers 
is  the  chief  source  not  only  of  the  traf- 
fic's national  wealth  and  power  but  of 
nearly  all  the  separate  elements  of  its 
activity  and  influence.  From  the  facts 
already  stated  the  first  part  of  this 
conclusion  may  indeed  be  taken  for 
granted ;  for  it  is  needless  to  demonstrate 
the  proposition  that  for  acquisitive  pur- 
poses riches  can  be  most  effectively  util- 
ized when  invested  co-operatively  and 
wielded  by  a  few  chosen  executives,  or 
that  for  objects  of  aggression  and. defense 
the  degree  of  co-operation  determines 
the  degree  of  strategic  advantage. 
And  in  a  more  detailed  survey  of  the 
organized  strength  of  the  liquor  "  trade  " 
at  large  the  prestige  of  the  manufac- 
turers is  the  most  conspicuous  thing. 

There  are  two  great  organizations  that 
act  politically  and  represent  the  "  trade" 
throughout  the  country  in  a  comprehen- 
sive manner — the  United  States  Brew- 
ers' Association,  which  has  been  noticed 
above,  and  the  National  Protective  Asso- 
ciation. The  latter  was  founded  at  a 
convention  held  in  Chicago,  Oct.  18  and 
19,  188(3,  at  the  instance  of  distillers, 
brewers  and  Avholesale  liquor-dealers.  Its 
special  mission  is  to  raise  funds  by  assess- 
ments upon  members,  which  are  wholly 
used  for  counteracting  the  Prohibitory 
movement.  It  is  supported  mainly  by 
the  distillers  and  their  agents,  the  whole- 

1  Ibid,  p.  64. 


sale  whiskey-sellers;  a  distiller  is  at  its 
head  and  its  headquarters  are  in  Louis- 
ville, one  of  the  most  important  distil- 
lers' centers.  A  third  national  organiza- 
tion, also  controlled  by  the  distillers  and 
wholesalers,  is  the  Wine  and  Spirit  Trad- 
ers' Society,  with  headquarters  in  New 
York.  The  results  of  its  political  work 
have  not  been  frequently  shown,  but  its 
power  was  indicated  by  the  alacrity  with 
which  Congress  submitted  to  its  dicta- 
tion when  the  McKinley  tariff  rates  of 
1890  were  fixed.  (See  United  States 
Government  and  the  Liquor  Traffic.) 
Even  among  the  liquor  organizations  in 
the  separate  States  the  manufacturers' 
societies  are  frequently  the  strongest  and 
most  energetic.  There  are  compact  or- 
ganizations of  brewers  in  a  number  of 
States,  notably  New  York,  New  Jersey, 
Pennsylvania  and  Ohio.  In  Prohibitory 
Amendment  campaigns  the  brewers, 
through  State  associations,  have  often 
constituted  the  chief  factor  of  the  oppo- 
sition. 

Retailers. — The  retail  traffic  is  every- 
where organized,  but  in  most  instances 
for  local  and  immediate  purposes  only. 
Almost  without  exception  the  saloon- 
keepers are  ignorant  and  brutal  individ- 
uals, and  their  trade  policy  resembles 
that  pursued  by  criminal  bands.  They 
are  forever  at  war  with  the  restrictions 
of  the  law  and  the  opinion  of  the  moral 
and  religious  public;  and  the  value  of 
their  organized  efforts,  from  a  general 
pro-liquor  point  of  view,  lies  in  their 
ability,  locally,  to  perform  all  conceiv- 
able dirty  work  with  success — to  defy 
restrictive  laws  and  make  them  ridicu- 
lous, to  sell  the  maximum  quantity  of 
liquor,  to  take  the  leadership  of  the  des- 
perate, corrupt  and  criminal  classes  of 
voters,  to  manipulate  primaries  and  con- 
ventions, to  defeat  good  and  elect  bad 
candidates  for  office,  and  to  compel  the 
police  and  other  authorities  to  disregard 
their  duties  and  their  oaths.  While  the 
retailers  are  very  active  and  powerful  in 
local  affairs  their  open  interference  in 
larger  fields  is  discouraged  by  all  the 
discriminating  persons  interested,  be- 
cause it  is  not  desirable  to  have  the 
traffic  formally  represented  by  ruffians, 
blackguards  and  illiterates.  On  the  other 
hand  the  saloon-keepers  bear  themselves 
with  a  certain  conceit  and  insist  upon 
instituting  State  associations,  which  in- 


Liquor  Traffic] 


379 


[Liquor  Traffic. 


veigh  against  Prohibition  and  restric- 
tion, scurrilously  attack  honest  men  and 
good  women,  broadly  hint  at  the  success- 
ful use  of  corrupt  methods  in  Legisla- 
tures and  elections  and  in  other  ways 
forcibly  call  attention  to  the  worst  as- 
pects of  the  liquor  cause. 

But  the  retailers  also  are  feeling  the 
discipline  of  concentration.  High  Li- 
cense is  reducing  their  numbers,  elimi- 
nating the  indiscreet  and  irresponsible 
rumsellers  and  bringing  the  saloon  busi- 
ness as  a  whole  under  systematic  man- 
agement. Since  practical  experiments 
have  shown  that  this  policy  promotes 
the  general  welfare  of  the  traffic  without 
diminishing  the  consumption  of  liquor 
or  disturbing  the  characteristic  methods 
and  influence  of  the  dealers,  the  entrench- 
ment movement  is  resisted  only  by  the 
short-sighted.  Li  forecasting  the  ulti- 
mate development  of  present  tendencies 
it  is  hardly  needful  to  take  into  account 
the  preferences  of  the  retailers  as  a  class. 
Even  now  they  are  not  an  independent 
element.  In  most  of  the  great  cities  the 
majority  of  them  operate  as  agents  of  the 
brewers,  who  select  or  approve  the  prem- 
ises, procure  the  licenses,  advance  the 
requisite  capital  in  whole  or  in  part,  and 
secure  themselves  by  chattel  mortgages. 
W.  J.  Onalian,  City  Collector  of  Chicago, 
in  January,  1888,  declared  that  not  less 
than  80  per  cent,  of  the  saloons  in  that 
city  were  owned  by  or  mortgaged  to  the 
brewers.  In  New  York  City  an  exami- 
nation of  the  records  showed  that  during 
the  eight  weeks  from  March  10  to  April 
25,  1888,  mortgages  or  renewals  of  mort- 
gages on  497  saloons  were  executed  in 
favor  of  43  brewing  firms,  the  aggregate 
value  of  the  mortgages  and  renewals 
being  $404,932.^  The  mortgaged  saloons, 
or  "tied  houses,"  represent  a  consider- 
able part  of  the  investment  of  each 
brewer,  and  their  chief  business  object  is 
to  sell  and  advertise  the  beer  of  the  par- 
ticular brewery  to  which  they  are  bound. 
Frequently  the  signs  displayed  in  front 
of  licensed  premises  announce  the  name 
of  the  brewing  establishment  in  large 
characters,  but  do  not  show  the  name  of 
the  saloon-keeper.  The  prevalence  of 
this  system  is  another  evidence  of  the 
concentration  that  the  whole  traffic  has 
undergone. 

1  Political  Prohibitionist  for  1888,  p.  159. 


General  Conclusions. — As  effect  fol- 
lows cause,  temperance  success  is  made 
more  difficult  by  the  conditions  which 
we  have  reviewed.  A  fight  with  a  single 
saloon  means  a  fight  with  a  combination 
of  saloons  and  with  the  brewer  and  whole- 
saler whose  interests  are  involved;  a 
general  conflict  with  the  retail  traffic  in 
city,  county  or  State,  means  a  conflict 
with  all  the  local  societies  and  also  (if 
the  issues  at  stake  are  important)  with 
great  national  organizations  which  are 
always  ready  for  battle  and  can  compel 
enormous  campaign  contributions  with 
perfect  ease.  Yet  it  must  be  remembered 
that  when  the  existence  of  a  long-estab- 
lished institution  is  threatened  a  solid 
confederation  of  its  defenders  is  inevit- 
able ;  and  that  the  sooner  such  a  confeder- 
ation is  effected  the  sooner  will  all  the  con- 
ditions of  warfare  be  understood,  the  pre- 
liminary results  be  reckoned  at  their  cor- 
rect worth  and  the  decisive  operations  be 
inaugurated.  Therefore  if  the  aggres- 
sors aim  to  definitely  overthrow  rather 
than  to  harrass  the  enemy,  there  are 
compensations  for  any  prejudicial  con- 
sequences inflicted  by  vigorous  resistance : 
the  issues  are  drawn  so  that  none  can 
mistake  them,  the  co-operation  of  hither- 
to indifferent  forces  is  gained,  the  merits 
of  the  cause  receive  more  serious  con- 
sideration from  the  public  at  large  and 
the  ground  subsequently  won  will  be  more 
secure. 

RESOURCES     AND      NUMBERS — THE      RUM 
POWER. 

Capital  Invested. — The  total  capital 
invested  in  the  various  departments  of 
the  traffic  cannot  be  satisfactorily 
reckoned.  According  to  the  Census  of 
1880 "  there  were  invested  in  the  manu- 
facturing branches  in  that  year  the  fol- 
lowing amounts:  Malt  liquors,  191,- 
208,224;  distilled  liquors,  124,247,595; 
vinous  liquors,  $2,581,910.  We  have 
seen  that  in  December,  1890,  82  brew- 
eries which  had  recently  been  consoli- 
dated had  a  stated  capitalization  of 
more  than  $81,000,000;  while  several  of 
the  greatest  breweries,  with  more  than 
1,850  others,  were  not  included  in  this 

'  Application  was  made  by  tlie  editor  of  this  Cyclopiedia 
to  the  Superintendent  of  the  11th  Cenpus  for  estimates  of 
the  amouuts  of  capital  invested  iu  liquor  manufacture  in 
1890  ;  but  a  communication  from  the  Census  oftice.  re- 
ceived just  before  this  part  of  the  book  was  given  to  the 
printer,  stated  that  the  data  then  in  hand  were  not  suffi- 
cient to  justify  the  desired  estimates. 


liiquor  Traffic] 


J80 


[Liquor  Traffic. 


number.  We  have  also  seen  that,  on  the 
testimony  of  the  President  of  the  Dis- 
tillers and  Cattle-Feeders'  Trust,  the 
capital  stock  of  that  organization  was 
|30,00().()()()  in  1888,  and  tliat  this  sum 
represented  none  of  the  capital  invested 
in  distilleries  in  the  South,  or  in  the 
"•fine"  whiskey  business  in  Pennsylvania 
or  other  Northern  States,  or  in  the 
molasses  distilleries,  or  in  the  more 
than  3,000  fruit  distilleries.  Manifestly, 
therefore,  it  must  be  concluded  (1)  that 
the  Census  figures  of  1880  were  very 
much  too  low,  1  or  (2)  that  the  capital  of 
the  brev/ers  and  distillers  has  been  vastly 
increased  since  that  year,  or  (3)  that  the 
English  syndicates  and  Whiskey  Trust 
have  been  over-capitalized  or  "stock- 
watered"  to  a  great  extent.     It  is  quite 

'  It  is  scenerally  recognized  by  statisticians  that  the 
estimates  in  the  Census  for  1880  of  capital  invested  in 
manufacturing  interests  are  conservative,  including  paid- 
up  capital  only.  Besides,  the  Census  Bureau  disregards 
capital  invested  in  many  small  establishments.  For  ex- 
ample, the  Census  estimate  of  $34,247,595  invested  in  the 
manufacture  of  distilled  liquors  represented  only  844  dis- 
tilling establishments  (■•  Compendium  of  the  10th  Census," 
p.  9:W);  yet  the  Internal  Revenue  records  show  that  4,661 
distilleries  were  operated  in  the  fiscal  year  ending  Juue 
30,  1880. 

Indeed,  the  unsatisfactoriness  of  the  Census  statistics 
of  capital  invested  is  frankly  admitted  by  Francis  A. 
Walker,  Superintendent,  who  says  ("10th  Census  of  the 
United  States,"  vol.  2,  p.  xxxix)  : 

"  The  statistics  of  capital  invested  in  manufacture,  as 
obtained  by  a  popular  canvass,  in  w  hich  the  statements  of 
individual  proprietors  are  necessarily  accepted,  and,  in- 
deed, are  by  the  law  intended  to  be  accepted,  are  al- 
ways likely  to  be  partial  and  defective,  far  beyond  the 
limit  of  error  which  pertains  to  other  classes  of  statistics 
derived  from  the  manufacturing  schedule.  .  .  .  When  the 
Committee  of  Congress  was  in  1869  engaged  in  preparing 
a  bill  providing  for  the  taking  of  the  9th  Census,  the 
present  writer  [Francis  A.  Walker]  addressed  to  that 
Committee  a  recommendation  that  the  inquiry  regarding 
the  amount  of  capital  invested  be  omitted  from  the  manu- 
facturing schedule;  and  ...  in  commenting  .  .  .  used 
the  following  language  (see  volume  on  'Industry  and 
Wealth,'  9th  Census,  pp.  381-2):  'The  Census  returns  of 
capital  invested  in  manufactures  are  entirely  untrust- 
worthy aiid  delusive.  The  inquiry  is  one  of  which  it  is 
not  too  nuK'h  to  say  that  it  ought  never  to  be  embraced  in 
the  schedules  of  the  Census,  not  merely  for  the  reason 
that  the  results  are  and  must  remain  wholly  worthless, 
.  .  .  but  also  because  the  inquiry  in  respect  to  capital 
creates  more  prejudice  and  arouses  more  opposition  .  .  . 
than  all  the  other  inquiries.  .  .  .  Manufacturers  resent 
[it]  as  needlessly  ohstrusive,  .  .  .  and  the  majority  of 
them  could  not  answer  to  their  own  satisfaction  even  if 
disposed.  No  man  in  business  knows  what  he  is  worth — 
far  less  can  say  what  portion  of  his  estate  is  to  be  treated 
as  capital.  With  .  .  .  corporations,  having  a  determinate 
capital  stock,  the  difficulty  .  .  .  becomes  very  much  re- 
duced; yet  .  .  .  the  difference  caused  by  returning  such 
capital  stock  at  its  nominal  value  on  the  one  hand,  or  its 
actual  selling-price  on  the  other,  whether  above  or  below 
par,  might  easily  make  a  difference  of  50  to  75  percent,  in 
the  aggregate  amount  of  capital  stated  for  any  branch  of 
industry.  Where  .  .  .  business  is  carried  on  outside  of 
incorporated  companies,  the  difficulty  of  obtaining  even 
an  approximate  return  of  the  capital,  .  .  .  irrespective  of 
the  reluctance  of  manufacturers,  becomes  such  as  to 
render  success  hopeless.  So  numerous  are  the  construc- 
tions, possil)le  and  even  reasonable,  in  respect  to  wliat 
constitutes  manufacturing  capital,  that  anything  like 
harmony  or  consistency  of  treatment  is  not  to  be  ex- 
pected of  a  large  body  of  officials  pursuing  their  work  in- 
dependently of  each  other.  The  Su|)erintendent  is  free 
to  confess  that  he  would  be  puzzled  to  furnish  a  definition 
(tit  for  i)ractical  use  liy  enumerators)  of  manufacturing 
capital,  or,  even  in  a  single  case,  with  complete  access  to 


certain  that  all  these  conclusions  are  to 
be  accepted.  The  reasonableness  of  the 
first  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  the  82 
syndicated  breweries,  capitalized  at  181,- 
000,000  in  1890,  produced  only  4,401,- 
177  barrels,"  or  something  more  than 
one-third  as  much  as  the  total  beer  out- 
put of  1880;  and  it  is  not  conceivable 
that  the  brewers  of  the  country  were 
able  to  manufacture  nearly  three  times 
as  much  beer  with  only  $91,000,000  in 
1880  as  82  brewers  produced  with  181,- 
000,000  in  1890 — even  making  very  gen- 
erous allowances  for  a  smaller  percent- 
age of  watered  stock  in  1880  than  in 
1890.  But  it  is  undoubted  that  there 
has  been  a  heavy  increase  in  invested 
capital  in  the  10  years;  this  is  shown  by 
the  doubled  production  of  beer  and  the 
development  of  the  wine  interest,  ^  not 
to  speak  of  the  capital  specially  attracted 
by  the  new  movements  that  we  have  out- 
lined. In  the  brewing  business  alone, 
if  the  capital  has  increased  in  proportion 
to  the  production,  the  amount  now  in- 
vested should  be  about  1180,000,000; 
but  it  is  unsafe  to  make  this  assumj^tion. 

the  books  of  a  manufacturing  establishment  conducted  by 
two  or  more  partners  and  with  the  frankest  exhiliit  of  the 
assets,  tiotli  of  the  firm  and  of  the  individuals  thereof,  to 
make  up  a  statement  of  the  capital  of  the  concern  in  re- 
spect to  which  he  would  feel  any  assurance.  When  to  such 
difficulties  in  the  nature  of  the  subject  is  added  the  re- 
luctance of  manufacturers  to  answer  an  inquiry  of  this 
character,  it  may  fairly  be  assumed  in  advance  of  any 
enumerations  that  the  result  will  be  of  the  slightest  pos- 
sible value.' 

"A  host  of  illustrations  might  be  offered.  .  .  .  Here 
are  two  shoe  factories  in  the  same  town,  each  employing 
200  workmen.  In  one  case  the  manufacturer  owns  the 
building  in  which  his  operations  are  carried  on.  and  re- 
ports his  capital  $75,000,  being  the  value  of  his  stock  and 
machinery  plus  the  value  of  the  building  ;  the  other  re- 
ports his  capital  $'25,000,  being  the  value  of  stock  and 
machinery  only.  The  latter  would  not  and  could  not 
rightfully  report  the  value  of  the  building  as  a  jiart  of  his 
capital.  .  .  .  Yet  that  building  is  devoted  to  manufactur- 
ing uses,  and  any  summary  of  the  manufacturing  capital 
of  the  country  which  omits  consideration  of  it  is,  in  so 
far,  defective.  ...  A  very  large  part  of  the  manufactur- 
ing establishments  of  a  city  like  New  York  or  Philadel- 
phia are  located  in  leased  buildings.  .  .  .  The  value  of 
utilized  water-powers  .  .  .  must  amount  to  a  vast  sum, 
.  .  .  being  the  property  of  water-power  companies  or  of 
the  individual  owners  of  adjacent  lands.  .  .  .  Take  still 
another  large  class  of  cases.  A  manufacturer  has  habitu- 
ally $50,000  worth  of  his  paper  discounted  by  one,  two,  or 
three  banks.  .  .  .  He  cannot  return  this.  ...  It  is  not 
his  manufacturing  capital,  for  the  best  reason  in  the 
world,  viz.,  that  it  is  not  his  property  at  all — it  is  the 
capital  of  the  banks  or  of  his  individual  creditors.  .  .  . 
Y'et  many  hundreds  of  millions  of  dollars  of  borrowed 
capital  are  liabitually  employed  in  prosecuting  the  manu- 
facturing enterprises  of  the  country." 

2  Brewers'  Journal,  Pec.  1,  1890. 

3  According  to  an  article  appearing  in  the  New  York 
Sun  for  Oct.  26,  1890,  which  (it  was  claimed)  was  based  on 
information  furnished  by  Mr.  Gardner,  Special  Agent  of 
the  Census  office  for  the  collection  of  statistics  relating 
to  viticulture,  the  amount  of  capital  now  invested  in  vine- 
yards and  wine-cellars  in  the  United  States  is  in  excess  of 
$155,(X)0,tXX).  This  large  estimate,  taken  in  connection 
with  the  figures  above  presented,  is  another  illustration  of 
the  great  embarrassments  encountered  in  such  an  iuvesti- 
gutiou  as  the  present  one. 


Liquor  Traffic] 


$81 


[Liquor  Traffic. 


All  that  can  with  certainty  be  said  is 
that  the  aggregate  amount  of  liquor- 
manufacturers'  capital  ($118,037,729) 
given  in  the  Census  for  1880  was  very 
much  below  the  actual  amount  for  that 
year;  and  that  no  estimate  of  the 
present  amount  is  likely  to  be  excessive 
if  so  calculated  as  to  avoid,  on  the  one 
hand,  the  disposition  to  obtain  a  total 
not  considerably  above  the  Census  figures, 
and  on  the  other  the  danger  of  un- 
reasonably approximating  a  total  that 
would  be  in  proportion  to  the  foregoing 
figures  of  English  syndicate  capitaliza- 
tion. 

It  is  even  more  difficult  to  estimate 
the  sums  invested  in  the  wholesale  and 
retail  departments.  The  most  that  can 
be  done  is  to  state  the  number  of  per- 
sons engaged,  and  leave  it  to  the  reader 
to  determine  the  probable  average  in- 
vestment. In  the  fiscal  year  1888-9 
there  were,  according  to  the  Internal 
Kevenue  report,  6,907  wholesale  and 
171,069  retail  dealers  in  malt  and  dis- 
tilled liquors — a  total  of  178,576.  Many 
of  these  Avere  druggists,  others  were 
hotel-owners  and  others  were  not  law- 
fully engaged  in  the  traffic  under  State 
regulations.  But  taking  these  facts  and 
others  into  account  it  is  probably  a  fair 
supposition  that  this  number  represents 
not  less  than  165,000  establishments  de- 
voted, practically,  to  the  exclusive  sale 
of  liquor  at  wholesale  or  retail,  and  based 
on  tolerably  solid  trade  foundations.  If 
it  is  assumed  that  the  average  investment 
per  liquor-dealer  is  $2,000,  the  aggregate 
capital  is,  therefore,  1320,000,000  ;  if 
$4,000,  $640,000,000,  etc. 

There  is  another  means  of  indicating 
the  magnitude  of  the  wealth  invested. 
The  total  annual  gross  receipts  of  the 
retailers  from  the  consumers  have  been 
conservatively  calculated  at  $1,000,000,- 
OJO.  (See  Cjst  o?  the  Drink  Traf- 
fic.) It  may  be  supposed  that  the  in- 
vestment necessary  to  produce  such  an 
income  is  of  courso  much  smaller  in  the 
retail  liquor  business  than  in  most  other 
lines  of  trade,  since  the  profits  are  far 
larger  and  are  won  without  special  ef- 
fort; but  when  it  is  remembered  that  the 
hazards  involved  are  greater,  that  rents 
and  insurance  come  higher,  that  license 
fees  averaging  perhaps  not  less  than 
$250  per  year  must  be  paid  by  each 
dealer,  etc.,  it  will  be  understood  that 


the  volume  of  the  capital  must  be  enor- 
mous, even  when  measured  with  the 
gross  receipts.  Indeed,  knowing  the 
amount  that  the  traffic  draws  from  the 
people  annually,  it  is  unnecessary  as  it  is 
Iniitless  to  strive  for  a  precise  answer  to 
the  question.  How  much  is  invested  ? 
Each  year  the  tremendous  sum  of  a 
thousand  millions,  freshly  obtained  from 
the  people,  is  handled  by  the  liquor-deal- 
ers, while  incalculable  hundreds  of  mil- 
lions of  accumulated  resources  are  held 
by  them  in  reserve.^ 

Ref^ources  of  the  Liquor  Organizations. 
— Upon  this  vast  wealth  the  leaders  of 
the  traffic  have  power  to  levy  indefi- 
nitely for  political  and  defensive  pur- 
poses, and  there  are  numerous  evidences 
that  the  power  is  constantly  exercised. 
The  great  national  organizations,  the 
United  States  Brewers'  Association  and 
the  National  Protective  Association,  are 
able  to  raise  large  sums  at  short  notice. 
The  brewers  are  so  well  organized  in  the 
separate  States  that  their  National  As- 
sociation apparently  does  not  address 
itself  to  detail  work,  but  stands  ready  to 
perform  any  national  or  special  service 
that  may  be  required.  Thus,  in  1887  it 
paid  to  two  lawyers  the  princely  fee  of 
$16,000  for  writing  briefs  in  a  single 
anti-Prohibition  case  (see  p.  92),  and 
donated  $13,000  to  liquor  managers  in 
Amendment  campaigns.  Apart  from 
extra  assessments  it  has  a  regular  annual 
income  of  more  than  $50,000,  raised  by 
a  tax  of  20  cents  on  each  100  barrels  of 
beer  manufactured,  and  by  requiring 
each  associate  member  to  pay  annual 
dues  of  $40.'  The  National  Protective 
Association  is  incessantly  engaged  in 
anti-Prohibition  agitation.  Its  regular 
funds  are  provided  by  yearly  assessments 
of  $25  to  $1,000  on  distillers  and  whole- 
salers, the  amount  paid  by  each  to  be 
in  proportion  to  the  business  done  dur- 


1  There  is  also  a  very  considerable  amount  of  capital 
invested  by  dealers  illicitly  or  transiently  engaged  in 
the  traffic,  and  by  persons  in  various  pursuits— coopers, 
hotel-proprietors,  hop-growers,  maltsters  (see  Malt),  ice- 
dealers,  manufacturers  of  distilling  and  1  rewing  appara- 
tus, bottlers,  etc., — whose  prosperity  is  associated  with 
that  of  tlie  drink-producers  and  sellers.  This  allied  cap- 
ital must  be  reckoned  in  taking  a  general  view  of  the 
tratttc's  resources. 

'^  The  Brewers'  Association,  previously  to  1S90,  assessed 
its  members  only  10  cents  per  100  barrels,  and  charged  only 
$20  for  annual  dues.  These  rates  were  doubled  in  1890, 
and  this  of  course  doubled  the  regular  annual  income. 
(See  '•Report  of  the  Thirtieth  Brewers'  Couveution," 
p.  45.) 


Liquor  Traffic] 


382 


[Liquor  Traffic. 


ing  the  year.'  But  the  money  thus  ob- 
tamed  is  only  a  part  of  its  resources  ; 
additional  sums  are  secured  by  system- 
atic solicitation  when  campaigns  are  on. 

Secrecy  is  one  of  the  essential  rules  of 

conduct  of  all  the  liquor  organizations, 
but  the  enormous  amounts  which  they 
expend  in  political  and  legislative 
machinations  and  to  defeat  Prohibition 
are  indicated  by  much  testimony  besides 
that  cited  above.  It  is  known  that  in 
the  Amendment  campaign  in  Pennsyl- 
vania, in  1889,  |-200,0()0  was  contributed 
in  the  city  of  Philadelphia  alone,  while 
a  single  wholesale  liquor  firm  advanced 
$38,000;  and  the  Philadelphia  Press 
estimated  that  in  the  whole  State  the 
subscriptions  aggregated  $1,000,000,  and 
additional  amounts  were  raised  outside 
the  State,  including  $100,000  from  the 
New  York  brewers  and  large  donations 
from  the  National  Protective  Associa- 
tion. (See  pp.  121-2.)  By  direct  testi- 
mony from  the  liquor  campaign  man- 
agers it  has  been  ascertained  that  in  the 
Ehode  Island  contest  of  1889  $31,000 
was  paid  for  the  single  object  of  ma- 
nipulating the  newspapers,  and  $6,000 
was  given  for  the  services  of  a  single 
politician  (see  pp.  125-G) ;  and  that  in 
Nebraska  in  1890  $25,000  was  furnished 
by  a  few  brewers  and  probably  an  equal 
amount  by  the  Executive  Board  of  the 
AVhiskey  Trust.'  It  is  notorious  that 
the  payments  made  by  the  liquor-sellers 
to  the  campaign  loaders  of  both  the 
leading  political  parties  are  steady  and 
heavy.  In  the  Presidential  fight  of  1888 
it  was  charged  that  the  National  Com- 
mittee of  one  of  the  parties  received 
1200,000  from  the  Whiskey  Trust,  do- 
of  a  discrimination  in 
distillers  embraced  in  a 
revenue  bill  championed  in  Congress  by 
the  opposing  party  ;  and  that  the  same 
Committee  obtained  generous  sums  from 
the    brewers    in    consideration    of    the 


pledge  of  its  Chairman  to  defeat  Pro- 
hibition in  Pennsylvania  in  1889. 

It  is  impossible  to  touch  this  subject 
of  the  means  at  the  command  of  Prohi- 
bition's organized  opponents  withoiit 
speedily  becoming  convinced  that  they 
are  practically  identical  with  the  surplus 
resources  of  the  traffic.  There  have  even 
been  cases  of  resistance  so  zealous  as  to 
bankrupt  the  persons  engaged  in  it.^ 

Numerical  Strength. — The  following 
table,  compiled  from  the  Internal  Reve- 
nue reports,  shows  the  numbers  of  distil- 
leries  and    breweries   operated    in    the 


United  States  each  year  since  1872 : 

Fiscal  Years 

Distilleries 

Ending 

Operated.' 

Breweries. 

June  30. 

1872 

3,132 

3.421 

187.3 

7..504 

3.5.54 

1874 

3..506 

2,524 

187.5 

4.608 

2,783 

1876 

2,918 

3.293 

1877 

4,510 

2.7,58 

1878 

5,652 

2,8;i0 

1879 

5,.346 

2,719 

1880 

4,661 

2,741 

1881 

5,210 

2,474 

1882 

5,022 

2,371 

18*3 

5.129 

2,.378 

1884 

4,738 

2.240 

18*5 

5,172 

2,230 

1886 

6,034 

2,292 

1887 

4,905 

2,269 

1888 

3,646 

1,968 

1889 

4,349 

1,964 

nated   because 
favor  of  small 


'  To  avoid  confusion,  the  reader  should  bear  in  mind  that, 
rot  all  of  these  distillers  are  included  in  the  tables  of  per- 
sons paying  United  States  special  liquor  taxes.  Distillers 
as  such  do  not  pay  special  taxes;  only  those  distillers  who 
are  also  engaged  in  rectifying  (as  defined  in  ^  3244  of  c.  3 
of  the  Internal  Revenue  laws  for  1889)  are  so  taxed.  Thus, 
although  there  were  4,:M9  distilleries  operated  in  1889,  the 
Internal  Revenue  returns  show  that  only  l,24;i  persons  paid 
the  rectifier's  special  tax  in  that  year.  This  distinction 
does  not  apply  to  brewers,  wiiolesale  liquor-dealers  or  re- 
tail liquor-dealers— all  of  whom  pay  special  taxes.  But 
the  distinction  as  to  distillers  must  be  remembered  by  all 
who  may  have  occasion  to  compare  the  figures  given  above 
with  those  appearing  in  the  original  Internal  Revenue  tables 
of  special  tax-payers— these  tables  being  commonly  (but 
erroneouslj')  regarded  as  embracing  all  manufacturers  of 
and  dealers  in  distilled  and  malt  liquors. 

In  the  following  table  are  shown  the 
numbers  of  distilleries  operated,  by  States 
and  Territories,  for  the  three  years  1872, 
1880  and  1889 : 


1  Wholesale  dealers:  those  doing  a  yearly  business  of  less 
than  $200,000,  $25;  those  doing  a  business  of  $200,000  to 
$500,CH)0,  $100;  those  doing  a  business  of  $500,000  to  _ 
$1,000,000,  $:300;  those  domg  a  business  of  more  than 
$1,000,000,  $500.  Distilleries  (whether  running  or  not): 
those  with  a  mashing  capacity  of  KW  bushels,  $100;  200  to 
300  bushels,  $2(X);  300  to  4tX)  bushels.  $400;  500  to  600 
bushels,  $500;  600  to  700  bushels,  $6(.X);  700  to  800  bushels, 
$700;  800  to  900  bushels,  $800;  9(X)  to  1,000  bushels,  $900; 
over  1,000  bushels,  %\,(m.— Political  Frohibitionist  for 
1888,  Ji.  25. 

2  See  confidential  letters  from  George  L.  Miller  of 
Omaha,  Neb.,  and  J.  B.  Greenhut,  President  of  the  Dis- 
tilling and  Cattle-Feeding  Company,  in  the  Voice  for  Oct. 
2,  9  and  16,  1890. 


States  and 
Territories. 


Alabama 

Arizona 

Arkansas 

California 

Colorado 

Connecticut 

Daliota 

Delaware 

District  of  Columbia  . 

Florida 

Georgia 


1872. 

1880. 

1889. 

68 

24 

64 

22 

262 

55 

"2() 

212 

1 

97 

85 
262"  • 

53 

"is 

'87 

646 

287 

177 

3  Notably  the  case  of  John  Walruff,  a  brewer  at  Law- 
rence, Klin.,  who  spent  his  entire  fortune  in  vainly  fight- 
ing the  Kansas  Prohibitory  law. 


Liquor  Traffic] 


383 


[Liquor  Traffic. 


States  and  Tkrritories. 


Idaho 

Illinois 

Indiana 

Iowa 

Kansas 

Kentucky 

Louisiana 

Maine 

Maryland 

Massachusetts . . 

Michi2:an 

Minnesota 

Mississippi 

Missouri 

Montana 

Nebraska 

Nevada 

New  Hampshire  . 

New  Jersey 

New  Mexico 

New  York 

North  Carolina. . 

Ohio 

Oregon 

Pennsylvania . . . . 
Rhode  Island  . . . . 
South  Carolina. . 

Tennessee 

Texas 

Utah 

Vermont 

Virginia 

Washington 

West  Virginia. . . 

Wisconsin 

Wyoming 


1873. 

1 

98 

121 

18 

2 
337 

3 

1 
28 
28 

1 

'4.3 
01 


3 

IIG 

2 

92 

166 

110 

6 

86 

1 

103 

246 

29 

"5 
342 

"78 
10 


1880. 


Totals. 


1 

.54 

79 

13 

4 

570 


23 
36 

'  i 

3 

81 

"i 

"  i 

no 

5 

40 

1,284 

87 

9 

96 

'46 
263 

13 

"9 
1,003 

113 
6 


1889. 


38 

67 

3 

1 

584 
13 

63 
15 

'3 

'79 


2 

73 

5 

58 

l,.3:i3 

68 

11 

116 

29 

316 

25 


3,133 


4,661 


769 

36 
6 


4,349 


Below  are  given  the  numbers  of  ])rew- 
eries,  by  States  and  Territories,  for  tlie 
same  years : 


States  and  Terkitoeies. 


Alabama 

Arizona 

Arkansas 

California 

Colorado 

Connecticut 

Dakota 

Delaware 

District  of  Columbia. 

Florida 

Georgia 

Idaho  

Illinois 

Indiana 

Iowa 

Kansas 

Kentucky 

Louisiana 

Maine 

Maryland  

Massachusetts 

Michigan 

Minnesota 

Mississippi 

Missouri  

Montana 

Nebraska 

Nevada 

New  Hampshire 

New  Jersey 

New  Mexico 

New  York 

North  Carolina 

Ohio 

Oregon 

Pennsylvania 

Rhode  Island 

South  Carolina 

Tennessee 

Texas 

Utah 


1873. 


5 

10 

1 

236 

36 

35 

6 

2 

15 

2 

4 

12 

316 

169 

171 

46 

46 

16 

1 

72 

56 

189 

114 

2 

124 

36 

23 

41 

5 

83 

8 

479 

1 

288 

31 

443 

4 

2 

11 

44 

16 


1880. 


1 
15 

223 
36 
20 
19 
7 
_   1 

'2 
11 

LSO 
96 

1.39 
39 
42 
11 

73 

.37 

141 

133 

88 
34 
34 
35 

0 
58 

3 

387 
2 

214 

33 

372 

r* 
4 

4 
4 

28 
17 


1889. 


196S- 
26« 

a 


3 

^     8 

108 
44 
41 
4« 
37 
lO'" 
1 1 

5612 
34 
138 
99 
.  .13 
49 
461'' 

401  6 

16 

'6"7 

40 

1419 

285 

140 
7719 
268 


States  and  Territories. 

1872. 

1880. 

1889. 

Vermont 

4 

13 

14 

17 

292 

'3 

15 

12 

323 

9 

22 
"2 

23 
'3 

176 
.  .^^ 

Virginia 

Washington 

West  Virginia 

Wisconsin 

WvominiT 

Totals ■ 

3,421 

2,741 

1,964 

1  Since  Oct.  2.  1876,  the  District  of  Columbia  has  been 
part  of  the  tliird  district  of  Maryland.  "  See  New  Mexico 
above.  ^  Including  Nevada.  ■•  including  Wyoming.  ^  in. 
eluding  Rhode  Island.  "  See  Nebraslia  anove.  '  See  Mary- 
land above.  "  See  Montana  above.  "  Including  Indian 
Territory,  i"  Including  Mississippi.  "See  New  Hamp- 
shire above.  12  Including  Delaware.  Dist.  of  Columbia  and 
two  counties  of  Virginia.  i3  See  Louisiana  above.  1^  In- 
cluding Idaho  and  Utah,  i^  Including  Dakota.  i^See 
California  above,  i'  Including  Maine  and  Vermont.  ■«  In- 
cluding Arizona,  i"  Including  Alaska  and  Washington. 
""See  Connecticut  above.  -'See  Montana  above.  22See  New 
Hampshire  above.  23  gee  Oregon  above.  ^^  See  Colorado 
above. 

The  Internal  Eevenue  reports  of 
wholesale  and  retail  liquor-dealers  are, 
for  several  reasons,  not  conclusive. 
Every  person  paying  the  United  States 
special  tax  on  wholesale  and  retail  liquor- 
dealers,  whether  regularly  engaged  in 
the  liquor  traffic  or  not,  and  whether 
selling  for  a  whole  year  or  for  but  a  sin- 
gle month,  week  or  day,  is  counted  in 
these  reports.  This  fact  should  not  be 
overlooked  in  analyzing  the  figures  that 
follow. 

Previously  to  1878  the  numbers  of 
Avholesale  and  retail  dealers  were  not 
specified  in  the  Internal  Revenue  rec- 
ords. For  that  year  and  the  succeed- 
ing years  the  numbers,  as  indicated  by 
the  records,  were :' 


Fiscal  Years 

Wholesale 

Retail 

Ending 

Dealers. 

Dealers. 

June  30. 

1878 

5,6.33 

16.5,804 

1879 

5,400 

165,:i38 

1880 

5,8.55 

173.400 

1881 

6,146 

179,176 

1882 

6,427 

176,776 

18&3 

7,229 

195,869 

1884 

6,996 

188.288 

18R5 

6,904 

190.994 

1886 

7,302 

198..530 

1887 

7,.5.50 

196,793 

1888 

7,185 

176.748 

1889 

6,907 

171,669 

The  numbers  of  wholesale  and   retail 
dealers,  by  States  and  Territories,  for  the 


1  In  the  Internal  Revenue  reports  the  different  kinds  of 
dealers  are  classitied  as  "Wholesale  Liquor-Dealers" 
(meaning  those  dealing  in  distilled  liquors),  "  Wholesale 
Dealers  in  Malt  Liquors  "  (meaning  those  not  dealing  in 
distilled  liquors),  "Retail  Liquor-Dealers  "  and  "Retail 
Dealers  in  Malt  Liquors."  We  have  combined  both  classes 
of  wholesale  and  retail  dealers  under  the  respective  heads, 
go  that  our  lists  of  wholesale  and  retail  dealers  include 
all  wholesalers  and  all  retailers. 


Liquor  Traffic] 


384 


[Liquor  Traffic. 


fiscal  years   ending  June  30,  1878 
June  30,  1889,  are  given  below : 


and 


States  and 
Tekbitories. 


Alabama 

Arizona' 

Arkansas 

California^ 

Colorado^ 

Connecticut'' 

Dakota^  

Delaware" 

District  of  Columbia' 

Florida 

Georgia 

Idaho"* 

Illinois 

Indiana 

Iowa 

Kansas'" 

Keiituck}' 

Louisiana'" 

Maine" 

Maryland' 2 

Massachusetts   

Michigan 

Minnesota 

Mississippi' 2 

Missouri 

Montana'* 

Nebraska"' 

Nevada'" 

New  Hampshire".. 

New   Jersey 

New  Mexico'" 

New  York 

North  Carolina 

Ohio 

Oreiion'" 

Peniisylvania 

Khode  Island-o 

South  Carolina 

Teiniessee 

Texas 


Utab^i 

Vermont^-  .... 

Virginia 

Washinijton^^  . 
West  Viri^inia. 
Wisconsin  .... 
Wyoming^''  . . . 


Totals. 


Wholesale 
Dealers. 


1878. 


1889. 


Retail 
Dealers. 


1878. 


1889. 


53 
21 
43 

293 
55 

104 
23 
14 

ii 

85 

9 

a34 

125 

114 

44 

254 

192 

13 

217 

296 

118 

67 

62 

261 

42 

46 

23 

32 

85 

21 

942 

44 

446 

19 

503 

67 

.38 

125 

164 

19 

6 

70 

11 

19 

97 


5.632 


46 

41 
.512 
109 
209 


20 
75 

443 
167 
85 
28 
220 
170 

'i8.3 
353 
174 
140 

271 

92 

173 

"'ei 

255 

66 

1,279 

33 

541 
66 

555 

"'i7 

69 

217 


167 


6,907 


1,730 
403 

1,423 

8,785 
904 

2,799 
608 
625 

513 
2,300 

215 
11,133 
4,837 
4,350 
1,083 
3,963 
3.506 

487 
4,887 
6,775 
5.095 
2,203 
1,770 
6,082 

429 
1.001 

989 

928 
6,2.59 

406 

28.149 

1,779 

13..379 

934 
16,190 
1,410 
1,3.37 
3,104 
3,704 

361 

444 
2,.384 

292 

731 
4,964 

269 


165,804 


879 

"811 

1.3,029 

2,623 

4,340 


352 
1,610 

12,278 
6,214 
2,981 
1.350 
3,308 
5,679 

6.22.3 
5,482 
6,050 
2,749 

5,709 
2,151 
3,534 

2..320 
6,840 
1,401 

33,387 
1.2';  3 

12,330 
1,993 
9,908 

'830 
1,059 
3,318 


2,211 

'oii) 

6,.^55 


171,669 


'  See  New  Mexico  above.  "^  Including  Nevada  from  Oct. 
1,  1883  to  July  31,  1884,  and  since  .July  1,  1887.  3  Including 
Wyoming  since  Aug.  15.  1883.  ^  Including  Rhode  Island 
since -lulv  1,  1887.  ^  See  Nebraska  above.  *  Including  9 
counties  of  Maryland  from  Oct.  2,  1876  to  June  30,  1887, 
two  counties  of  Virginia  from  June  19,  1877  to  June  30,1887, 
and  part  of  the  collec-tion  district  of  Maryland  since  July 
1,  1887.  'See  Maryland  above,  ^gge  Montana  above. 
"  Including  Indian  Territory  since  Aug.  8,  1881.  '"  Includ- 
ing Mississippi  since  July  1,  1887.  "  See  New  Hampshire 
above.  '2  Including  District  of  Columbia  from  Oct.  3, 1870 
to  June  30,  1887,  and  States  of  Maryland  and  Delaware  and 
District  of  Columbia  since  .luly  1,1887.  '^  See  Louisiana 
above.  '*  Including  Idaho  since  Aug.  20.  1883,  and  Utah 
from  Aug.  20.  1883  to  July  31,  1884,  and  since  Julv  1.  1887. 
»5  Including  Dakota  since  Aug.  20. 188;i.  '"  Including  Utah 
from  Aug.  1,  1884  to  June  30,  1887;  see  California  above. 
"  Includins,'  Maine  and  Vermont  since  July  1,  1887.  "*  In- 
cluding Arizona  since  Sept.  5.  1883.  ''■'  Including  Alaska 
since  Dec.  27,  1872,  and  Washington  Territory  since  Sept. 
1,  1883.  20  See  Connecticut  above,  ^i  y^g  Montana  and 
Nevada  above.  22  j^gy  Kew  Hampshire  above.  ^^  See 
Oregon  above.    ^*  See  Colorado  above. 

From  these  statistics  it  appears  that 
the  number  of  establishments  manufac- 
turing or  selling  liquors  (exclusive  of 
those  in  which  only  vinous  liquors  were 
made  or  vended)  increased  from  179,918 


in  1878  to  214,158  in  1886,  and  that  since 
1880  there  was  an  annual  decrease,  the 
number  having  fallen  to  184,889  ^  in  1889 
— a  decrease  of  nearly  30,000  in  three 
years.  We  have  already  pointed  out  tliat 
many  Avho  pay  United  States  special  taxes 
as  wholesale  and  retail  liquor-dealers  are 
not  to  be  regarded  as  ruinsellers  proper. 
Making  allowance  for  this  fact  it  is 
probable  that  the  whole  number  of  places 
in  which  the  wholesaling  or  retailing  of 
liquors  is  carried  on  constantly  and  as  the 
sole  or  chief  feature  of  the  business,  may 
now  fairly  be  estimated  at  about  105,000; 
and  counting  distillers  and  brewers,  the 
number  of  manufacturing,  wholesale  and 
retail  liquor  establishments  (distilled  and 
malt)  is  therefore- something  in  excess  of 
170,000.  On  the  basis  of  this  total  the 
number  of  persons  engaged  as  pro- 
jirietors,  active  or  silent  (including  those 
handling  vinous  liquors  only),  cannot 
reasonably  be  reckoned  at  less  than 
250,000. 

These  250,000  proprietors  constitute 
the  chief  division  of  the  "  rum  power." 
But  there  are  other  divisions  even  more 
formidable  numerically.  The  first  is  made 
up  of  employes  of  the  traflic.  x\ccordingto 
the  Census  returns,  there  were  employed 
in  the  three  manufacturing  branches 
33,234  males  over  10  years  of  age  in  the 
year  1880;  but  since  the  number  of 
liquor-manufacturing  establishments  in- 
cluded in  the  Census  records  for  that 
year  was  very  much  less  than  the  actual 
number,  and  since  the  volume  of  the 
brewing  business  has  doubled  in  the  last 
10  years,  it  is  probable  tliat  not  fewer 
than  50,000  adult  males  (exclusive  of 
proprietors)  are  now  employed  in  liquor 
jn'oduction.  There  are  no  reliable  sta- 
tistics of  persons  employed  in  the  whole- 
sale and  retail  departments ;  but  it  is  un- 
doubtedly fair  to  assign  at  least  three 
employes  to  each  two  Avholesale  and  re- 
tail concerns,  making  247,500  employes 
if  the  aggregate  number  of  wholesale  and 
retail  establishments  is  placed  at  the  low 
figure  of  105,000.  Besides  proprietors 
and  employes,  there  is  a  large  element 
made  up  of  saloon  dependents,  relatives 
of  manufacturers  and  dealers,  individuals 
engaged  in  allied  trades,  etc.,  whose  per- 
sonal interests  are  scarcely  less  actively 


'  These  totals  are  at  variance  with  the  footings  of  the 
tables  of  I'nited  States  special  tax-jjayers.  For  ex- 
planations, see  the  uote  to  the  table,  p.  382,  col.  2. 


Liquor  Traffic] 


385 


[Liquor  Traffic- 


enlisted  in  defense  of  the  traffic  than 
those  of  the  classes  already  mentioned. 
In  view  of  the  peculiarly  strong  influence 
exerted  hy  the  men  engaged  in  the  liquor 
business,  few  will  dispute  the  conclusion 
that  for  each  one  of  the  170,000  liquor 
establishments  there  are  at  least  five 
men  (besides  proprietors  and  employes) 
whose  opinions  and  votes,  so  far  as  the 
temperance  issue  is  concerned,  are  abso- 
lutely at  the  disposal  of  the  liquor-traffick- 
ers— -making  8,")0,000  in  all.  The  follow- 
ing recapitulation  shows  the  approximate 
total  numerical  strength  of  the  "rum 
power"  if  the  foregoing  calculations  are 
worthy  of  acceptance : 

Proprietor 250.000 

Employes  (manufacturing) 50.000 

Employes  (wholesale  and  retail) 247.5(X) 

Dependents  of  the  tratttc,  etc 850,000 

Total    1,397,500 

Our  estimates  represent  males  and 
voters  only.  The  entire  popular  vote  of 
the  United  States  in  1888  (including 
Territories)  was  about  11,700,000  ;  so 
that  the  rum  power  constitutes  nearly 
12  per  cent,  of  the  entire  electorate.  This 
is  a  most  formidable  balance  of  power, 
and  its  importance  is  increased  when  its 
distribution  is  analyzed.  The  pivotal 
State  of  the  Union,  politically,  is  New 
York,  which  contains  about  35,000  special 
liquor  tax-payers  ;  and  if  no  more  than 
five  votes  (including  proprietors  and 
employes)  are  represented  by  each  special 
tax  payment,  the  voting  strength  of  the 
liquor  traffic  in  this  one  State  is  175,000, 
or  more  than  13  per  cent.,  without 
taking  into  acconnt  the  numerous  voters 
whose  hostility  to  Prohibition  arises  from 
other  causes  than  personal  identification 
or  direct  association  with  the  traffic. 

ECONOMIC    AND    POLITICAL   RELATIONS. 

The  value  to  mankind  of  the  vast 
wealth  and  strength  of  this  traffic,  and 
the  influence  exercised  upon  the  varied 
interests  of  civilization,  are  to  be  esti- 
mated, as  in  the  case  of  any  industry  or 
craft,  by  a  dispassionate  insjDection  of 
its  fruits. 

The  claim  is  no  longer  made  by  intel- 
ligent persons  that  alcohol  in  any  of  its 
beverage  forms  is  indispensable  to  man 
in  the  broad  sense  that  food,  clothing, 
habitation,  etc.,  are  indispensable.  Even 
if  it  is  conceded  (and -the  temperance 
advocates  are  by  no  means  willing  to 
make  such  a  concession)  that  alcohol  is 


to  a  certain  limited  extent  indispensa-' 
ble  for  medicinal  and  similar  restricted 
purposes,  it  is  manifest  that  there  is  no 
actual  necessity  for  a  large  production  of 
beverage  liquors  or  for  a  liquor  traffic  of 
any  considerable  importance.  The  most 
favorable  view  of  the  drink  business  in 
its  present  state  of  development  is,  there- 
fore, that  it  exists  to  supply  a  luxury. 
But  when  it  is  remembered  that  tho 
characteristic  results  of  this  business  arc 
vice,  crime,  impoverishment,  insanity, 
and  misery  in  all  its  forms,  its  place  in 
the  economic  scale  is  clearly  not  with 
those  luxury-supplying  industries  that 
minister  peculiarly  to  refinement  and 
elegance,  but  with  those  abhorrent 
trades  (like  prostitution  and  gambling) 
that  prey  upon  the  innocence,  weakness 
and  folly  of  humanity.  If  exception- 
ally, or  even  in  many  instances,  the  use 
of  liquor  is  not  conspicuously  injurious, 
or  indeed  may  be  thought  promotive  of 
pleasure  and  sociability,  this  fact  does 
not  call  for  a  modification  of  the  severity 
with  which  the  general  liquor  traffic  is 
viewed  by  moralists.  The  most  promi- 
nent of  living  American  apologists  for 
conservative  or  "  expedient "  liquor 
legislation  has  frankly  declared  that  the 
saloon  is  "  evil,  and  only  evil,  and  that 
continually  ;  "  ^  and  it  is  in  vain  to  seek 
for  a  serious  contradiction  of  this  opin- 
ion from  any  disinterested  person  whose 
views  deserve  citation. 

Necessarily  the  traflic  pays  a  price  for 
its  existence;  and  it  remains  to  be  de- 
termined whether  this  price  so  far  com- 
l^ensates  the  community  for  the  evils 
wrought  as  to  neutralize  the  objections 
that  are  urged  against  the  business. 
Conclusions  may  be  reached,  first,  by 
logically  reviewing  the  general  questions 
involved  from  the  standpoint  of  morals 
and  public  policy ;  and  second,  by  reck- 
oning, from  available  statistics,  the  com- 
j^arative  money  value  of  the  contribu- 
tions made  by  the  traffic  to  the  commu- 
nity. The  outlines  of  the  logical  argu- 
ment are  presented  in  various  articles  in 
this  work,  especially  in  Ethics  of  Li- 
cense, License,  Personal  Liberty,  and 
Logic,  Liquor.  The  chief  statistical 
facts  are  examined  in  the  articles  on 
of    the     Drink     Traffic     and 


Farmers;  but  there  is  one   factor  not 

'  Dr.  Howard  Crosby,  in  a  speech  in  Brooklyn,  N.  Y., 
Feb.  3, 1887.    (See  the  Voice,  Feb.  10,  1887.) 


Liquor  Traffic] 


386 


[Liquor  Traffic. 


yet  considered — the  recompense  that  the 
traffic  gives  to  labor  and  to  various  in- 
dustries (apart  from  agriculture)  for 
services  performed,  material  furnished, 
etc. 

Labor  Employed  by  the  Liquor  Traf- 
fic. — An  immoral  and  damaging  trade 
cannot  be  economically  defended  on  the 
ground  that  it  employs  labor  and  to 
some  extent  enlarges  the  market  for 
useful  products.  The  questions  inevita- 
bly arise.  Does  not  such  a  trade,  by  rea- 
son of  its  demoralizing  and  damaging 
effects,  prevent  to  a  greater  extent  than 
it  promotes  the  employment  of  labor  ? 
Does  it  not  injure  or  ruin  more  men 
than  it  benefits  ?  Does  it  not  restrict 
more  than  it  enlarges  the  market  for 
necessaries  and  comforts  ?  Does  it  not 
interfere  with  more  than  it  stimulates 
consumption  ?  Even  if  the  wages  paid 
to  labor  and  the  volume  of  the  business 
transacted  with  other  industries  are  up 
to  or  above  the  average  the  general 
judgment  upon  such  a  trade  must  be 
made  up  without  regard  to  any  favorable 
reputation  that  it  may  have  from  this 
point  of  view. 

But  the  liquor  traffic  notoriously  gi 
to  labor  smaller  rewards,  on  the  basis 
the  capital  invested,  than  are  bestowed  in 
other  lines  of  trade.  Taking  its  three  man- 
ufacturing branches  (malt,  distilled  and 
vinous),  we  have  seen  that  in  the  3,152 
establishments  represented  in  the  Census 
of  1S80,  the  capital  invested  (according 
to  the  Census  estimates),  amounted  to 
$118,037,729,  while  the  average  number 
of  hands  employed  (adult  males,  females 
and  minors)  was  33,689  and  the  wages 
paid  for  the  year  1880  aggregated  $15,- 
078,579.  Although  the  Census  data 
under  this  head  were  not  complete,  the 
returns  for  the  liquor  establishments 
represented  were  probably  as  nearly  accu- 
rate (so  far  as  the  ratios  existing  between 
capital  invested,  laborers  employed 
and  wages  paid  are  concerned)  as  those 
given  in  the  Census  for  most  other  man- 
ufacturing industries.  In  so  broad  an 
inquiry  as  that  conducted  by  the  Cen- 
sus Bureau,  it  may  be  assumed  that  the 
proportion  of  errors  in  the  estimates  for 
one  department  of  manufacture  is  no 
greater  than  in  those  for  other  separate 
(le})artments.  On  the  basis  of  the  above 
figures,  an  investment  of  $3,504  of  capi- 
tal in  liquor  manufacture  employs  one 


man  one   year   and  pays  him  in  wages 

1448.  Taking  the  statistics  for  several 
other  leading  manufacturing  industries 
appearing  in  the  Census  for  1880,  the 
following  comparisons  are  obtained:' 


iNDUSTUr. 


Capital. 


*  i  b 
i:  1-  o 

PS  'J 
y  0^  a> 

a*  ^  - 
wo 


n 


<  03 

^    o 


Liquors 

Boots  and  Shoes 

Puniiturc' 

Carpenterina; 

Brick  and  Tile 

Carpets^ 

Cotton  Goods 

Woolen  Goods 

Sewing   jVlachines 
and  Attaeiiments  . 

Printing     ana    Pub- 
lishing  

Worsted  Goods 

Agricultural     Imple- 
ments   


'     1 

8.6 

4.6 

9.7 

8.4 

3.4 

3. 

504  Invested.  ' 

3.2 

V)   7 

3.3 

3.2 

\ 

2.2 

$448 
3,287 
1,847 
4,408 
1,702 
l,1.3o 
728 
942 

1,299 

1,699 
977 

867 


1  Including TurnitureCChairs).  ^  Including  Carpets  (Rag) 
and  Carpew  (Wood). 

Thyil  18,037,729  of  capital  Avhich,  in- 
vest^ in  liquor  manufacture,  gave  em- 
ployment  to   33,689    persons   and    paid 

em  $15,078,579  in  wages,  would,  if  in- 
ves^d  in  the  other  11   industries  speci- 
fiedwbove,  have  employed  134,833  per- 
and  paid  them  in  wages  $45,499,- 
-reckoning  on  the  basis  of  the  Cen- 
sus returns  for  1880. 

There  are  no  statistics  from  which  to 
compare  the  number  of  laborers  employed 
and  the  wages  paid  in  the  wholesale  and 
retail  liquor  traffic  and  in  other  branches 
of  wholesale  and  retail  trade.  But  it  is 
not  probable  that  the  share  given  to 
labor  by  the  liquor-dealers  is  proportion- 
ately more  generous  than  that  given  by 
the  liquor-manufacturers.  It  is  notori- 
ous that  very  little  labor  is  required  in 
the  ordinary  liquor-shop.  And  there 
are  but  few  who  will  claim  that  the 
demand  for  labor  which  is  to  be  credited 
to  the  rumsellers  is  a  wholesome  demanc] 
or  beneficial  in  any  sense  to  the  general 
interests  of  labor.  The  name  of  bar- 
tender is  odious  to  all  reputable  work- 
ingmen;  and  the  most  extensive  secret 
organization  of  wage-workers  ever  found- 
ed in  the  United  States  has  refused  to 
recognize  bartenders  as  worthy  of  fel- 
lowship with  its  members. 

Aside  from  and  above  all  other  reasons, 
the   liquor  traffic   is   economically  con- 

>  For  these  computations  the  editor  is  indebted  to  John 
Lloyd  Thomas.  The  figures  hitherto  presented  l)y  Mr. 
Thomas  iiave  bee«  specially  revised  and  corrected  for 
this  work. 


Liquor  Traffic] 


[Liquor  Traffic- 


demned  because  of  its  hnrtfulness  to  the 
community  on  grounds  of  public  policy. 
It  is  regarded  by  all  as  the  chief  pro- 
moter of  corruption,  crime  and  rascality 
in  politics,  and  of  wicked  and  discredit- 
able government.  Any  trade  whose  ex- 
istence is  in  jeopardy  will  naturally  ac- 
quire political  prominence.  If  the  trade 
in  question  is  a  thoroughly  bad  one  from 
the  moral  point  of  view,  the  political  in- 
fluence that  it  exerts  is  certain  to  be  evil 
in  a  corresponding  degree.  To  survey 
the  political  relations  of  the  drink  traffic 
is  therefore  to  present  in  wearisome  de- 
tail familiar  instances  of  odious  political 
conditions.  This  subject  may  at  pres- 
ent be  dismissed  with  the  general  state- 
ment here  made;  it  is  more  particularly 
considered  iu  the  article  on  Political 
Evils. 

character  of  liquor-sellers — policy 
and  methods. 

Nothing  more  distinguishes  the  drink 
traffic  from  all  legitimate  trades  than  the 
ignorance,  callousiiess  and  viciousness  of 
the  individuals  engaged  in  it.  Utter  in- 
difference to  religion,  morality,  intelli- 
gence and  the  rights  of  persons  is  one  of 
the  chief  attributes  of  the  typical  liquor- 
dealer.  Indeed,  it  is  all  but  impossible 
for  any  scrupulous  man  to  enter  this 
traffic.  Many  of  the  religious  denomina- 
tions absolutely  refuse  church  member- 
ship to  all  its  votaries.  Not  a  few  rum- 
sellers  profess  connection  with  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church  ;  but  this  church, 
through  its  highest  representative  body 
in  America,  has  in  the  most  solemn  lan- 
guage counseled  its  liquor-selling  mem- 
bers to  cease  their  disgraceful  work  and 
find  more  decent  means  of  livelihood. 
There  are  few  words  that  are  more  re- 
proachful in  the  estimation  of  cultivated 
people  iu  the  United  States  than  "  liquor- 
dealer."  The  number  of  native  Ameri- 
cans, or  persons  with  names  of  English 
derivation,  identified  with  the  "  trade," 
is  comparatively  very  small. 

The  policy  of  the  traffic  is  wholly  sel- 
fish, uniformly  obstructive  and  recklessly 
defiant.  A})parently  the  experience  of 
50  years  of  Prohibition  and  severe  restric- 
tion has  not  induced  the  liquor-sellers  to 
])articipate  in  practical  efforts  for  solving 
the  drink  problem.  No  co-operation  has 
ever  been  volunteered  or  is  to  be  looked 
for  from  them.     While    vast   numbers 


cf  thoughtful  persons  are  proposing  and 
seekingto  institute  various  remedies,  the 
men  who  are  pecuniarily  most  interested 
and  who  have  it  in  their  power  to  at  least 
give  evidences  of  a  disposition  to  correct 
abuses  are  flagrantly  exhibiting  their 
contempt  for  law  and  for  reform  senti- 
ment. The  total  inability  of  the  traffic 
to  demonstrate  its  right  to  exist,  by  se- 
riously meeting  the  questions  at  stake, 
caused  the  most  important  liquor  organ 
of  the  country  to  print  these  pregnant 
words  •} 

"It  is  all  very  well  for  the  wine  and  spirit 
trade  to  quiet  its  apprehensions  by  reverting  to 
the  majorities  against  Prohibition  in  the  Michi- 
gan, Texas,  Tennessee,  Oregon  and  West  Vir- 
ginia elections,  but  the  fact  is  still  apparent  that 
the  sentiment  against  our  business  is  constantly 
growing  in  this  country  and  gaining  friends 
among  the  most  substantial  element  in  our  popu- 
lation. The  question  is  a  grave  one,  and  the 
sooner  we  appreciate  fully  the  hold  it  is  securing 
on  the  public  mind  and  conscience  the  better.  It 
is  to  most  of  its  followers  what  the  slavery 
question  was  to  its  adherents — a  great  moral 
question.  The  good  that  alcohol  does  is  little 
referred  to  ;  the  harmful  effects  following  its 
abuse  are  seen  by  all  the  world.  To  check  this 
abuse  is  the  aim  of  the  conservative  classes,  and 
hoping  to  find  a  remedy  in  Prohibition  they  are 
rapidly  falling  into  its  ranks. 

"We  are  "all  familiar  with  society's  com- 
plaints against  the  liquor  traffic.  We  realize  that 
there  is  good  ground  for  many  of  these  com- 
plaints. We  deplore  the  facts,  but  stand  help- 
less and  without  a  word  of  advice  to  those 
who  would  correct  them.  Herein  lies  our 
weakness.  We  are  without  a  policy.  We 
see  young  men  becoming  dnmkards,  but  we 
offer  no  remedy.  We  see  old  men  turn  to  com- 
mon sots,  but  we  offer  no  remedy.  We  see  the 
scum  of  society  all  flocking  into  the  retail  liquor 
business,  but  we  offer  no  remedy.  We  see  these 
men  gain  control  of  city  governments,  but  we 
offer  no  remedy.  We  see  the  retail  liquor  busi- 
ness dragged  down  to  the  level  of  the  bawdy- 
house  and  little  hells  are  operated  in  public 
places  under  liquor  licenses,  but  we  offer  no 
remedy.  The  great  mass  of  our  fellow-citizens 
are  not  opposed  to  the  manufacture  or  sale  of 
wine,  beer  or  whiskey,  but  they  are  opposed  to 
the  abuses  i  ef erred  to  above,  and  demand  their 
correction.  They  are  right,  and  we  should  add 
our  protests  to  theirs.  We  should  define  an 
aggressive  reform  policy  that  will  attract  them 
to  our  standard.  We  should  demand  the  pas- 
sage of  restrictive  laws  that  will  prevent  any  but 
reputable  men  retailing  wines  and  spirits." 

Occasionally  fulsome  utterances,  prom- 
ising or  counseling  reformation  in  the 
traffic,  come  from  leading  representatives 
of  it  or  from  influential  organizations. 
For   example,  the    National  Protective 

J  BonforVs  Wine  and  Spirit  Circular  (New  York), 
Feb.  10, 1889. 


Iiiquor  Traf&c] 


388 


[Liquor  Traffic. 


Association,    at    its    first     Convention 
(Chicago,  Oct.  19,  1886),  declared  : 

"  Resolved,  That  we  recognize  to  the  ful- 
lest extent  th(!  duties  and  responsibilities  resting 
upon  us  as  citizens,  and  pledge  ourselves  to 
the  faithful  performance  of  every  duty.  " 

"Resolved,  That  we  mo.st  earnestly  favor 
temperance  and  most  strongly  condemn  in- 
temperance, and  appeal  to  every  member  of  the 
trade  to  make  proof  of  this  declaration  by  his 
daily  life  and  the  daily  conduct  of  his  bu.sine,ss. 

"  Resolved,  That  it  is  our  duty,  as  it  is  of 
all  good  citizens,  to  obey  the  laws  of  our 
country,  and  we  condemn  every  violation  of 
law,  regardless  of  the  damage  inflicted  in  its 
observance  upon  any  individual  or  upon  our 
general  business  interests. 

"Resolved,  That  we  are  in  favor  of  both 
public  and  private  morality  and  good  order  and 
popular  education,  and  that  we  feel  the  duty 
resting  on  us  as  individuals  and  as  a  trade  to 
work  with  the  great  body  of  our  people  in  the 
advancement  of  these  interests. 

"We  recognize  and  admit  the  evils  that 
result  from  the  abuse  of  all  kinds  of  liquors, 
and  condemn  in  the  strongest  terms  every  place, 
by  whatever  name  known,  that  encourages  or 
permits  tliis  abuse.  We  likewise  condemn  the 
indiscriminate  issue  of  licenses  and  the  estab- 
lishment or  toleration  of  places  open  to  disrep- 
utable characters  who  expo.se  their  depravity 
under  the  guise  of  intoxication.  Our  interests, 
as  well  as  our  duty  as  citizens,  demand  that  we 
enter  a  solemn- protest  against  all  such  places, 
and  pledge  ourselves  as  a  trade  to  co-operate 
with  the  ofilcers  of  the  law  and  with  all  good 
citizens  to  prevent  the  issue  of  licenses  to  all 
disreputable  places." 

But  these  sounding  pledges  and  rec- 
ommendations find  no  practical  obser- 
vance. In  no  locality  and  uiider  no  cir- 
cumstances do  the  rumsellers  live  up  to 
the  spirit  of  the  National  Protective 
Association's  platform,  unless  they  are 
compelled  to  do  so  by  public  officials 
whom  they  cannot  bribe  or  intimidate, 
or  by  public  sentiment  tliat  they  can- 
not override.  Indeed,  the  only  phases 
of  policy  that  have  the  cordial  support 
of  the  "  trade  "  are  the  ones  indicated  in 
the  following  resolutions,  from  the  same 
platform  : 

"  Resolved,  That  we  are  unalterably  op- 
posed to  Prohibition,  general  or  local.   .  .   . 

"Resolved,  That  in  our  natural  abhor- 
rence of  all  titled  rulers,  and  in  our  devotion  to 
liberty,  we  sliould  not  install  the  statute-book 
as  a  tyrant,  nor  establish  a  tyranny  in  the  law. 

' '  Resolved,  That  we  are  in  favor  of  absolute 
non-interference  in  politics  as  an  organization, 
e^v.cept  ill  such  places  and  at  such  times  as  united 
action  is  necessary  to  protect  ourselves  and  mcr 
business  against  such  legislation  as  seeks  to  destroy 
our  trade  and  not  to  remedy  evils  therein  exist- 
ing. 

"  Resolved,  That  we  endorse  the  license  sys- 


tem and  favor  the  enactment    of  laws  by  the 
States  imposing  a  reasonable  license.  ..." 

The  methods  by  which  the  "trade" 
prosecutes  its  policy  are  in  all  ways  re- 
pugnant to  fairness,  decency  and  intel- 
ligence.    Only  the  very  ignorant  rum- 
sellers  are  frank  enough  to  engage  in 
open  advocacy  of  the  traffic  on  the  merits 
of  the  questions  involved.     The  leaders 
admit  that  it  is  not  wise  to  defend  the 
business  of  making  and  selling  liquors, 
and  that  only  by  artful  evasions,  elabo- 
rate misrepresentations  and  corrupt  prac- 
tices   can   popular    majorities    for    the 
saloon  be  commanded.     There  was  never 
any  attempt  made   to   formally  discuss 
issues   from   the  pro-liquor    standpoint 
until   the   National  Protective  Associa- 
tion came  into  existence  in  188G.     This 
organization  announced  that  its  especial 
purpose  was  to  meet  the  Prohibitionists 
with   facts   and   arguments,   and   many 
pamphlets    and    tracts    were    prepared 
under  its  auspices.     But  in  the  Prohibi- 
tion campaigns  in  which  these  were  cir- 
culated,  the   name    of   the   Association 
responsible  for  them  was  suppressed,  or 
veiled   under   such   fictitious   names   as 
"  The  National  Publishing  Association  " 
and  "The  American  Printing  Company."^ 
The  same  organization,  as   a   means  of 
appealing    to  rural    voters,  published  a 
pretended    agricultural    journal,   called 
the  Farm  Herald;  but  similar  artifices 
were   resorted   to.'     The   United  States 
Brewers' Association  conducts  a  "liter- 
ary bureau,"  which   employs   unscrupu- 
lous and  bombastic  writers :  the  publica- 
tions emanating  from  it  are  invariably 
sophistical,  and  nevci   deal  in  an  honest 
way   with   facts   and   statistics.     It  has 
indeed  been  the  constant  endeavor  of  the 
representatives  of  the  traffic  to  prevent 
the  ascertainment  of  truth  and  to  avert 
a  fair  consideration  of  all  the  pertinent 
evidetice  produced  by  their  opponents. 
Their  steady  antagonism  to  the  demand 
for   an   impartial    investigation   of    the 
public  aspects  of  the  drink  question  by 
a  Federal  Commission  is  a  notable  illus- 
tration of  their  attitude.  The  exhaustless 
wealth  at  their    disposal  has   not   been 
used,  in  any  instance,  for  gathering  and 
presenting   weighty   testimony,  but   for 
propagating  the  most  scandalous  false- 
hoods  and   deceptions   and  for  bribing 

1  See  the  Voice,  June  13, 1889.    «  Jbid,  April  17, 1890. 


Livesey,  Joseph.] 


389 


[Livesey,  Joseph. 


the  editors  of  influential  newspapers. 
With  but  few  exceptions  the  special 
"  trade  *'  organs  of  the  traffic  display  no 
editorial  ability  or  intelligence.  The 
excepted  journals,  representing  the 
brewing,  distilling  and  wholesale  inter- 
ests, are  owned  by  wealthy  men;  but 
they  take  no  part  in  the  serious  discus- 
sion of  vital  subjects. 

The  methods  which  govern  all  the 
efforts  put  forth  by  the  traffic  in  seeking 
to  control  the  public  verdict  were  never 
hinted  at  more  authoritatively  or  signif- 
icantly than  by  the  representative  of  the 
pro-liquor  organization  that  had  charge 
of  the  anti-Prohibition  campaign  in 
Nebraska  in  1890.  In  a  confidential  let- 
ter he  wrote :  "  In  no  event  can  we  con- 
sent to  an  open  association  with  the 
liquor  interests  of  the  country."  ^  And 
the  principal  manager  of  the  saloon  can- 
vass in  Pennsylvania  in  1889,  in  confid- 
ing to  an  interviewer  his  experiences  and 
the  secrets  of  his  success,  laid  especial 
stress  upon  the  recommendation,  "  Never 
try  to  defend  the  saloon."  ' 

Livesey,  Joseph. — Born  in  Wal- 
ton, Eng.,  March  5,  1794;  died  Sept.  2, 
1884.  He  was  left  an  orphan  at  the  age 
of  seven  and  was  brouglit  up  by  his 
grandparents,  who  were  in  extreme  pov- 
erty. As  a  boy  and  youth  he  worked  at 
a  loom  in  a  damp  cellar.  lie  married  at 
the  age  of  21,  and  soon  afterward  aban- 
doiied  the  trade  of  weaver  and  engaged 
in  a  provision  business  in  Preston,  Eng., 
which  thrived  and  brought  him  a  com- 
fortaljle  fortune.  He  reared  a  family  of 
13  children. 

Despite  the  disadvantages  of  his  early 
years  he  acquired  a  fair  education  by 
reading  and  study  in  his  leisure  hours. 
In  January,  1831,  he  started  a  monthly 
magazine,  the  Moral  Reformer,  devoted 
to  social  reform.  In  it  he  advocated  the 
repeal  of  the  famous  Beer  act,  which 
had  come  into  operation  in  October, 
1830,  and  Avhich,  though  designed  to 
promote  temperance  by  discriminating 
.in  favor  of  beer,  greatly  stimulated  the 
drink  traffic  and  largely  increased    the 


'  George  L.  Miller,  of  the  Executive  Association  of  the 
"  State  Business  Men's  and  Bankers'  Association  of  Ne- 
braska," in  a  letter  (dated  Omaha,  Sept.  20.  1890),  to  A. 
Lucius  Rodman  of  Albany,  N.  Y.  The  so-called  "  Busi- 
ness Men's  and  Bankers' Association  "  was  a  li(}uor  organi- 
zation pure  andsiiOple,  masquerading  under  a  respectable 
name.    (See  the  Voice,  Oct.  2,  1890.) ' 

2  See  p.  122. 


I 


number  of  public  houses.  (See  p.  3G6.) 
On  March  22,  1832,  the  Preston  Tem- 
perance Society  was  organized,  on  the 
basis  of  abstinence  from  the  beverage 
use  of  distilled  spirits.  Livesey  was 
a  prominent  member,  but  the  aim  of  the 
Society  was  not  in  keeping  with  his  radi- 
cal views.  On  Aug.  22  of  the  same 
year  he  drew  up  a  pledge  of  abstinence 
from  all  intoxicating  drinks,  and  induced 
one  sympathizer,  John  King,  to  sign  it 
with  him.  The  Preston  Society  held  its 
next  meeting  on  Sept.  1,  and  the  ques- 
tion whether  the  new  idea  should  be  ap- 
proved w^as  hotly  discussed.  Livesey 
produced  the  following  pledge,  which 
had  been  signed  by  himself,  John  King 
and  five  others : 

"We  agree  to  abstain  from  all  liquors  of  an 
intoxicating  quality,  whether  ale,  porter,  wine 
or  ardent  spirits,  except  as  medicine. " 

It  is  recognized  by  all  that  these  "  seven 
men  of  Preston  "  were  the  founders  of  the 
movement  for  total  abstinence  in  Great 
Britain.     Livesey  was  the  father  of  the 
cause,  and  he  was  the  only  one  of  the 
seven   who    accomplished    any    notable 
work.      In  the  next  year   (July  8)   he, 
with  five  companions,  members  of  the 
Preston  Society,  began  a   week's   tour. 
They  rode  from  place  to  place,  going  as 
far  as  Manchester  and  Bolton,  displaying 
a  banner  on  which  a  temperance  motto 
was    inscribed,  distributing  tracts   and 
holding   meetings   in   the   open   air   or 
within-doors  as  occasion   offered.      The 
foundation  of   a   temperance  society  at 
Bolton,  on  July  22,  was  one  of  the  results 
of  this  tour.     But  in  the  time  that  had 
elapsed  since  the  pledge  was  signed  at 
Bolton,  Livesey  had   not  been  inactive. 
On  Feb.   28,   1833,  he  had  delivered  at 
Preston  his  celebrated  lecture  on  "  Malt 
Liquors,"  in  which  he  gave  facts  and  ar- 
guments to  controvert  the  popular  belief 
in  the  nutritive  qualities  of  beer.     This 
lecture,  in  condensed  form,  under  the 
title    of    "The    Great   Delusion"    was 
printed  and  very  widely  circulated,  and 
copies  of  it  were  sent  to  all  the  members 
of   Parliament.      The    Moral    Reformer 
was  discontinued  with  the  number  for 
December,  1833,  but  a  new  total  absti- 
nence Journal,  the  Preston  Temperance 
Advocate  (monthly)  was  issued  by  Liv- 
esey  in    January,    1814,      He   wrote   a 
number  of  tracts  and  made  many  ad- 
dresses, giving  his  "  Malt  Liquors  "  lee- 


Xiocal  Option.] 


390 


[Local  Option. 


ture  again  and  again.  In  its  printed 
form  it  passed  through  many  editions, 
and  probably  no  other  single  temper- 
ance argument  has  enjoyed  so  extensive  a 
dissemination  in  England.  Mr.  Livesey 
and  Dr.  F.  E.  Lees  acted  as  Secretaries 
at  the  session  of  the  British  Temperance 
Association  at  Leeds,  July  4  and  5, 
1837. 

Besides  the  periodicals  already  men- 
tioned, Livesey  published  Livesey' s  Moral 
Reformer,  a  penny  vv^eekly  begun  in  1838 ; 
the  Struggle,  started  in  1841  in  advocacy 
of  Free  Trade  and  the  repeal  of  the 
Corn  laws;  the  Preston  Guardian,  estab- 
lished in  1844  and  conducted  until  1859 
by  Livesey  and  his  son ;  Livesei/s  Pro- 
gressionist, issued  in  1853  and  devoted  to 
"temperance  and  physical,  moral,  social 
and  religious  reform,"  and  the  Staunch 
Teetotaler  (1867).  In  1868  he  published 
his  "  Keminiscences  of  Early  Teetotal- 
ism,"  and  in  1881  his  "Autobiography." 

Local  Option. — In  its  popular  ac- 
ceptation. Local  Option  is  that  legisla- 
tive mode  of  dealing  with  the  liquor 
traffic  which  permits  citizens  to  deter- 
mine by  vote  whether  the  sale  or  furnish- 
ing of  liquors  shall  be  allowed  in  a  given 
locality  during  a  specified  period,  usually 
of  one  or  two  years.  Local  Option  is  of 
two  kinds :  (1)  A  general  statute  may  be 
enacted  by  a  Legislature,  with  limita- 
tions, penalties,  etc.,  made  applicable  to 
counties,  townships,  municipalities  or 
other  small  districts,  which  territories 
may  avail  themselves,  by  popular  vote,  of 
the  provisions  of  this  general  law ;  or  (2) 
A  special  act  may  be  passed  for  a  given 
locality  with  restrictions,  penalties,  etc., 
applicable  to  that  territory  only.  Stat- 
utes of  the  second  variety  are  of  many 
kinds.  Some  of  them  provide  that  when 
Prohibition  shall  have  been  carried  in 
the  prescribed  territory  no  further  elec- 
tions shall  be  held  under  the  act.  This 
latter  status  can  hardly  be  called  Local 
Option  at  all,  since  the  option  feature  is 
eliminated  after  the  first  affirmative  vote. 
It  is  rather  Local  Prohibition,  effected 
by  the  Legislature  through  the  concur- 
rence of  the  popular  vote.  Many  coun- 
ties in  Georgia  have  secured  such  Local 
Prohibition.  In  a  majority  of  the  States, 
however,  the  option  principle  appears  in 
the  vote— usually  annual — of  towns  or 
townships,  upon  the  issue  of  license  or 
no-license  for  the  saloons. 


Local  Option  laws  differ  widely  as 
to  scope  of  restriction  and  also  as  to  ex- 
tent of  territory.  Some  prohibit  the 
vending  of  all  liquors,  spirituous,  malt 
or  cider;  others  prohibit  only  distilled 
liquors.  Some  provide  for  the  sale  of 
certain  liquors  for  medicinal  or  mechan- 
ical purposes;  others  make  no  such  ex- 
ceptions. Some  prescribe  penalties  for 
their  violation  for  the  special  territory 
concerned ;  others  leave  the  whole  mat- 
ter of  penalty  under  a  general  law,  as  in 
the  case  of  other  criminal  offenses.  In- 
deed, so  wide  are  the  variations  of  these 
statutes  that  only  their  general  inhibi- 
tory feature  allows  them  to  be  referred  to 
the  same  genus  of  laws,  while  their  local 
application  gives  them,  in  pojDular  con- 
ception, a  fancied  resemblance  to  demo- 
cratic methods. 

HISTORICAL   REVIEW. 

Local  Option  grew  up  as  a  kind  of 
natural  fungus  upon  the  license  system 
stock.  While  statutory  license  laws  were 
necessarily  of  legislative  origin,  and  nat- 
urally applicable  to  the  whole  territory 
under  the  jurisdiction  of  the  legislating 
power,  the  ajDplication  of  these  laws  and 
their  enforcement  were  committed  to 
local  authorities  in  whose  hands  were 
lodged  the  issuing  of  the  license,  com- 
monly the  amount  of  the  license  fee,  the 
infliction  of  penalties,  etc.  Thus  the 
people  learned  to  look  to  the  local  rather 
than  to  the  State  authorities  as  the  dis- 
pensers of  the  license  prerogatives,  and 
so  the  local  came  to  be  popularly  re- 
garded as  the  real  source  of  power.  The 
citizen  regarded  the  license-dispensing 
authority,  with  which  he  came  into  di- 
rect contact,  as  in  some  sort  the  proper 
authority  also  to  refuse  the  license  and 
j)rohibit  the  traffic.  Local  Prohibition 
thus  grew  up  as  the  natural  offspring  of 
local  license,  and  Local  Option  and  local 
license  have  therefore  much  in  common. 

The  chief  merit  claimed  for  the  Local 
Option  system  is  that  it  enables  a  small 
area  to  free  itself  from  the  liquor  traffic 
when  it  would  be  impossible  for  the  rid- 
dance to  be  effected  in  a  whole  State  or 
large  territory.  Local  Option  has  so  far 
been  applied  only  to  the  vending  or 
"  furnishing "  of  liquors,  the  manufac- 
ture and  importation  being  beyond  the 
scope  of  local  legislation.  County  Local 
Option  has  found   favor   chiefly   at  the 


Local  Option.] 


391 


[Local  Option. 


South.while  the  town  or  township  method 
has  been  common  at  the  North, 

As  early  as  183:3  the  Georgia  Legisla- 
ture extended  to  the  inferior  Courts  of 
two  counties — Liberty  and  Camden — the 
right  to  grant  or  to  withhold  retail 
licenses.  As  these  Courts  were  elected 
by  the  people  the  law  in  effect  became 
optional  in  its  application.  Prior  to 
1833,  in  many  parts  of  the  Union  the 
constitutionality  of  the  license  system  or, 
ut  least,  the  right  of  the  State  to  grant 
license,  began  to  be  questioned.  Between 
1835  and  1840  local  control,  in  some 
form,  of  the  license-dispensing  policy, 
had  been  acquired  in  several  States.  Six 
counties  in  Massachusetts,  through  the 
action  of  the  County  Commissioners, 
elected  by  popular  vote,  refused  license. 
In  1838  Eliode  Island  and  New  Hamp- 
shire left  license  optional  with  the 
towns.  Connecticut  followed  in  1839. 
Illinois  granted  to  towns  and  counties 
power  to  suppress  the  traffic  upon  the 
petition  of  a  majority  of  the  adult  male 
ijihabitants.  The  rise  of  the  Washing- 
tonians,  in  1840,  and  the  general  accept- 
ance of  their  moral  suasion  policy,  prac- 
tically put  an  end,  for  several  years,  to 
Prohibitory  effort.  After  this  wildfire 
had  passed  the  movement  for  Prohibi- 
tion revived,  but  this  time  was  directed 
generally  in  favor  of  State  Prohibition, 
since  the  local  acts  were  usually  repealed 
after  one  or  two  years  and  the  people 
began  to  grow  disgusted  with  such  insta- 
bility. In  Wisconsin,  Iowa,  Indiana, 
Connecticut  and  Michigan,  a  large  num- 
ber of  towns  had  been  carried  for  Pro- 
hibition— in  Iowa,  all  the  counties  except 
Keokuk.  Soon  Ohio  and  Michigan  made 
the  granting  of  license  unconstitutional. 
Most  of  the  Local  Option  of  this  period 
fell  still-born  or  died  in  early  infancy. 
After  State  Prohibition  had  begun  to  be 
agitated,  little  more  effort  in  behalf  of 
Local  Option  in  the  ante-bellum  period 
was  made.  Toward  the  close  of  the  war 
Rhode  Island  engrafted  Local  Option 
upon  her  license  law.  Pennsylvania  had 
a  Local  Option  law  from  187:3  to  1875; 
Massachusetts  followed  in  1881.  New 
Jersey's  law  was  repealed  almost  without 
a  trial.  All  tbe  Southern  States  now 
have  Local  Option  in  some  form. 

Local  Option  has  never  effected  gene- 
ral Prohibition  in  any  State,  unless,  for- 
sooth,  through   the   negative   force   in- 


spired by  disgust  at  its  failure.  The  sys- 
tem is  certainly  the  most  acceptable  to 
the  liquor  power  of  all  forms  of  Prohi- 
bition. In  1884  Hon.  J.  H.  Murphy,  a 
liquor  representative  from  Iowa,  intro- 
duced into  Congress  a  resolution  declar- 
ing that,  "in  the  sense  of  this  House, 
the  matter  of  restricting  and  regulating 
the  traffic  in  alcoholic,  malt  or  vinous 
liquors  in  the  United  States  belongs 
properly  to  the  domain  of  municipal  or 
local  government,  and  does  not  fall 
within  the  scope  of  the  powers  inherent 
in  the  Federal  Government  in  virtue  of 
the  Constitution."  About  the  same  time 
Hon.  P.  V.  Deuster  introduced  an  anti- 
Prohibition  Amendment  to  the  Federal 
Constitution,  Avhich  should  abrogate  all 
existing  State  and  local  anti-liquor  laAvs 
and  render  similar  enactments  illegal 
thenceforth.  This  extraordinary  scheme 
would  have  prevented  Congress  from 
prohibiting  the  liquor  traffic,  and  then 
made  that  body  abolish  all  local  Prohib- 
itory statutes  and  forbid  any  such  future 
legislation.  Thus  the  liquor  power  mani- 
fests its  readiness  to  use  both  National 
and  State  legislation  to  crush  Prohi- 
bition. 

CLAIMS   OF    THE    LOCAL  OPTIONISTS. 

Local  Optionists  claim  especially  the 
following  advantages  for  their  methods: 

1.  That  it  secures  and  has  secured 
Prohibitory  laws  over  much  territory 
where  general  Prohibition,  through  State 
enactment,  was  impossible.  Witness  the 
large  number  of  counties,  townships,  dis- 
tricts and  municipalities  all  over  the 
land  where  such  local  Prohibition  is  in 
effect  to-day. 

2.  That  it  is  especially  valuable  to 
rural  districts,  where  it  is  chiefly  applic- 
able, the  contaminating  traffic  being 
thereby  removed  from  the  yeoman  popu- 
lation— "the  bone  and  sinew"  of  the 
land. 

3.  That  it  is  essentially  non-political 
and  non-partisan  in  its  operation,  and 
thereby  avoids  collisions  with  jDarties  and 
the  antagonisms  of  politicians — an  oppo- 
sition invariably  provoked  by  any  party 
efforts  to  accomplish  Prohibition.  By 
thus  eliminating  or  avoiding  the  oppo- 
sition of  political  i^arties,  all  the  friends 
of  temjjerance  may  be  united  against  the 
saloon.  Moreover,  only  on  this  common 
ground  can  Republicans,  Democrats  and 


liOcal  Option.] 


392 


[Local  Option. 


other  party  adherents  be  rallied  for  Pro- 
hibition, as  they  are  not  compelled  to 
surrender  party  affiliations  ofttimes  of 
life-long  continuance. 

4.  That  Local  Option  requires  no  new 
Btatement  of  position — no  confession  of 
faith  as  to  tariff,  silver  coinage,  race 
problems,  universal  suffrage  or  other 
vexed  questions  which  must  surely  dis- 
tract and  divide  whenever  introduced. 
In  this  way  the  harmony  of  opposition 
to  the  saloon  may  hold  all  creeds,  colors 
and  castes  under  its  banner,  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  traffic  being  the  only  issue. 

5.  That  by  the  retention  of  this  live 
issue,  popular  attention  cannot  be  di- 
verted from  the  saloon's  enormities;  the 
public  cannot  grow  indifferent  to  the 
ever  present  question,  but  must  be  con- 
Btantly  on  the  alert,  for  safety  can  be 
the  reward  only  of  eternal  vigilance. 
So  the  Local  Option  condition  may  be- 
come an  important  factor  in  educating  a 
people  to  the  horrors  of  the  traffic  and 
the  necessity  for  its  suppression. 

6.  That  the  system,  by  steadily  elim- 
inating the  traffic,  tends  gradually 
towards  general  Prohibition,  to  which  it 
is  therefore  a  kind  of  stepping-stone. 

7.  That  the  option  principle  accords 
best  with  popular  ideas  of  local  independ- 
ence —  sentiments  everywhere  preva- 
lent in  our  democratic  polity,  e.  g.,  in 
the  comparative  autonomy  even  of  our 
municipal  governments  in  the  regula- 
tion of  their  internal  affairs.  The  prin- 
ciple thus  commends  itself  by  its  gen- 
eral harmony  with  our  political  system. 

DEFECTS. 

But  Local  Option,  as  a  temperance 
measure,  has  many  radical  defects.  Some 
of  these  we  will  now  consider. 

1.  The  system  is  necessarily  of  a  leg- 
islative and  political  character.  The 
very  enactment  of  such  a  law  means 
that  the  crime-side  of  the  liquor  traffic 
is  denied  or  at  least  not  universally  ac- 
cepted, and  therefore  special  statutes  are 
needed  to  give  authority  to  Courts  and 
officials  to  deal  with  and  punish  its  ex- 
ercise. But  legislators  willing  to  enact, 
maintain  and  enforce  such  laws  must  be 
chosen.  To  the  defeat  of  such  law- 
makers, of  coiirso,  the  liquor  power  is 
committed  and  the  issue  is  made.  Since 
Local    Option   leaves    the    question   an 


open  one,  and  the  law  always  subject  to 
change  or  repeal,  it  must  forever  remain 
in  politics,  and  the  election  of  all  offi- 
cials in  any  wise  charged  with  maintain- 
ing or  enforcing  the  law  must  ever  be  of 
a  political  character. 

2.  Although  thus  necessarily  political 
in  its  workings,  the  oi^tion  system  is  also 
non-partisan  in  its  character.  A  non- 
partisan petition  may  bring  on  an  elec- 
tion so  non-partisan,  indeed,  that  neither 
of  the  chief  and  law-making  parties  will 
dare  endorse  the  measure ;  yet,  if  carried, 
parties  and  politicians  altogether  hostile 
must  be  depended  upon  to  enforce  the 
statute.  It  dares  not  promise  support 
or  threaten  opposition  to  the  parties  and 
officials  into  whose  hands  its  life  is  com- 
mitted. It  trembles  while  exercising  the 
common  "right  to  peaceably  petition." 
Disarmed  and  neutral  it  is  thrust  into  the 
arena,  while  denied  the  right  of  self-de- 
fense  or  even  the  maidenly  privilege  of 
choosing  its  own  champion  knights. 
Politically  helpless  and  unresisting  it  is 
led  away  to  be  crucified. 

3.  Local  Option,  like  license,  makes 
revenues  local  but  expenses  general. 
County  or  Town  A  votes  ''For  the  Sale," 
levies  its  license  fees,  collects  its  police 
fines  and  monopolizes  its  private  chain- 
gang  of  "rock-pile"  labor;  while  its 
heavy  criminal  docket,  pauperage,  alms- 
houses, and  the  fearful  residuum  of  in- 
creased depravity  and  immorality  which 
always  follow  the  traffic,  are  thrown  like 
an  incubus  upon  the  State  and  county  at 
large.  As  license  naturally  shifts  to  the 
crowded  communities,  its  revenues  flow 
to  the  towns.  To  purchase  popular  in- 
dulgence these  fees  are  commonlv  de- 
creed  to  schools  and  benevolent  pur- 
poses. Thus  it  has  happened,  especially 
in  the  South,  that  nearly  all  the  well- 
supported  public  schools  are  in  license 
towns  and  depend  chiefly  upon  the  li- 
quor revenue  for  sustenance.  As  a  con- 
sequence, thousands  of  families  of  our 
most  substantial  rural  population  are  an- 
nually drawn  into  these  towns  to  enjoy 
the  benefits  of  the  schools,  and  the  chil- 
dren are  brought  face  to  face  with  the 
saloons  and  grow  up  under  their  baleful 
influence.  The  rural  districts,  on  the 
contrary,  thus  lose  their  bone  and  sinew, 
their  schools  are  made  yet  poorer  and 
their  industries  languish.  Thus  the  sys- 
tem operates  to  degenerate  the   people. 


Iiocal  Option.]                                  393  [Local  Option. 

to  crowd  the  towns  and  to  depopulate  its  batteries  securely  under  Prohibition's 

and  pauperize  the  country,  silent    guns — then,    at    a    crisis,    when 

4.  Local  selfishness  is  therefore  en-  the  opportunity  offers,  it  may  strike  its 
gendered  and  fostered.  What  cares  unarmed  victim  to  the  heart.  Thus 
Town  A  for  the  sword  and  fire  it  sends  with  all  of  advantage  on  the  side  of 
through  the  adjacent  territory  while  it  liquor,  Local  Option  territory  steadily 
revels  in   its  revenues  ?     On  the   other  falls  back  to  the  saloon's  sway. 

hand,  how  much  active  interest  will  A^  8.  As  a  consequence,  the  enthusiasm  of 
dry  by  Local  Option — tajce  in  the  strug-  first  temperance  efforts  dies  out  and  it  is 
gles  of  B,  C,  D  and  the  rest,  against  the  next  to  impossible  to  preserve  or  to  re- 
destroyer  ?  A's  fight  is  won ;  aid  she  arouse  it  for  repeated  elections.  An 
neither  receives  nor  lends;  the  weak  abnormal  tension — even  in  religion — 
may  take  care  of  themselves.  The  policy  cannot  be  maintained,  for  enthusiasm 
is  "  too  local  and  too  optional."  is  not  man's  normal  state.     Temperance 

5.  Local  Option — operating  in  this  men  weary  with  this  everlasting  crushing 
local,  selfish  manner,  scattering  and  dis-  of  hydras'  heads,  and  not  having — like 
integrating  the  temperance  forces  and  their  enemies — selfish  motives  in  tlie  con- 
preventing  unity  of  purpose  and  of  test,  eventually  give  over  the  strug- 
effort,  efl'ectually  militates  against  State  gle,  accepting  "  High  License  and  strict 
and  National  Prohibition.  So  far  from  regulation  "  as  a  substitute  for  Prohibi- 
being  a  stepping-stone  to  general  Pro-  tion,  and  so  the  latter  condition  is  usu- 
hibition,  it  has  contributed  so  much  to  ally  far  worse  than  the  former. 

thwart   such  legislation  that  State  Pro-  9.     Local  Option  has  to  Prohibition- 

hibition  has  never  followed  as  a  result  ists  the  character  of  a  "  suspect "  from 

of  this  disunifying  measure.  Local    Op-  its  correlation  and  companionship  with 

tion  makes  such  general  laws  far  harder  license.     The   latter   appears   always   as 

of  attainment.                '  the  alternate  or  supplement  to  the  for- 

G.  Local  Option  impregnably  fortifies  mer.  Both  are  local  in  operation ;  both 
the  traffic  from  without,  while  it  can  involve  permission  to  the  traffic ;  the  the- 
be  assailed  only  from  within.  Forty-  ory  of  each  contemplates  the  continued 
four  States  are  powerless  against  a  sin-  existence  of  the  traffic;  neitber  pro})oses 
gle  hamlet  or  county.  A  treaty  of  non-  to  touch  the  manufacture  or  importation 
interference  stands  with  the  world  out-  of  liquors ;  neither  attacks  the  Internal 
side.  Five  hundred  saloonists  may  con-  Revenue  system — the  money  power  of  the 
centrate  in  a  town  or  county,  bid  defiance  traffic;  neither  deals  with  the  State  as  a 
to  the  nation  and  sell  their  liquors  to  whole;  neither  will  prevent  the  traffic  in 
debauch  the  whole  country.  Only  at  the  Territories,  in  the  army,  navy,  or  else- 
their  own  sovereign  will  can  liquors  be  where  (directly)  under  Federal  jurisdic- 
removed,  while  they,  on  the  other  hand,  tion;  neither  can  hinder  the  traffic  among 
may  have  the  land  for  a  prey.  The  king  the  Indians.  Both  are  directly  or  indi- 
of  Daliomey  may  pave  his  chamber  with  rectly  under  local  control.  The  two  sys- 
the  heads  of  his  enemies,  toss  his  sub-  tems  are  naturally  correlated,  the  twain 
jects  from  a  precipice  and  marry  or  mur-  have  long  lived  side  by  side  in  most  of 
der  half  the  women  of  his  pigmy  realm  the  States,  and  in  tolerable  amity,  as 
—the  world  has  nothing  to  say.  His  most  wedded  pairs.  "  High  License  with 
majesty  is  lord  absolute  at  home.  So  of  the  Local  Option  feature  "  is  the  popular 
the  Liquor  Dahomey  under  the  option  recognition  of  their  relationship ;  while 
system.  Strongholds  of  Bluebeards  will  the  "  feature  "  of  option  in  morals  para- 
be  left  all  over  the  land  and  protected  by  lyzes  all  the  temperance  force  in  either.  So 
law.  heljDless,  indeed,  is  Local  Oj^tion  that  it 

7.  Local  Option  sounds  an  armistice  lives  rather  by  tolerance  than  by  inher- 
to  Prohibitory  work  but  leaves  liquor  ent  vitality.  Its  longest  lease  of  life 
free.  A  county  or  a  town  is  carried  for  is  where  one  political  party  is  practically 
no-licensCo  The  legal  goal  has  been  in  undisputed  ascendancy.  The  hot 
reached  for  the  temperance  forces,  but  blasts  of  "  close  "  State  campaigns  hardly 
liquor  remains  under  arms,  for  its  truce  allow  it  a  span  of  life. 
need  last  only  12  months  or  two  10.  The  system  stands  always  as  a  corn- 
years,  and  it  may  openly,  defiantly  build  promise  measure.     Its  basis  is  temporiz- 


liocal  Option.] 


394 


[Local  Option. 


ing,  temporary  expediency.  It  is  the 
commercial  method  of  dealing  with  the 
traffic.  It  is  made  to  stand  aside  in  the 
interests  of  all  parties,  cliques,  politi- 
cians and  schemers.  Its  little  ewe-lamb 
of  Prohibition  may  be  butchered  for  any 
stranger,  be  offered  up  to  propitiate  any 
liquor  Moloch,  and  its  blood  may  be 
sprinkled  upon  all  the  high  places  where 
sin  holds  its  carnivals. 

MOEAL   CONSIDERATIONS. 

But  far  the  greatest  of  all  Local  Option's 
defects  is  its  rotten  basis  as  to  morals, 
where  its  presumptuous  elective  system 
appears  most  audacious.  With  its  ma- 
jority rule  set  up  as  the  origin  of  right, 
the  results  are  most  destructive  to  all 
proper  conceptions  of  divine  law.  Here 
it  is  best  for  us  to  compare  the  resjjective 
moral  basis  of  Prohibition  and  Local 
Option,  to  see  the  broad  difference  be- 
tween their  foundation  tenets.  It  is 
taken  for  granted  in  this  discussipn  that 
there  is  a  Ruler  who  governs  the  world 
by  moral  law;  that  this  law  is  supreme 
in  the  affairs  of  men,  and  all  human 
laws  are,  or  should  be,  in  conformity 
therewith  ;  that  all  human  statutes  sanc- 
tioning that  which  is  forbidden  by 
the  divine  law  must  be  wrong;  that 
conformity  with  divine  law  in  the  more 
effective  enforcement  of  its  precepts  is 
the  only  proper  object  of  civil  legislation 
— the  only  Justification  for  such  laws  to 
assume  Jurisdiction  over  the  lives,  liber- 
ty, property  and  pursuits  of  men ;  and 
that  the  liquor  traffic  is  wrong  as  Judged 
by  every  moral  standard.  With  these 
lights  let  us  examine  the  moral  basis  of 
Prohibition  and  Local  Option,  as  Judged 
by  this  divine  law. 

Civil  law  should,  jier  se,  prohibit  the 
wrong  and  uphold  the  right.  No  con- 
stitutional provisions — those  symptoms 
of  moral  weakness — ought  to  be  neces- 
sary to  authorize  Courts  to  prohibit  and 
punish  the  evil.  Such  is  the  ideal  rela- 
tion of  law  to  crime.  But  the  force  of 
evil  habits,  of  perverted  views,  has  given  a 
kind  of  legalization  to  wrong.  Therefore 
it  has  been  felt  necessary  to  give  authority 
to  Courts,  by  specific  constitutional  and 
statutory  backing,  to  deal  with  the 
wrong.  Thus  human  depravity  has  con- 
stantly added  to  the  bulk  of  such  laws, 
when  the  moral  code  alone  should  have 
been  a  sufficient  warrant.     But  all  these 


civil  laws  must  agree  with,  not  contra- 
dict, the  divine.  Here  is  the  basis  of 
Prohibition,  namely,  in  its  harmony  with 
God's  law,  which  ever  prohibits,  never 
permits ;  always  punishes,  never  legalizes 
the  wrong.  Prohibition  does  not  as- 
sume the  right  of  veto  in  moral  law  as 
does  Local  Option.  A  vote  for  it  is  a 
man's  approval  of  the  right.  Prohibi- 
tion provides  for  no  alternative.  Failure 
to  carry  it  does  not  commit  its  adherents 
to  license  any  more  than  the  refusal  of 
the  multitude  to  accept  Christ  commits 
his  followers  to  the  service  of  Satan.  The 
vote  is  not  in  regard  to  the  right- 
ness  of  Prohibition  itself — only  upon  its 
acceptance  or  rejection.  The  exercising 
of  the  wrong  is  the  issue — not  the  right- 
ness  of  forbidding  it.  Israel  might  choose 
and  risk  the  consequences,  as  to  the  Lord 
or  the  Baalim ;  but  she  did  not  choose 
as  to  the  rightfulness  of  Jehovah's  rule. 
So  in  the  question  of  Prohibition,  not  the 
right  of  the  law  but  adherence  to  it 
is  the  thing  to  be  settled.  Where  Pro- 
hibition is  already  in  force  the  right  to 
repeal  the  law  in  favor  of  license  cannot 
be  morally  conceded ;  where  the  inhibition 
does  not  exist,  it  should  be  incorporated 
into  the  fundamental  law.  If  this  can 
be  done  only  by  popular  vote  then  the 
question  may  be  submitted — not  for  ac- 
ceptance or  rejection  at  irresponsible  op- 
tion, but  only  for  legalization  of  the  in- 
hibition. It  will  be  observed  that  Pro- 
hibition being  a  dealing  with  morals,  the 
right  to  reject  it  for  the  immoral  can- 
not belong  to  the  powers  of  human 
ontion. 

Local  Option,  as  a  principle,  is  the  ig- 
noring of  the  moral  in  law.  It  totally 
rejects  the  eternity  of  right,  since  it  as 
readily  endorses  the  wrong  and  as  cheer- 
fully legalizes  it.  Indeed,  it  eliminates 
the  moral  entirely,  save  in  so  far  as  it  it- 
self, at  its  own  will,  creates  it  by  its  ma- 
jority method.  Thus  the  most  destruc- 
tive standards  in  morals  are  set  up — 
standards  which  eliminate  the  moral 
from  human  action.  The  option  princi- 
ple recognizes  no  divine,  unchanging,  all- 
pervading  law  of  right.  A  majority  vote 
is  its  highest  authority  in  morals;  the 
right  this  year  may  be  the  wrong  after  12 
months.  It  assumes  the  prerogative  to 
make  wrong  into  right  by  investing  it 
with  all  tlie  sanctity  of  law.  It  puts 
right  on  trial  for  its  life  by  a  probation 


liocal  Option.] 


595 


[Local  Option. 


of  one  or  two  years.  Local  Option  is 
merely  a  balancing  between  two  wrongs, 
or  a  right — not  as  a  right,  however — 
against  a  wrong.  It  is  always  Local  Op- 
tion in  one  end  of  the  scale  and  license 
in  the  other,  never  Local  Option  balanced 
against  some  other  form  of  Prohibition. 
If  temperance  does  not  sncceed,  drunk- 
ard-making may  be  lawfully  endorsed. 
If  law-breakers  defy  and  violate  the  law, 
then  to  prevent  the  violation  the  law 
sliould  be  set  aside,  we  are  told,  and  the 
crime  legalized.  The  amount  of  viola- 
tion is  to  determine  the  life  of  the  law. 

,.    A  premium  is  set  for  a  greater  degree  of 

*     violation. 

Local  Option's  practical  lesson  is  to  go 
with  the  multitude,  even  "to  do  evil." 
Local  Option's  moral  standard  is  the  will 
of  the  majority — one  of  the  fatal  deduc- 
tions from  a  democracy.  Necessarily, 
therefore,  not  only  the  liberty  to  exer- 
cise the  traffic  but  the  right  of  the  traf- 
iic  itself  is  assumed.  To  illustrate :  Had 
Joshua  said  to  Israel,  "Determine  this 
year  whether  ye  will  serve  the  Lord  or 
other  gods,  and  next  Nisan  the  question 
may  be  again  submitted,"  then,  of  course, 
the  right  of  submission  and  of  decision 
would  have  been  in  the  people's  hands ; 
no  crime  could  have  attached  to  the 
choice  of  Baalim,  for  the  right  to  choose 
and  to  worship  other  gods  would  have 
been  Israel's,  and  neither  guilt  nor  pun- 
ishment could  have  been  visited  upon 
them  in  the  matter.  This  is  Local  Op- 
tion. Prohibition  would  say  in  the  sj^irit 
of  Joshua:  "As  voluntary  agents,  re- 
s^wnsible  for  your  actions  and  their  con- 
sequences, choose,  this  day,  whom  ye 
will  serve ;  for  you  must  bear  your  own 
sins.  Nay,  more;  remember,  you  cannot 
choose  the  Lord  this  year  and  Moloch  the 
next,  for  he  is  a  jealous  God.  If  ye  for- 
sake the  Lord  and  serve  strange  gods, 
then  he  will  turn  and  do  you  hurt,  and 
consume  you  after  that  he  hath  done  you 
good." 

Here  we  can  easily  see  the  province  of 
the  option  principle.  The  right  of 
choice  without  criminality  in  its  result 
was  never    thought  of.     The  option  of 

.  suljmission — like  that  of  mercy — admit- 
ted the  possibility,  never  the  right,  to  re- 
ject. The  opportunity  for  choice  was 
given;  not  liberty  to  choose  the  wrong. 
Kesponsibility  still  hung  over  the  choice. 
Opportunity  there  may  be  to  contract 


debt,  but  no  exemption  from  payment  to 
the  uttermost  farthing.  80  of  all  ques- 
tions having  a  criminal  side  as  an  alter- 
nate issue.  A  man  has  power  and  op- 
portunity to  steal;  divine  law  inhibits 
the  exercise  of  that  opportunity,  not  the 
^possibility  of  stealing.  So  far  from 
guiltlessness  attaching  to  choice,  the 
choosing  of  the  wrong  but  intensifies 
the  criminality  of  the  option. 

Prohibition  contemplates  no  other 
side — no  alternative,  no  rejection  of  the 
divine  law,  least  of  all  the  right  to  re- 
ject. The  choice  of  the  right  is  to  be 
final.  "  Put  away,  therefore,  the  strange 
gods  from  among  you."  Ojition  would 
permit  Israel  to  "  hate  knowledge  "  and 
"  not  choose  the  fear  of  the  Lord."  But 
for  their  option  for  the  bad  they  must 
"  eat  of  the  fruit  of  their  own  way,  and 
the  turning  away  of  the  simple  should 
slay  them."  Israel  must  "choose  none 
of  the  ways  of  the  oppressor,  for  the 
curse  of  the  Lord  is  on  the  house  of  the 
wicked."  For  merely  exercising  this 
choice  in  the  wrong  direction  they  must 
"  bow  to  the  slaughter  and  be  numbered 
to  the  sword."  Option  can  choose,  but 
never  lawfully  choose  the  wrong.  The 
right  to  create  right,  to  commit  or  per- 
mit crime,  is  at  war  with  God's  law.  The 
option  to  approve  and  enforce  this  higher 
law  never  implies  permission  to  subvert 
it.  The  option  of  obedience  or  rebellion 
is  presented,  but  the  choice  is  not  with- 
out sin.  Standing  in  the  gate  of  the 
camp  Moses  gives  option  to  Israel  in  the 
call,  "  Who  is  on  the  Lord's  side  let  him 
come  unto  me;"  but  those  who  used 
their  option  to  stay  away  soon  felt  the 
Levites'  destroying  swords. 

Prohibition,  then,  is  popular  assent  to 
the  divine  law ;  confirmatory,  it  expresses 
the  consent  of  men  to  the  rightness  of 
that  law  and  willingness  to  keep  it. 
Option,  on  the  contrary,  would  sit  in  a 
higher  than  Moses's  seat,  cite  this  law 
to  trial,  accept  or  reject  it,  and  set  up 
another  standard  in  its  stead.  Option 
would  make  a  law  to  sin  by,  or  rather  to 
turn  wrong  into  right.  The  distinction 
between  the  principles  is  very  broad. 
Prohibition  will  choose  only  right.  Op- 
tion says :  "  License  or  No-License ;  For 
the  sale  or  against  the  sale;  make  your 
choice;  it  is  immaterial  in  morals." 
Such  a  principle,  generally  applied  in 
morals,  would  wreck  the  universe.     It 


Local  Option.] 


396 


[Local  Option. 


ignores  tlie  divine  law  and  makes  man's 
will  supreme.  H.  A.  Scomp. 

Additional  Particulars. — The  Local 
Option  jirovisions  in  the  statutes  of  the 
various  States  and  Territories,  past  and 
present,  are  summarized  in  the  article  on 
Legislation. 

Although  most  of  the  Prohibition 
leaders — at  least  in  the  North — regard 
Local  Option  measures  with  i3ronounced 
dissatisfaction,  few  of  them  have  refused 
to  co-operate  in  the  campaigns  brought  on 
under  such  measures.  These  campaigns 
have  frequently  been  waged  with  great 
vigor,  and  in  their  results  have  been 
of  much  significance  by  showing  the 
strength  of  local  sentiment,  bringing  the 
practical  reasons  for  and  against  the  li- 
cense system  under  searching  review  and 
demonstrating  that  the  demand  for  Pro- 
hibition is  not  ephemeral,  capricious  or 
confined  to  a  few  extremists,  but  is  con- 
stant, determined  and  widespread,  and 
indeed  touches  the  thought  and  action 
of  the  people  more  intimately  than  any 
other  subject  involving  local  policy. 

The  record  made  by  the  communities 
of  the  State  of  Massachusetts  is  espec- 
ially impressive.  The  following  tables 
show  the  number  of  towns  and  cities,  re- 
spectively, voting  for  and  against  license, 
and  the  popular  vote  polled,  each  year 
from  1884  to  1889,  inclusive  •} 


Year. 


Towns  (Voting  in  March). 


1884 
1885 
188G 
1887 
1888 
1889 


I^o.  Towns 

Carried 

Against 

For 

License. 

License. 

238> 

86 

2322 

93 

2603 

65 

277^ 

4D 

2605 

68 

273« 

53 

Popular  Vote 
Against  For 
License.    License. 


41,413 

39,428 
45,066 
54,603 
47,622 
49,971 


34,592 
34,463 
31.252 
34,433 
35,340 
34,834 


1  Including  10  towns  that  did  not  vote  on  the  question. 

2  Inciudinc;  10  not  voting  and  3  in  which  the  vote  was  tied. 

3  Including  6  not  voting.     ■•  Including  2  not  voting.     *  In- 
cluding 2  ties.     "  Including  1  r.ot  voting  and  3  ties. 


Year. 

C 

iTiES  (Voting  in  December). 

Xo.   Cities  Carried 

PopuLAR  Vote 

Again;?t 

For 

Against         For 

Liceng  3. 

License. 

License.      License. 

1884 

3 

20 

.38,001 

69.701 

1885 

5 

18 

41,733 

57,9.56 

1883 

13 

10 

56,945 

61,464 

1887 

8 

15- 

63,385 

75,5.55 

1888' 

i 

17 

59.782 

90,141 

18892 

12 

13- 

64,695 

7'3,944 

'  The  last  election  before  the  High  License  and  Limita- 
tion laws  came  into  force.  -  The  first  election  after  these 
acts  took  eft'ect. 

'  These  tables  have  been  compiled  from  printed  reports 
furnished  by  the  Secretary  of  State  of  Massachusetts. 


Combining  the  votes  of  tlie  towns  and 
cities,  it  is  found  that,  on  the  Local  Op- 
tion issue,  there  were  anti-license  ma- 
jorities in  the  whole  State  of  Massa- 
chusetts of  5,888  in  1889,  7,200  in  1887, 
and  9,295  in  1886.  Yet  on  the  question 
of  Constitutional  Prohibition,  in  April, 
1889,  there  was  a  saloon  majority  of  45,- 
820  (see  p,  119),  and  this  despite  the  fact 
that  the  aggregate  vote  cast  on  Constitu- 
tional Prohibition  (216,304)  was  more  than 
7,000  less  than  that  cast  in  the  Local  Op- 
tion elections  in  the  same  year  (223,444). 
This  difference  is  easily  explained.  Local 
Option  excites  comparatively  little  an- 
tagonism; and  the  liquor  men,  knowing 
from  experience  that  Prohibition  in  lo- 
calities can  be  circumvented  without  spe- 
cial difficulty,  do  not  put  forth  their  en- 
ergies in  Local  Option  campaigns.  The 
figures  also  show  that  notwitbstanding 
the  apparent  majority  of  46,000  against 
Prohibition  in  Massachusetts,  there  really 
exists  in  tliat  State  a  predominant  anti- 
saloon  sentiment. 

To  further  illustrate  the  strength  of 
local  feeling  in  favor  of  Prohibition,  we 
give  the  following  detailed  exhibit  of  the 
vote  by  towns  and  cities  on  the  license 
issue  in  Massachusetts  in  1889 : 


Towns  Voting  Against 
License,  March,  1889. 

Barnstable  Co. 

License. 

No.  Yes. 

Barnstable 13  6 

Bourne... 69  1 

Brewster 47  14 

Chatham 86  19 

Bennis 85  4 

Eastham 35  11 

Falmouth 82  6 

Harwich 108  19 

Mashpee 26  18 

Orleans 79  6 

Provincetown . .  153  14 

Truro 69  4 

Wcllrteet 97 

Yarmouth 32  1 

Totals 981  123 

Berkshire  Co. 

Alford 24  21 

Becket 81  21 

Cheshire 106  56 

Clarksburg 7  4 

IJalton 184  34 

Euremont 103  42 

Florida .30  28 

Hancock 72  7 

Hinsdale 149  85 

Lanesborough . .    45  26 

Lee 228  210 

Monterey 41  23 

Mt.  Washington     16  11 

New  Ashford. ..     16  13 

NewMarlbor'h.     83  51 

Peru 20  7 

Kichmond 47  2 

Sandislield 108  23 

Savoy 33  19 

Stockbridgc 145  120 


Towns  Voting  for  Li 
CENSE,  March,  1880. 

Barnstable  Co. 

License. 
No.      Yes. 


Sandwich 115 


129 


Berks/lire  Co. 

Adams 203 

Gt.  Barrington.  24G 

Leno.x 70 

North  Adams  . .  543 

Otis 26 

Pittsticld 741 

Sheffield 106 


53C 
366 
193 
995 
58 
1,442 
165 


Totals 1,9L5     3,756 


Local  Option.] 


39^ 


[Local  Option. 


Towns  Voting  Against 
License,  March,  188;). 

License. 

No.  Ye.s 

Tyringham .30  17 

WashinKton 21  12 

Willianistown..  255  78 

Windsor 51  17 

Totals 1,875  927 

Bristol  Co. 

Acnshnet 40  9 

Attlel)oi-ou;;h...  .3!)G  208 

Berkley :W  1 

Dartnibiitli 135  22 

Di!];htoii 96 

Eustoii 178  132 

Fairhuveii 205  7 

Freetown 56  10 

Mansfield 121  25 

Morton  85  39 

Raynhani 68  11 

Rehoboth 94  35 

Seekonk 62  3 

Somerset 119  52 

Swanzev 88  30 

Westport 131  2 

Totals 1.906  586 

Dukes  Co. 

Chilmark :?7  3 

Cottar;eCitv....    66 

Edsjartown 81  2 

Gay  Head 23 

Gosnold 9 

Tisbury 103  3 

Totals 318  8 

Essex  Co. 

Amesbury 556  431 

Andover 358  82 

Beverly 473  236 

Boxford 35  11 

Bradford 190  140 

Danvers 403  100 

Essex 93  16 

(jleorgetown 95  52 

Hamilton 74  38 

Lynnfield 59  20 

Manchester 99  6 

Marblehead  ....  750  560 

Merriniac 130  48 

Methuen 328  181 

Middleton 67  23 

Newbm-y 68  22 

North  Andover.  287  170 

Peabody 712  639 

Rockport 350  14 

Rowley 90  44 

Sali'jbury 98  58 

San<j;us 245  204 

Swampscott 275  30 

Topstield 5:3  29 

Weiiham 58  12 

West  Newbury.  102  23 

Totals 6,!08  3,189 

Franklin  Co. 

Ashfield 68  14 

Bernardston.. . .     53  40 

Charlemont ....    45  11 

Colrain 41  13 

Conway 108  57 

Gill..." 30  14 

Ilawlcy .50  3 

Heath 39  21 

Leverett j39 

Leyden 27 

Monroe 26  18 

New  Salem 39  3 

Northtield 97  70 

Orange 466  95 

Rove 36  24 

Shelburnc 77  8 

Shiitesbury 28  23 

Sunderland  ....    76  17 


Towns  Voting  for  Li- 
cense, Makch,  1889. 

License. 
No.     Yes. 


Bristol  Co. 
N.  Attleborougli  373 


462 


Dukes  Co.— None. 


Essex  Co. 

Groveland 59 

Ipswich 171 

Nahant 42 

Totals 272 


75 

204 

63 

813 


Franklin  Co. 

Buckland 55 

Deerfield 141 

Ervinsr 40 

Greenfield 247 

Montague 146 

Wendell 28 

Totals 657 


103 

218 

77 

313 

411 

34 

1,216 


Towns  Voting  Against 
License,  March,  1889. 
License. 

No.  Yes. 

Warwick 44  21 

Whately 38  34 

Totals 1,427  486 

Hampden  Co. 

Agawam    121  53 

Brimfield 74  20 

Chester 75  72 

Granville 108  39 

Hampden 62  58 

Holland 13  3 

Longmeadow  . .    76  1 

Ludlow 61  6 

Monson 2.34  127 

Montgomery  ...     40  7 

Tolland 34  9 

Wales 42  29 

W.  Springfield  '.  312  113 

Wilbrahain  ....  107  41 

Totals 1,359  578 

Hampshire  Co. 

Amherst 1.36  48 

Belchertown  ...  134  60 

Chesterfield  ....    55  12 

Cummingtou. . .    64  10 

Goshen 30  11 

Granby 77  2 

Greenwich 62  14 

Hadlev 110  66 

Hatfield 57  27 

Huntington  ....  120  71 

Middletield 32  16 

Pclham 42  16 

Plainfield 74  3 

South  Hadley  . .  2.59  57 

Southampton  . .     .56  15 

Westhampton. .     47  4 

Williamsburgh.  138  69 

Worthiugton ...    50  6 

Totals 1,543  507 

Middlesex  Co. 

Acton 88  68 

Arlington 445  328 

Ashby 47  25 

Ashland 152  36 

Ayer 148  1 

Bedford 127  12 

Belmont 127  21 

Billerica 69  10 

Boxborough 36  12 

Burlington 42  34 

Carlisle 40  17 

Chelmsford  ....     93  13 

Concord 128  104 

Dunstable 41  12 

Everett 510  21 

Framingham. . .  784  648 

Groton 1(5  28 

Holliston 218  88 

Hudson 450  197 

Lexington 230  115 

Lincoln 54  3 

Littleton .55  5 

Medford 496  460 

Melrose 518  16 

Natick 905  645 

North  Reading.    41  20 

Pepperell  ......  269  206 

Reading 261  41 

Sherborn 64  13 

Shirley 59  40 

Stoneham 4.58  228 

Stow 28  13 

Sudburv 91  21 

Tewksbnry  ....     82  15 

Townsend 94  .32 

Wakefield 431  277 

Watertown 459  319 

Wayland 116  43 

Westford 138  130 

Weston 83  15 

Wilmington....     .51  26 

Winchester  ....  238  2 

Totals 8.871  4,360 


Towns  Voting  for  Li- 
cense, Marcu,  1889. 

License. 

No.      Yes. 


Hampden  Co. 

Chicopee 450 

Palmer 249 

Russell 17 

Southwick 63 

Westfield 490 

Totals 1,269 


585 
303 
153 
104 
763 

1,907 


Hampshire  Co. 
Easthampton  . .  256 

Enfield 64 

Prescott 18 

Ware 321 

Totals 775 


279 
72 
23 

401 

659 


Middlesex  Co. 

Dracut 36 

Hopkinton 232 

Marlborough...  600 

Maynard 103 

Tyngsborough  .    34 


135 

267 

1,117 

218 

57 


Totals 1,005      1,794 


Local  Option.] 


398 


[Local  Option. 


Towns  Voting  Against 
License,  March,  1889. 

License. 
No.      Yes. 
Nantucket  Co.— None. 


Norfolk  Co. 

Avon 100 

Bellingham 45 

Braiiitree 279 

Brookline .505 

Canton 290 

Oohasset 69 

Dover 26 

Foxborough  . . .  145 

Franklin 277 

Holbrook 195 

Hyde  Park 792 

Medtield 59 

Medway 261 

Millis.". .39 

Milton 303 

Need  li  am 226 

Norfolk 49 

Norwood 231 

Randolph 413 

Sharon 70 

Stougliton 340 

Walpole 147 

Wellesley 121 

Weymonth 496 

Wrentham 64 

Totals 5,542 

Plymouth  Co. 

Abington 2.30 

Carver 44 

E.  Bridgewater.  127 

Halifax 41 

Hanover 101 

Hanson 85 

Kingston 84 

Lakevillc 52 

Marion 77 

Marshfield 99 

Mattapoisett  ...  109 
Middleborough.  302 

Norwell 101 

Pembroke 67 

Plymouth 4.38 

Plympton 37 

Rochester 34 

Rockland 318 

Scituate 94 

Wareham 170 

W.  Bridgewater    85 
Whitman 406 

Totals 3,101 

Suffolk  Co. 

Winthrop 295 

Worcester  Co. 

Ashbuniham . . .  108 

Athol 324 

Auburn 67 

Barre 96 

Berlin 95 

Bolton 54 

Bovlston 35 

Charlton 85 

Dana 56 

Harvard 65 

Holden 129 

Hopedalc 81 

H  u  bbardston ...  69 

Lancaster 130 

Leicester 174 

Leominster  ....  537 

Lunenburg 73 

Mendon 56 

Millbury 272 

New  Braintree. .  19 

North  borough..  112 

North  bridge....  83 

N.  Brooktield..  .336 

Oxford 152 

Paxton 38 

Phillipston .35 

Princeton 51 


15 
13 
90 

487 

250 
52 
10 
63 

145 
60 

272 
25 

201 

26 

16 

75 

6 

144 

179 
15 
72 
75 
.37 

410 
32 

2,770 

1.30 
13 
64 
14 
36 
18 
59 
19 
12 
18 
26 
39 
46 
14 

249 
8 

252 
46 
97 
65 

177 

1,402 


60 

278 

2 

33 

21 
31 

28 
29 
18 
22 
2 
32 
78 
98 

277 

35 

8 

218 
14 
64 
13 

150 
40 
15 
17 
33 


Plymouth  Co. 
Bridgewater  . . .  1.36 

Dnxburv .50 

Hinghain 198 

Hull 21 

Totals 405 


To'vvNS  Voting  for  Li- 
cense, March,  1889. 

License. 
No.      Yes- 
Nantucket  Co. 
Nantucket 141         212 

Norfolk  Co. 
Dedham 374 


Suffolk  Co. 

Revere 237 

Worcester  Co. 

Blackstone 76 

Brookfield 211 

Clinton 618 

Douglas 137 

Dudley 66 

Gardner 342 

Grafton 2.50 

Hardwick 84 

Milford 513 

Petersham 57 

Royalston 51 

Southbridge....  358 

Sterling 53 

Webster 219 


423 


228 
.52 

.316 
71 

667 


386 

938 
235 
945 
138 
167 
490 

mi 

120 
74<) 
65 
fiO 
389 
100 
485 


Totals 3,035     4,585 


Towns  Voting  for  Li- 
cense, March,  1889. 

License. 
No.      Yes. 


Cities  Voting  for  Li- 
cense, December,  1889. 

License. 


Towns  Voting  Against 
License,  March,  1889. 

License. 

No.  Yes. 

Rutland 72  68 

Shrewsbury  ....   101  34 

Southborough..  1.54  24 

Spencer....'....  440  373 

Sutton 121  103 

Templeton 175  77 

Upton 114  98 

Uxbridge 121  35 

Warren 275  246 

Westborough  . .  419  247 

West  Bovlston.  129  73 

W.  Brookfield..     86  13 

Westminster  ...  100  58 

Winchendon  ...  224  104 

Totals .5,863      3,168 

Tie  Votes. 

Berkshire  Co. 

W.  Stockbridge    70  70 

Worcester  Co. 

Oakham 46  46 

Sturbridge 74  74 

No  Returns. 
Hampden  Co. 
Blandford. 

Cities  Voting  Against 
License,  December,  1889. 

License. 

No.  Yes. 

Brockton 2,229  1,763 

Cambridge....  .3,793  3,300 

Fall  River 4,190  2,731 

Fitchburg 1,.504  1.299 

Haverhill 1,7?!  1.464 

Lowell 5,457  4,457 

Maiden 1,186  848 

Newton 1,841  7.50 

Quincy 1,162  618 

Somerville  ...,   1,706  6:^5 

WoVnim 979  809 

Worcester 5,189  .5,119 

Totals 30,947    23,793 


Connecticut  is  another  New  England 
State  in  which  Local  Option  votes  by 
cities  and  towns  are  taken  annually,  al- 
though its  returns  are  not  so  extended  as 
those  for  Massachusetts.  Many  of  the 
Connecticut  towns  neglect  the  license  is- 
sue, taking  no  vote  upon  it.^  From  an 
abstract  of  the  votes  cast  for  and  against 
license  on  Oct.  1, 1889,  specially  obtained 
from  the  Secretary  of  State  of  Connec- 
ticut, the  following  summary  is  made  : 

Cities  and  towns  for  wliich  returns  are  given, 
81 — of  which  57  voted  for  license  and  24  against. 

Cities  and  towns  whicli  did  not  vote  on  the 
question,  or  for  whicli  no  returns  are  given,  84 — 
of  which  33  voted  against  license  at  tlie  last  elec- 
tion and  6  voted  for  licen.se,  while  the  latest  re- 
sults in  the  other  45  are  not  .stated. 

Total  number  of  cities  and  towns  favoring  li- 
cense, 63;  opposing,  57;  attitude  not  .stated,  45. 
(In  most  of  the  45  unclassified  towns  no  licenses 
are  issued;  so  that  a  majority  of  the  Connecti- 
cut communities  are  "dry.") 

A  peculiar  system  of    indirect  Local 

'  Due  to  the  pro\-ision  in  the  .statutes  that  petitions  must 
be  presented  before  Local  Option  elections  can  be  lield. 


No. 

Yes. 

Boston 

17,875 

27,1  :i4 

Chelsea 

951 

1,647 

Gloucester. . 

861 

1,342 

Holyoke 

767 

2,253 

Lawrence . . . 

2,593 

2,792 

Lynn 

2,040 

3,012 

NewBedfon; 

1,717 

2,382 

Newb'yport 

718 

1,164 

N'thampton 

.     722 

748 

Salem 

1.293 

2.237 

Springfield. . 

2,176 

2,950 

Taunton 

1,244 

1,486 

Walthara  . . . 

791 

1,004 

Totals.... 

33,748 

50,1.51 

Local  Option.] 


}99 


[Local  Option. 


Option  prevails  in  the  State  of  New 
York.  In  each  town  and  small  city  the 
licensing  power  is  wielded  by  a  Board  of 
Excise  Commissioners,  of  three  members 
chosen  by  po})ular  vote — one  member  re- 
tiring and  one  new  member  being  elected 
each  year.  The  Board  in  every  locality 
has  absolute  power  to  grant  or  refuse  li- 
censes ;  and  it  is  the  constant  aim  of  the 
temperance  people  to  secure  or  retain 
control.  The  formidable  strength  of 
anti-license  sentiment  must  be  recognized 
when  it  is  said  that  even  under  this  im- 
perfect measure  it  is  wholly  impossible  to 
procure  license  in  many  parts  of  Ncav 
York,  and  local  agitation  against  the 
liquor  traffic  is  in  a  great  number  of 
towns  the  chief  feature  of  the  annual 
elections.  In  other  States,  like  New  Jer- 
sey, Illinois,  Indiana,  Wisconsin,  Califor- 
nia and  many  more,  where  local  deter- 
mination of  the  license  issue  is  dependent 
on  the  action  of  the  authorities,  the  strife 
with  the  dramshops  divides  public  senti- 
ment constantly  and  nearly  always  re- 
ceives greater  attention  than  any  other 
permanent  subject  of  local  concern,  so 
thoroughly  has  the  Prohibition  idea  per- 
meated the  country.  It  is  a  peculiarity 
of  these  petty  contests  that  defeat  does 
not  daunt  the  Local  Option  workers ;  and 
the  constancy  with  which  their  demands 
are  urged  is  one  of  the  clearest  evidences 
of  the  impossibility  of  solving  the  drink 
question  by  any  measure  short  of  Pro- 
hibition. 

But  while  the  town  struggles  are  most 
instructive  in  making  a  minute  analysis 
of  what  may  be  called  the  spontaneous 
disposition  of  the  people  at  large,  the 
aspects  of  County  Local  Option  are  hardly 
less  interesting.  County  Option  laws  are 
more  distasteful  to  the  saloon  element 
than  those  acts  that  apply  merely  to 
towns  and  townships ;  and  legislative  bills 
extending  County  Option  have  frequently 
been  modified,  at  the  instance  of  liqitor 
leaders,  so  as  to  confine  the  exercise  of 
Prohibitory  rights  to  smaller  constituen- 
cies. County  Local  Option  campaigns 
are  prosecuted  with  greater  vigor,  and 
have  at  times  engaged  general  and  sys- 
tematic support. 

Missouri  is  a  typical  County  Option 
State.  The  cottnty  privilege  is  some- 
what restricted,  however,  by  the  require- 
ment that  a  Local  Option  vote  in  a  county 
shall  not  aSect  the  liquor  traffic  in  any 


city  within  the  county,  each  city  being 
permitted  to  vote  separately  on  the  ques- 
tion. The  following  table  gives  the  re- 
sults of  Local  Option  votes  in  elections 
held  between  June.  1887,  and  April,  1888, 
in  82  counties  and  20  cities  of  Missouri :  ^ 


COITNTIES 

(82  of  the  115). 

Andrew 

Atchison 

Audrain 

Barry 

Barton 

Bates 

Bollinger 

Butler 

Cape  Girardeau 

Caldwell 

Carroll 

Chariton 

Christian 

Clarke 

Clay 

Clinton 

Cooper 

Crawford 

Dade 

Dallas 

Daviess 

Dent 

DeKalb 

Douglass 

Dunklin 

Gentry 

Grundy  

Greene 

Henrv 

Holt ". 

Howell 

Iron 

Jasper  

Jefferson 

Knox 

Laclede 

Lafayette 

Lawrence 

Lewis 

Lincoln 

Linn 

Livingston  .... 
McDonald 


License. 


No. 

900 
1.4% 
1,256 
1,0.38 
l,.5;i3 
2,476 

598 

635 
1,053 

967 
1,502 
1.804 

726 
1.050 
1,032 
1,492 
1.083 
1,102 
1,236 

605 
1,740 

627 
1,099 

248 
1,044 
1,769 
1.057 
2,095 
2,185 
1.286 
1,021 

600 
2,274 
1,170 

885 

982 
1,255 
1,679 
1,461 
1.622 
1,44-3 

957 

700 


Yes. 
1,598 
1,3.55 
1,162 
1,662 

960 
1,2.55 
1,062 

749 
1,920 
1,322 
1.062 
2,:S86 

m5 

1,386 

1,926 
6.56 

1,147 
492 

1,265 
682 
923 
770 

1,009 
231 
946 

1,321 
695 
998 

1,.595 

1,391 
879 
8i>4 
760 

2.096 

m4 

928 

2.952 

937 

1,2(« 

951 

692 

816 

1,017 


Counties. 

Macon 1.109 

Madison 761 

Marion 1,1.56 

Miller 798 

Mercer 1,191 

Mississippi  ....  847 

Moniteau 826 

Monroe 1.085 

N.Madrid 774 

Newton 2..320 

Nodaway 2,426 

Oregon 392 

Ozark 268 

Pemiscot 242 

Pike 1.715 

Polk 1,219 

Pulaski 469 

Putnam 900 

Randolph 477 

Rav 207 

Riplev 104 


License. 
No.      Yes. 


St.  Clair. 

Saline 

St.  France.. . 

Schuyler 

Scotland  . . . . 

Scott 

Shannon  . . . . 

Shelby 

Stoddard  

Stone  

Sullivan 

Taney 

Texas 

Washington. 

Wayne 

Webster 

Worth 

Wright 


103 

14 

67 

302 

89 

146 

106 

268 

135 

90.5 
107 
637 
214 
117 
209 
700 
66 


831 

742 
927 

1.073 
.529 
810 

1,7.59 

2,796 
873 

1,280 
694 
707 
22:} 
153 

1,4.54 

1,785 
429 
629 

1,664 

1,977 
.566 
862 

2,194 

1,419 
972 
377 

1,080 
219 

1,2.33 
965 
273 

1,663 
482 
556 
977 
797 
939 
945 
796 


Totals 92,1.34  85,8 

Majority  . . .  6,148 


License. 
No.    Yes. 


License. 

Cities.  No.  Yes. 

Macon 305       269 

Marshal .353       324 

Maryville 414       2.37 

Moberly 579  1,022 

Neosho 206        167 

Pierce  Citv....      297       217 

Springfield....     1,722  1,472 

Trenton 406       311 


Totals 8,186    8,.509 

Majority....  323 

license,    38;    for,    44.    Cities 


Cities  (20). 

Boonville 323  428 

Brooktield 284  369 

Butler 337  247 

Cameron 267  203 

Carroll  ton 308  ;i30 

Carthage 781  427 

Clinton 478  421 

De  Soto 310  347 

Fulton .300  378 

Kirksville 340  199 

Lamar 291  274 

Lexington 1.35  617 

Counties  voting    against 
against,  13;  for,  7. 

In  the  other  States  that  have  tried 
the  County  Option  system  the  anti- 
license  people  have  enjoyed  more  or  less 
success  and  the  results  have  been  uni- 
formly significant.  For  example,  in 
Michigan,  under  the  law  of  1877  (pro- 
nounced unconstitutional  in  1888),  36  of 
the  82  counties  voted  out  the  saloons  in 
a  few  months;  in  Pennsylvania,  under 
the  law  of  1872  (repealed  in  1875),  more 

'  Political  Prohibiaonlst  for  1888,  p.  57. 


Ijocal  Option.] 


400 


[Locke,  David  Ross. 


than  40  of  the  GG  counties  did  the  same; 
in  New  Jersey,  under  the  law  of  1888, 
the  Prohibition  victories  were  so  numer 
ous  that  the  politicians  repealed  the  act 
the  next  year,  and  in  Arkansas  (which 
votes  by  counties  on  the  license  issue  in 
September  of  every  second  year)  the 
anti-saloon  vote  is  always  very  large.' 
The  vast  area  of  Prohibition  at  the 
South,  especially  in  the  States  of 
Georgia,  Mississippi,  Alabama,  Missouri, 
Tennessee  and  Kentucky,  has  been  won 
chiefly  by  the  county  method,  as  Prof. 
Scomp  has  pointed  out. 

As  a  rule,  however,  the  ordinary  Local 
Option  contests  excite  little  attention, 
and  every  year  there  are  hundreds  of 
town,  township  and  county  votes  of 
which  no  record  is  made.  It  is  only 
when  exceptionally  aggressive  or  impor- 
tant fights  are  waged  that  much  in- 
terest is  aroused. 

Some  of  these  fights  are  historic  and 
almost  take  rank  with  the  Constitutional 
Prohibition  campaigns.  The  most  mem- 
orable, undoubtedly,  were  those  made  in 
Atlanta,  the  capital  of  Georgia,  in  1885 
and  1887.  The  first  one  was  won  by  the 
Prohibitionists,  who  secured  a  majority 
of  228  in  a  total  of  9,000  votes ;  in  the 
second  there  was  an  anti-Prohibition  ma- 
jority of  1,100  in  a  total  of  10,000.  In 
each  year  the  city  was  stirred  as  it  had 
never  been,  even  by  the  most  exciting 
political  agitations.  The  repeal  of  the 
law  was  due  to  the  unscrupulous  meth- 
ods by  which  the  liquor  element  influ- 
enced the  colored  vote.  Other  South- 
ern struggles  hardly  less  remarkable 
have  been  undertaken  in  various  impor- 
tant centres,  like  Jackson,  Miss.,  Raleigh, 
N.  C,  and  Rome,  Ga.,  resulting  in  alter- 
nate victory  and  defeat  for  the  oppo- 
nents of  the  saloon.  The  changes  at- 
tending these  crusades  have  been  strik- 
ingly illustrated  in  the  city  of  Lynchburg, 
Va.,  where  Prohibition  was  beaten  by 
1,100  majority  in  1886,  but  in  1890 
lacked  only  seven  votes  of  success — 
a  change  of  1,100  in  a  total  of  only 
3,400.  At  the  North  the  annual  city 
campaigns  in  Massachusetts  seldom  fail 
to  show  the  increasing  Avillingness  of  the 
people  to  seek  the  destruction  of  the 

>  The  followiiiCT  are  the  aggregate  votes  of  the  State  of 
Arkansas  on  license  f or  a  isenes  of  years:  1882— for,  79,- 
SJ46;  against,  45,187;  1884-for.  91,243;  against,  44,366; 
1886-for,  79,450;  against,  62,260;  1888— for,  94,344; 
agaiust,  68,035. 


saloon.  Great  strongholds  of  the  traffic, 
like  Worcester,  Fall  River,  Lowell, 
Springfield  and  Lawrence  have  been  car- 
ried at  times ;  and  the  anti-license  vote 
in  Boston  increased  from  9,3G2  in  1882  to 
17,875  in  1889.  Cambridge,  the  seat  of 
Harvard  University  —  a  city  of  70,- 
000  population, — which  formerly  gave 
liquor  majorities,  has  since  188G  stead- 
ily refused  to  grant  licenses." 

Necessarily  the  results  of  Local  Option 
Prohibition  have  not  proved  so  advanta- 
geous from  the  temperance  point  of 
view  as  those  of  complete  State  Prohib- 
ition. Crime,  drunkenness  and  the 
other  evils  flowing  from  the  sale  of  liquor 
have  not  been  diminished  in  so  marked 
a  degree.  But  the  results  have  mani- 
fested the  superiority  of  even  this  unsatis- 
factory form  of  Prohiliition  as  compared 
with  any  system  of  license,  however 
stringent.  Indeed,  it  is  not  conceivable 
that  the  number  of  anti-license  cities  in 
Massachusetts  could  have  increased  from 
three  in  1884  to  12  in  1889,  and  the 
total  anti-license  vote  from  38,001  to 
C4,G95,  in  the  teeth  of  a  much  more 
watchful  and  aggressive  liquor  opposi- 
tion, unless  experience  had  convinced 
the  citizens  of  the  benefits  of  Prohibitory 
law.  (For  important  testimony  bearing 
upon  this  point,  see  Prohibition,  Bene- 
fits OF.) 

Locke,  David  Ross.  —  Born  in 
Vestal,  N.  Y.,  Sept.  20,  1833,  and  died  in 
Toledo,  0.,  Feb.  15,  1888.  He  was  edu- 
cated in  the  common  schools  and  at  the 
age  of  10  was  apprenticed  to  learn  the 
printer's  trade  in  the  office  of  the  Cort- 
land Democrat.  Seven  years  later  he 
undertook  a  journey  through  the  LTnited 
States,  and  to  meet  his  expenses  worked 
both  as  printer  and  local  reporter  on 
various  Western  newspapers.  In  1852  he 
joined  James  G.  Robinson  in  editing  and 
publishing  the  Plymouth  (0.)  Adver- 
tiser. Later  he  had  charge  of  the  Mans- 
field Herald,  and  in  185G  established  the 
Bucyrus  Journal,  to  which  he  contrib- 
uted a  series  of  stories  that  were  repub- 
lished in  other  papers.  He  had  charge 
of  the  Bellefontaine  Republican  and  was 
connected  with  the  Findlay  Jcjfcri<onian, 
becoming  its  editor  and  proprietor  in 
1861.     The   action   of   some   citizens  of 


2  Anti-license  majorities  in  Cambridge:  1880,  566  in  a 
total  of  5,254;  1887,  .506  in  a  total  of  8,020;  1888,  664  in  a 
total  of  8.302;  1889,  493  in  a  total  of  7,093. 


Logic,  Liquor.] 


401 


[Logic,  Liquor. 


Wingert's  Corners,  0.,  in  petitioning  the 
8tate  Government  to  remove  all  colored 
j^ersons  in  Ohio  suggested  to  Locke  the 
theme  of  his  famous  "  Nasby  Letters,'' 
the  first  of  which,  dated  "  Wingert's 
Corners,  March  the  2Lst,  1861"  and 
signed  "  Petroleum  V.  Nasby,"  announced 
that  Wingert's  Corners  had  declared  her- 
self free  and  independent  of  Ohio.  Others 
followed,  at  first  in  the  Jeff'ersonian  and 
then  in  the  Toledo  Blade  of  which  he 
became  editor  and  part  proprietor.  These 
letters  exerted  a  powerful  influence  dur- 
ing the  war  and  reconstruction  periods. 
They  were  continued  at  intervals  until 
Mr.  Locke's  death.  In  the  later  ones 
the  views  and  logic  of  whiskey  advocates 
were  frequently  and  effectively  ridiculed. 
In  1871  Mr.  Locke  removed  to  New  York 
City  and  took  charge  of  the  Evening 
Mail,  but  a  few  years  later  he  returned 
to  Ohio  and  resumed  his  place  on  the 
Toledo  Blade.  In  his  youth  he  published 
a  little  paper  devoted  to  temperance,  and 
his  advocacy  of  total  abstinence  and  op- 
position to  the  legalized  saloon  made  the 
Weekly  Blade  for  many  years  the  strong- 
est and  most  widely-circulated  temper- 
ance paper  in  this  country.  His  tem- 
perance articles  in  that  journal  always 
ended  with  the  words,  "  Pulverize  the 
Kum  Power ! "  He  also  made  contribu- 
tions to  magazines  in  support  of  his  anti- 
liquor  principles.  He  was  a  thorough 
Prohibitionist  in  sentiment  but  an  un- 
bending Republican  partisan;  and  ap- 
parently he  neither  sought  nor  secured 
any  extensive  personal  influence  in 
the  Prohibition  movement.  Besides  the 
"  Nasby  Letters  "  he  printed  various  vol- 
umes and  papers  on  political  and  social 
subjects. 

Logic,  Liquor. — Those  who  sell  in- 
toxicating drinks  and  those  who  justify 
the  trathc  range  all  worlds  in  seeking 
arguments  of  defense  and  lines  of  excul- 
pation. They  start,  like  archangels,  in 
Heaven  itself,  and  end,  like  fallen  arch- 
angels, in  the  lowest  pit  of  selfishness. 
They  begin  by  affirming  that  these  drinks 
are  the  gifts  of  God,  and  that  their  use 
is  sanctioned  by  the  example  of  Christ. 
They  are  the  gift  of  God  precisely  as  the 
dagger  is  the  gift  of  God ;  but  what  has 
that  to  do  with  the  act  of  the  assassin  ? 
A  farther  bestowment  of  God  is  our  own 
reason,  which  bids  us  to  put  all  his  gra- 


cious concessions  to  those  uses  and  those 
only  in  which  they  shall  profit  ourselves 
and  others.  The  words  of  St.  Paul  are 
the  eternal  law  of  charity  under  which 
we  hold  all  gifts :  "  If  meat  make  my 
brother  to  offend,  I  will  eat  no  flesh 
wliile  the  world  standeth."  Scarcely  an- 
other such  accumulation  of  offenses,  bit- 
ter and  pervasive,  is  found  in  human 
history  as  that  associated  with  the  use  of 
intoxicating  drinks  and  the  traffic  in 
them ;  yet  these  men  are  ready  to  speak 
of  this  business  as  if  it  were  a  dispensa- 
tion of  the  charities  of  Heaven.  If  love 
has  nothing  to  say  on .  such  a  theme  as 
this,  its  lips  may  as  well  be  cut  in  marble 
once  for  all. 

Christ  accepted  the  Roman  Govern- 
ment and  explicitly  justified  it  in  the 
teachings  of  the  tribute  money.  Is  pa- 
triotism, therefore,  void,  and  the  search 
for  liberty  among  men  an  illusion  ?  The 
one  all-embracing  plan  of  Heaven  is  prog- 
ress, growth  into  the  grace  of  God. 
This  growth  alters  constantly  the  rela- 
tions of  action.  There  is  no  sacrilege 
more  censurable,  no  profanity  more  com- 
plete, than  bringing  forward  the  iuno- 
cency  of  a  past  action  to  cover  the  guilt 
of  a  present  one,  than  this  effort  to  plead 
the  accidents  of  the  life  of  Christ  against 
the  spirit  of  Christ.  This  is  to  stand  iu 
the  way  of  exit  when  a  building  is  on 
fire,  because  one  may  lean  innocently  on 
the  door-post  when  there  is  no  such  flee- 
ing of  multitudes.  If  one  is  to  use  holy 
things  he  must  use  them  in  a  holy  tem- 
per, or  they  are  most  of  all  deadly.  They 
become  the  name  of  God  on  profane 
lij^s. 

Stooping  a  little  from  this  direct  ap- 
peal to  God,  these  defenders  of  the  traf- 
fic affirm :  "  You  cannot  make  men  moral 
by  law."  Ah  !  this  much  then  is  ad- 
mitted, that  the  business  does  involve  im- 
morality ;  and  the  parry  becomes,  "  This 
immorality  can  be  rooted  out  only  by  jiure 
morality;  in  such  a  conflict  civil  laAV 
is  a  sword  of  lath."  We  answer.  Civil 
law  is  itself  a  moral  agent,  and  a  most 
primary  and  efficient  one.  We  are  using 
it  in  all  the  relations  of  life  to  secure  the. 
conditions  and  give  the  motives  of  moral- 
ity ;  to  express  the  moral  temper  of  the 
community.  A  moral  conflict  is  all-em- 
bracing. We  enter  it  from  every  side. 
We  bring  to  it  the  sweet  words  of  affec- 
tion and  the  stroni?  hands  of  resistance 


Logic,  Liquor.]  402  [Logic,  Liquor. 

Let  law  be  immoral,  and  the  society  it  had  and  can  never  be  expected  to  have 
encloses  will  be  immoral.  Nothing  alone,  grace  enough  not  to  make  what  gains  it 
indeed,  not  even  law,  can  make  men  can  out  of  the  infirmities  and  sins  of 
moral.  AVe  need  all  influences,  individual  men.  We  will  hold  on  to  our  gainful 
and  collective,  persuasive  and  mandatory,  end  of  iniquity,  say  they,  till  the  men  at 
to  compass  this  great  end.  Give  us  moral  the  other  losing  end  of  indulgence  let 
forces  in  their  integrity  and  entirety,  as  go.  After  the  virtue  of  other  men  has 
they  flow  through  each  mind  singly  and  made  your  vice  impossible,  will  you  in- 
all  minds  in  their  conjoint  civic  action,  deed  quit  it  ?     So  we  believe,  and  so  wo 

But  '•  This  is  a  free  country,"  and  free-  make  haste  to  bring  the  compulsion  of 

dom  means  to  do  as  one  pleases.    Having  Prohibition  to  bear  upon  you. 
tried  their  hand  at  perverting  the  grace         Again,  they  bid  under  themselves :  "  I 

of  God,  they  now  attempt  to  profane  the  never  sell  to  a  man  who  is  drunk."  Why 

liberty  of  the  world.     Liberty  is  for  the  not  ?     AVliich  is   worse,  to  make  a  man 

sake  of  power,  and  power  is  for  the  sake  drunk  or  to  make  him  dead  drunk  ?     If 

of  beneficence.     He  who  uses  his  personal  the  transition  at  this  stage  of  it  is  more 

liberty  to  injure  himself,  and  his   civic  brutish,  it   is   also  more  innocent.     The 

liberty  to  injure  others,  robs  them  both  moral  struggle  in  which  you  side  with 

of  their  value,  and  prepares  the  way  for  the  devil  takes  place  while  the  man  ia 

the  loss  of  both.     That  which  has  kept  getting  drunk.     Once  drunk,  and  he  is 

men  back  so  long  from  freedom  has  been  only  an  insensate  brute  whose   appetites 

their  ignorance  of  the  uses  of  freedom ;  are  merely  physical  facts.     It  is  by  many 

and  that  wliich  is  ready  to  plunge  them  degrees  less  sinful  to  fill  a  brutish  man 

again  into  a  more  bitter  bondage  is  this  to  bursting  than  it  is  to  help  a  sober  man 

mistaking  of  license  for   liberty.      Alas,  down  the  incline  to  brutishuess. 
that  men  should  stand  within  the  holy  Having  cast  up  these  defenses  in  suc- 

precincts  of  our  civil  liberty,  which  was  cession  they  now  retire  from  the  region 

so  religiously  won  and  at  such  infinite  of  moral  ideas  and   shelter   themselves 

cost,  and  devote  it  to  vice  and  woe — de-  behind  custom.     "  I  am  licensed  to  sell 

vote  it  to  the  very  demon  of  tyranny.  liquor;"  '"Resolved,  That  so  long  as  our 

Sinking  a  shade  farther  they  say :  "  I  business  is  licensed  by  the  United  States, 
do  not  compel  men  to  drink;  if  people  the  State  and  county,  we  consider  it 
would  stop  drinking  I  would  stop  sell-  jierfectly  legitimate  and  honorable,  and 
ing."  These  assertions  concede  that  the  do  not  think  we  deserve  the  censure 
sale  of  liquor  is  something  short  of  per-  which  is  constantly  being  heaj)ed  upon 
sonal  right  and  needs  the  apology  of  us."  AVe  are  not  disposed  to  enter  into 
affirming  that  the  sin  lies  at  least  between  the  common  shame  which  lies  between 
the  buyer  and  the  seller — is  a  common  the  licenser  and  the  licensed.  AVe  have 
one.  if  either  is  to  let  go  of  it  both  scant  sympathy  with  the  I-am-holier- 
must  let  go.  As  long  as  the  appetites  of  than-thou  air  with  which  the  licenser, 
men  give  me  a  chance  to  sell,  says  the  having  received  his  reward,  draws  to- 
liquor-dealer,  it  is  too  much  virtue  to  ex-  gether  his  robes  and  tries  to  keep  clear 
jject  from  me  not  to  sell.  The  sin  does  of  contact  with  the  man  who  ministers 
indeed  lie  between  the  buyer  and  the  sel-  his  permission.  AA^e  have  some  sad  en- 
ler.  They  are  the  two  dogs  in  the  fight  joyment  of  the  cynical  smile  with  which 
who  tear  each  other  and  hold  on  to  each  the  liquor-dealer  stretches  out  his  hand 
other  in  the  grip  of  hate.  But  what  of  us  and  says,  "  My  brother,  this  business 
who  stand  around  ?  Shall  we  be  indiffer-  lies  between  you  and  me."  AVe  turn 
ent  to  the  brutal  conflict  or  cheer  it  on  ?  loathingly  from  this  haggling  over  the 
AVliat  of  the  fact  that  one  of  these  dogs  partition  of  infamy.  If  the  above  reso- 
is  armed  with  an  iron  collar,  and  the  other  lution  of  the  liquor-dealers  had  really 
naked  to  all  injury  ?  The  buyer  may  be  been  just  it  would  never  have  been  of- 
driven  by  an  inexorable  appetite  that  has  fered.  What  galls  them  is  the  inextin- 
robbed  him  of  power,  and  the  seller  turns  guishable  sense  of  shame  which  is  in 
this  weakness — a  very  censurable  weak-  their  own  minds  and  the  minds  of  men. 
ness,  yet  a  weakness — into  a  means  of  per-  If  the  harlot  is  licensed  she  does  not 
sonal  profiting.  Most  shameful,  yet  most  thereby  become  an  acceptable  member 
true  confession  of  the  craft,  it  never  lias  of  society.     No  ap2:)roval  can  ever  make 


Logic,  Liquor.] 


403 


[Logic,  Liquor. 


her  such.  The  eternal  hiw  of  God  is 
against  her,  and  man  cannot  help  con- 
iirming  it.  Men,  in  their  very  selfish- 
ness, despise  the  instruments  of  their 
own  sins,  as  the  Romans  of  old  held  in 
contempt  the  gladiator  who  fought  for 
their  amusement.  Unjust  as  this  aver- 
sion may  be,  the  saloon-keeper  may  rest 
assured  that  the  community  which  li- 
censes him  and  the  church  Avhich  de- 
fends him  will,  more  often  than  otherwise, 
think  him  and  his  ilk  worthy  of  hell- 
fire — the  hell-fire  they  have  helped 
to  kindle  on  earth. 

One  slight  step  farther:  "Our  busi- 
ness puts  much  money  into  the  public 
treasury."  We  as  a  people  have  fallen 
perceptibly  behind  the  Pharisee  who 
Avould  not  devote  to  the  service 
of  the  temple  the  30  pieces  of  sil- 
ver— ^the  price  of  blood.  We  have  no 
scruples.  Let  not,  however,  these  hun- 
dred millions  blind  the  eye  by  their  own 
glitter.  They  stand  for  a  thousand 
millions  of  most  wasteful  and  wretched 
expenditure.  They  stand  for  money 
Avrongf ully  taken  from  the  most  extreme 
poverty,  money  that  all  divine  charity 
and  human  love  would  have  devoted  to 
the  nourishment  of  women  and  chil- 
dren, to  the  safety  of  the  body  and 
the  nurture  of  the  mind.  All  human 
ties  have  been  torn  asunder  in  receiv- 
ing that  money,  as  much  so  as  if  it 
were  the  price  of  a  slave.  These  hun- 
dred millions  must  stand  forever  as  the 
visible  sign  of  a  thousand  millions 
wrung  from  men  in  all  stages  of  impov- 
erishment, as  the  price  at  which  we  have 
valued  the  poor  of  our  people.  Bring  to 
bear  on  these  coins  sharp-eyed  moral 
vision,  and  symbols  of  debauch,  poverty 
and  crime  will  be  seen  intertwined  in  the 
device  of  every  one  of  them. 

"  The  liquor  traffic  gives  work  to  many 
people ; "  "  It  makes  business  lively." 
That  no  condemning  feature  might  be 
wanting  to  the  manufacture  of  intoxicat- 
ing drinks  and  to  the  traffic  in  them, 
this  occupation  is  distinguished  from  all 
other  lines  of  employment  in  the  unfav- 
orable ratio  of  labor  to  the  capital 
engaged  in  it.  (See  p.  38U)  It  is  parsi- 
monious above  every  branch  of  business 
in  the  accidental  good  of  giving  labor  to 
workmen.  The  liveliness  it  imparts  to 
business  is  the  lumbering  thud  of  the 
beer-truck  in  the  crowded  thoroughfare. 


issuing  a  few  hours  later  in  the  idleness, 
unnerved  energies  and  scattered  ambi- 
tions of  the  saloon.  Where  is  all  worthy 
life,  whether  social  or  economic,  so  ham- 
strung as  in  the  saloon  ?  The  saloon  is 
the  enemy  of  purity,  honesty  and  enter- 
prise; of  every  affection  which  prompts 
and  rewards  industry.  If  we  could  unite 
visibly  the  beginning  and  the  end  of  this 
business,  no  kind  of  industry — unless  it 
be  that  of  the  undertaker — would  be 
found  to  end  so  quickly  and  so  certainly 
in  the  charnel-house. 

And  now  comes  the  last  deep  dip,  as 
the  bird  touches  the  Dead  Sea  waves  of 
sin :  '*  I  was  brought  up  to  this  business, 
and  I  must  live  ;  if  I  do  not  sell,  others 
will."  If  a  man  pleads  that  he  must  live, 
even  though  it  be  on  the  lives  of  his  fel- 
low-men, one  feels  like  accepting  the 
cynical  reply  of  Talleyrand  on  a  like 
occasion,  "I  do  not  see  the  necessity." 
It  hardly  seems  possible  that  one  should 
unite  such  a  despicable  reason  as  this, 
"  I  will  make  haste  to  earn  the  wages  of 
sin,  lest  others  should  anticipate  me  in 
them,"  with  that  first  argument,  the 
grace  of  God  and  the  examj^ie  of  Christ. 
Yet  this  connection  marks  one  of  the 
terrible  features  in  this  accursed  traffic. 
Its  leading  advocates  may  stand  in  the 
pulpit,  and  thence  the  tenuous  line  of 
defenders  may  pass,  like  a  thread,  out  of 
the  church-door,  through  the  thorough- 
fare, by  the  gilded  saloon  on  the  cross- 
street,  down  the  lane,  till  it  hides  itself 
from  sunlight  and  daylight  in  a  dive. 
While  the  preacher  at  one  end  is  quoting 
the  example  of  Christ,  the  vendor  at  the 
other  end  mingles  with  the  oaths  that 
part  his  sodden  lips  that  abortion  of  the 
moral  reason,  "  If  I  do  not  sell  others 
will."  I  rob,  because  the  man  behind  me 
is  a  robber.  Where,  in  all  this  continuity 
of  sin-sick  thought,  is  the  point  of  sound 
division?  Which  of  its  two  extremities 
would  one  prefer  to  occujiy  ?  In  which 
direction  do  men  shift  most  frequently  in 
mutual  ministration  along  this  line  of 
defense — from  the  dive  to  the  pulpit,  or 
from  the  pulpit  to  the  dive  ? 

God  give  us  grace  to  speedily  gather 
up  all  these  interlocked  reasons  of  a  per- 
verted heart,  and  cast  them,  like  the 
chain  with  which  Satan  is  bound  and 
binds  his  followers,  into  the  bottomless 
pit. 

JoHisr  Bascoat. 


Longevity.] 


404 


[Longevity. 


Longevity. — The  evidence  that  the 
use  of  alcohol  shortens  life  greatly  is 
ample  and  is  daily  becoming  more  con- 
vincing. There  are  few — if  indeed  there 
are  any — of  the  questions  relating  to 
social  and  vital  statistics  which  can  be  so 
easily  and  satisfactorily  determined  as 
this  one.  It  is  (if  the  abundant  testi- 
mony so  far  adduced  can  be  regarded  as 
conclusive)  a  rule  without  any  exception, 
that  when  two  groups  of  men,  the  one 
group  composed  of  alcohol-users  and  the 
other  of  abstainers,  whose  environments 
— except  in  so  far  as  they  are  affected  by 
the  use  of  alcohol  or  by  abstinence 
from  it — have  been  brought  into  com- 
parison, the  abstainers  have  been  found 
to  have  had  a  great  advantage  in  the 
matter  of  longevity  over  the  alcohol- 
users.  This  point  of  environment  is  of 
vital  importance  inasmuch  as  the  returns 
of  the  English  Registrar-General  show 
that  the  various  occupations  or  employ- 
ments, in  their  influence  on  the  longevity 
of  those  engaged  in  them,  differ  from 
each  other  to  quite  a  surprising  extent.^ 
In  some  of  these  occupations,  at  certain 
ages,  the  death-rate  is  twice,  in  some 
thrice,  and  in  some  even  four  times  as 
high  as  it  is  in  others.  Obviously,  there- 
fore, in  such  an  inquiry  as  the  present,  it 
is  necessary  that  keen  watch  be  kept  on 
the  sanitary  and  other  surroundings  of 
the  various  groups  which  are  compared. 
Thus,  soldiers  who  are  alcohol-users 
should  be  compared  with  soldiers,  simi- 
larly circumstanced,  who  are  abstainers. 


Abstaining  workingmen  ought  to  be  com- 
pared with  other  workingmen  who  use 
alcohol,  and  not  with  alcohol-using 
clergymen,  lawyers  and  business  men — 
and  so  on. 

An  investigation  of  crucial  importance 
bearing  on  this  subject  was  recently  con- 
cluded in  England.  It  was  "  An  inquiry 
as  to  the  rates  of  mortality  and  sickness, 
according  to  the  experience  for  the  ten 
years  1878-87,  of  the  Independent  Order 
of  Kechabites  Friendly  Society,"  and  was 
conducted  by  Francis  G.  P.  Neison,  Esq., 
Fellow  of  the  Institute  of  Actuaries,  and 
barrister-at-law.  The  members  of  this 
Society  are  all  abstainers  and  are  mostly 
workingmen.  Therefore  a  comparison 
between  their  rate  of  mortality  and  the 
rate  of  mortality  of  the  members  of  other 
workingmen's  benefit  societies  may  le- 
gitimate!} be  made.  No  one  could  be 
better  fitted  for  undertaking  it  than  Mr. 
Neison.  He  is  an  expert  in  benefit  society 
matters,  and  has  conducted  several  in- 
vestigations as  to  the  rates  of  mortality 
and  sickness  of  the  Order  of  Odd-Fellows 
and  the  Order  of  Foresters,  both  of  which 
are  very  large  and  very  important  non-tee- 
total benefit  societies  with  a  membership 
consisting  chiefly  of  respectable  working- 
men.  The  longevity  of  members  of  each 
of  these  three  societies,  as  ascertained  by 
Mr.  Neison,  is  set  forth  as  follows : 


>  These  diflferences  make  a  very  decided  showing  in 
favor  of  those  classes  especially  noted  for  sobriety  and 
total  abstinence  and  asjainst  those  that  are  distinguished 
above  all  others  for  recklessness  in  the  use  of  liquors. 
Every  one  will  admit  that  the  clergymen  and  farmers  be- 
long peculiarly  to  the  tirst-mentioned  classes,  and  the 
brewers,  saloon-keepeis,  beer-dealers,  hotel  servants  and 
bartenders  to  the  second-mentioned.  The  Registrar- 
General's  report  for  1885  gives  the  results  of  a  very  careful 
inquiry  concerning  the  death-rate  of  all  males  in  England 
and  Wales  between  the  ages  of  25  and  65,  and  of  separate 
classes  of  males,  by  occupations.  The  death-rate  of  "  all 
males"  is  placed  at  1,000,  and  on  this  basis  the  following 
comparative  figures  are  presented  : 
Death-rate  of 

All  males 1,000 

Clurgymen 556 

Farmers,  etc 631 

Laborers,  agricultural TOl 

Males  in  selected  healthy  districts 804 

Carpenters  and  joiners 820 

Coal  miners 8!)1 

Masons  and  bricklayers 969 

Plumbers,  painters,  etc I,'i03 

Brewers 1,361 

Saloon-keepers,  beer-dealers,  etc 1,521 

flotel  servants,  bartenders,  etc 2.205 

The  Registrar-General,  in  his  summary  of  the  facts 
Bhown  in  his  report,  makes  the  significant  comment  that 
"  the  mortality  of  men  who  are  directly  concerned  in  the 
liqaor  trade  is  appalling." 


Summary  of  the  Rates  of  Mor-  | 

TALITY    PEl 

t  CENT.  IN  Each  Period 
OF  Years. 

From  Age 

Odd- 

Felloirs. 

Foresters. 

Eechabites. 

1866-1870. 

1871-1875. 

1878-1887. 

20  to  30 

7.0 

7.4 

5.2 

30  to  40 

9.2 

9.9 

5.5 

40  to  50 

13.4 

14.8 

8.5 

50  to  60 

22.5 

25.3 

17.0 

60  to  70 

44.7 

48.7 

39.0 

70  to  80 

96.5 

99.1 

97.3 

Here,  manifestly,  the  Kechabites  have 
a  very  considerable  advantage  in  the 
matter  of  longevity  over  both  the  Odd- 
Fellows  and  the  Foresters.  But  there  is 
other  evidence  derived  from  unquestion- 
able sources  that  points  in  the  same 
direction. 

The  following  table,  which  gives  the 
number  of  deaths  per  1,000  per  annum, 
at  the  ages  named,  of  Kechabites,  For- 
esters, "Healthy  Assured  Males"  and 
"  Males  of  All  England,"  should  be  read 
thus :  Of  1,000  Reclmhites,  aged  25, 5.080 
will  die  before  reaching  tlie  age  of  26;  of 
1,000  Fofesfers  aged  25,  7.370  'ti^ill  die 


Longevity.] 


405 


[Longevity. 


hefore  reaching  the  age  of  2^;  0/ 1,000 
"Healthy  Assured  Males"  6.030  loill  die 
before  reaching  the  age  of  26/  and  0/' 1,000 
"'Males  of  all  England"  7.729  loill  die 
hefore  reaching  that  age — and  so  on. 


OBTALITY 

M,   in  the 
for  the  10 

1887. 

c^  .0 

0  t*-" 

0  J,  0  i  0 

8  ^ 

W  4;  CO 

gg 

Sll^l 

Age. 

TE  OF  M 

B    AnNU 

habites, 
Dec.  .31, 

RTALITY 

in    the 
the  5  ye 

m 

m. 

0  «—1  c  K< 

&.  se  /-' 

fe  x^ 

fc^sSO  ^ 

Adjust; 
PER   1,0( 
Order  o 
Years  E 

Ratk  o 

FEB   An 
Forestei 

Rate  o 
PER  An 

All  Engl 

<  g  £  0  *  m 

2.5 

5.080 

7.. 370 

7.729 

6.6.30 

30 

5.120 

8.070 

9.-386 

7.720 

35 

5.450 

10.130 

11  276 

8.770 

40 

6.460 

12.080 

13.893 

10.. 310 

45 

8.570 

15.110 

16.601 

12.190 

.50 

11.970 

18.6.50 

20.390 

15.950 

55 

17.190 

26.260 

26.669 

21.030 

60 

25.150 

33.660 

a5.450 

29.680 

65 

38.970 

49. 370 

48.85^ 

43.430 

It  is  important  that  the  differences  be- 
tween these  tables  should  be  noted. 
They  are  just  such  as  the  returns  of  the 
Eegistrar-General  and  the  results  of  the 
investigations  conducted  by  Mr.  Neison 
would  lead  us  to  expect.  The  highest 
rate  of  mortality  is  amongst  the  "Males 
of  All  England."  This  section  includes 
the  whole  of  the  males  belonging  to  all 
diseased  and  defective  classes  in  the 
country,  and,  of  course,  in  it  the  death- 
rate  is  very  high.  The  next  in  order  is 
that  of  the  Foresters.  The  position  of 
those  composing  this  section  is  consider- 
ably better  than  that  of  the  males  in 
general.  Obviously,  people  of  abnormally 
feeble  constitutions  and  those  known  to 
be  subject  to  hereditary  disease,  are  ex- 
cluded from  the  Foresters.  The  next  in 
order  is  that  of  the  "Healthy  Assured 
Males."  Those  included  in  it  belong 
mainly  to  the  middle  and  upper  classes, 
whose  sanitary  conditions  and  sur- 
roundings are  of  the  best.  They  are 
also  selected  lives.  Their  death-rate, 
consequently,  is  considerably  lighter 
than  that  of  the  Foresters  and  very 
much  lighter  than  that  of  the  "  Males 
of  All  England."  The  lightest  death- 
rate  of  all,  however,  is  that  of  the 
members  of  the  Order  of  Eechabites. 
Their  rate  of  mortality  is  very  consider- 
ably lighter  than  even  that  of  the  mid- 
dle and  upper-class  healthy  assured 
males.     This  is  very  noteworthy,  for  of 


course  the  real  and  legitimate  compari- 
son is  between  the  Rechabites  and  the 
Foresters,  who,  saving  in  the  one  point 
of  using  or  not  using  alcohol,  are  prac- 
tically in  identical  circumstances.  One 
point  of  importance  must  here  be  no- 
ticed. The  investigations  as  to  the  mor- 
tality of  the  Rechabites  are  somewhat 
more  recent  than  are  those  as  to  the  mor- 
tality of  the  other  sections  under  notice  ; 
and  during  the  last  10  years,  as  compared 
Avith  the  preceding  20  years,  there  has 
been  a  considerable  decrease  in  the  aver- 
age death-rate  of  the  United  Kingdom. 
Hence  it  is  necessary  to  make  a  deduc- 
tion from  the  death-rates  given  of  the 
Foresters,  the  "  Males  of  All  England  " 
and  the  healthy  assured  males  sufficient 
to  cover  the  difference.  A  deduction  of 
about  7|  per  cent,  would  be  amply  suffi- 
cient on  this  account.  But  after  this 
deduction  has  been  made  the  balance  in 
favor  of  the  Rechabites  will  still  be  very 
great. 

Now,  if  the  matter  were  left  at  this 
point,  the  case  in  support  of  the  thesis 
that  the  use  of  alcohol  is  the  great  short- 
ener  of  life  would  be  one  of  the  strong- 
est ;  but  it  is  not  necessary  to  leave  it  in 
this  position.  Much  additional  evidence 
of  a  similarily  cogent  character  can  be 
presented. 

Tbe  Sons  of  Temperance  Benefit 
Societv,  an  organization  similar  in  all 
essential  particulars  to  the  Order  of 
Rechabites,  has  a  death-rate  correspond- 
ing very  closely  to  that  of  the  Rechabites. 
In  addition  to  all  this,  insurance  socie- 
ties that  insure  both  abstainers  and  non- 
abstainers  in  separate  sections,  and  re- 
cord their  life  experiences  separately, 
have  a  similar  mortality  experience  to 
that  of  the  Rechabites.  The  Sceptre, 
with  23  years'  experience,  has  a  death- 
rate  of  a  little  under  5  per  1,000  on  the 
average  per  annum  amongst  the  teetotal- 
ers, and  a  fraction  over  10  per  1,000 
amongst  the  general  section.  This  So- 
ciety, which  consists,  in  both  sections, 
of  exceptionally  young  insurers,  has, 
even  for  insurers  exceptionally  young, 
an  abnormally  low  rate  of  mortality  in 
both  sections.  This,  so  far  at  least  as 
the  teetotal  section  is  concerned,  will  be 
seen  from  the  astonishing  fact  that  while 
amongst  the  healthy  assured  males 
the  rate  of  mortality  at  the  earlv  age 
of    19   is    5.750  per   1,000,   the    death- 


Longevity.] 


406 


[Longevity. 


rate  amongst  the  teetotal  insurers  at 
all  ages  with  the  Sceptre  has,  on  the 
average  of  33  years,  heen  .  only  abont 
5  per  1,000  per  annum.  The  Whit- 
tington  Society  has  a  death-rate  of 
e.74  for  the  teetotalers,  and  16.35  for  the 
non-abstainers  Something  must  be  al- 
lowed in  both  these  societies  for  the  fact 
that  on  the  average  the  teetotalers 
amongst  their  insurers  are  younger  than 
the  non-teetotalers.  But  it  has  been 
found  that  between  the  ages  of  30  and 
50  in  tlie  AVhittington,  the  death-rate 
for  the  temperance  people  is  only  (3.73 
per  1,000  per  annum.  The  significance 
of  this  fact  will  be  recognized  when  it  is 
remembered  that  the  annual  death-rate 
per  1,000  amongst  "  Healthy  Assured 
Males  "  at  the  age  of  30  is  7.730,  at  the 
age  of  40  is  10.310,  and  at  the  age  of  50, 
15.950. 

Two  other  English  societies  which  in- 
sure  "temperance  lives"  have  lately 
been  established,  and  their  experience  is 
not  less  favorable  to  the  views  of  the 
temperance  party  than  that  of  the  older 
societies.  These  are  the  Scottish  Tem- 
perance Life  Assurance  Company  (limit- 
ed), and  the  Blue  Ribbon  Life,  Accident, 
IMutual  and  Industrial  Insurance  Com- 
pany (limited).  Each  of  these  societies 
has  recently  issued  its  first  quinquennial 
report.  In  the  case  of  the  first-named, 
in  the  temperance  section,  only  34  deaths 
have  occurred  per  100  of  those  which, 
according  to  the  "  Healthy  Males  "  table, 
were  expected ;  and ,  in  the  general  sec- 
tion, 63  per  100  of  those  expected.  In 
the  Blue  Ribbon  Company  the  mortality 
experience  has  been  equally  favorable.  It 
must,  however,  be  remembered  that  so 
exceptionally  low  a  death-rate  cannot  be 
expected  to  be  maintained,  as  the  whole 
of  the  insurers  in  both  these  societies 
have  quite  recently  been  passed  by  the 
medical  officers,  so  that  latent  imperfec- 
tions of  constitution  which,  in  a  certain 
proportion  of  cases,  will  by  and  by  affect 
the  rate  of  mortality,  have  not  yet  had 
time  to  do  so.  This  peculiarity,  how- 
ever, affects  both  teetotalers  and  non- 
teetotalers  alike — hence  the  point  to  .be 
noticed  is  the  difference  between  the 
death-rate  in  the  teetotal  section  and 
that  in  the  general  section,  which  is  very 
marked. 

Probably,  however,  the  most  valuable 
of  all  the  evidence  that  can  at  present  be 


obtained  from  the  statistics  of  assurance 
associations  is  that  supplied  by  the  United 
Kingdom  Temperance  and  General 
Provident  Institution.  This  society  has 
had  a  long  and  wide  experience.  The 
comparison  between  the  mortality  ex- 
perience of  the  temperance  and  that  of 
the  general  insurers  is  based  on  the 
extent  of  the  difference  betAveen  the 
expected  and  the  aciual  deaths  in  both 
sections ;  and  the  "  expectation  "  is  based 
on  the  death-rate  in  the  actuaries'  tables. 
The  results  are  these :  For  the  30  years 
1866-85  the  expected  deaths  in  the 
temperance  section  were  3,384,  and  the 
actual  deaths  were  3,408;  while  in  the 
general  section  the  expected  deaths  were 
5,431,  and  the  actual  deaths  were  5,384. 
One  significant  fact  is  that  there  has 
been  a  gradual  decrease  in  the  death- 
rate  of  the  abstainers  during  the  whole 
period.  For  the  five  years  1866-70,  of 
evei\y  1 00  deaths  expected  74  took  place ; 
for  the  years  1871-5,  of  every  100  ex- 
pected deaths  71  occurred ;  for  the  years 
1876-80,  of  every  100  expected  deaths 
70  took  place;  and  for  1881-5  the  deaths 
were  70  for  every  100  expected. 

Mr.  Neison  calculates  that  of  1,000 
Foresters,  at  18  years  of  age,  118  will 
reach  80;  while  of  1,000  Rechabites  of 
18,  no  fewer  than  164  will  reach  that 
age.  The  following  fact,  brought  to  light 
by  recent  investigations  of  the  British 
Medical  Association,  is  strongly  confirm- 
atory of  the  evidence  already  given.  Of 
a  total  number  of  people  over  80  years 
of  age,  whose  cases  were  investigated  by 
the  Association,  it  was  found  that  36  per 
cent,  were  total  abstainers.  Considering 
how  small  a  proportion  of  the  general 
community  are  abstainers,  this  is  a  re- 
markable result. 

One  other  point  ought  to  be  noticed. 
The  difference  between  the  death-rate  of 
teetotalers  and  that  of  alcohol-users  does 
not  measure  the  extent  of  the  mortality 
caused  by  drink;  for  many  teetotalers 
have  sustained  injury  from  their  own 
former  intemperance,  many  from  their 
parents'  intemperance,  and  all  of  them 
from  the  tjeneral  lowering  of  the  condi- 
tions of  life  which  is  caused  by  drinking. 

James  AVhyte. 

Much  stress  has  been  laid  by  unthink- 
ing or  unscrupulous  persons  in  the  United 
States   upon   certain    interpretations    of 


Longevity.] 


407 


[Longevity. 


statistics  recently  collected  by  the  British 
Medical  Association.  The  following,  from 
the  Wine  and  Spirit  Gazette  (accepted 
without  question  by  hundreds  of  Ameri- 
can newspapers  and  reprinted  by  them) 
is  a  specimen  of  the  deductions  that  have 
been  made : 

"  The  British  Medical  Association  appointed 
a  Committee  to  make  inquiries  in  order  to  ascer- 
tain the  average  age  of  the  different  categories 
of  drinkers — tliat  is  to  say,  those  who  refrain 
completely  from  alcoholic  drink,  those  who  in- 
dulge more  or  less  in  moderation,  and  those  who 
drink  to  excess.  This  Committee  has  handed 
in  its  report.  Its  cases  are  drawn  from  4,234 
deaths,  which  are  divided  into  five  categories  of 
individuals,  with  average  of  age  attained  by 
each: 

1.  Total  abstainers 51  years  2-^  days. 

2.  Habitually  temperate  drinkers. .    63      "      13    " 

3.  Careless  drinkers 59      "      67    " 

4.  Free  drinkers  57      "      59    " 

5.  Decidedly  intemperate  drinkers.    53      "       3    " 

These  figures  show,  singularly  enough,  that 
tho.se  who  reach  the  shortest  age  are  those  who 
drink  no  alcohol  whatever;  after  them  come 
the  drunkards,  who  only  exceed  them  by  a  trifle. 
The  greatest  average  age  is  those  who  drink 
modei'ately." 

The  investigation  in  question  was  super- 
intended by  Dr.  Isambard  Owen,  and 
when  his  attention  was  called  to  the  at- 
tacks on  total  abstinence,  based  upon  his 
figures,  he  wrote  the  following  letter  to 
the  Secretary  of  the  United  Kingdom 
Alliance : 

"  Sir. — As  the  author  of  the  report  on  '  The 
Connection  of  Disease  with  Habits  of  Intem- 
perance,' issued  last  year  by  the  Collective  In- 
vestigation Committee  of  the  British  Medieval 
Association,  I  shall  be  glad  if  you  will  allow  me 
to  correct  certain  erroneous  ideas  of  its  purport 
which,  I  am  informed  by  numerous  corre.spond- 
ents,  have  become  current  among  the  public, 
and  are  being  disseminated  by  interested  per- 
sons in  a  manner  calculated  to  do  serious  mis- 
chief. 

"  It  is  constantly  being  asserted,  I  am  told,  on 
the  authority  of  the  report  in  question,  that  ab- 
stinence from  alcoholic  liquors  has  lieen  proved 
to  be  a  habit  eminently  prejudicial  to  health, 
and  that  total  abstainers  have  been  shown  to  be 
a  shorter-lived  body  of  men  even  than  habitual 
drunkards. 

"  Permit  me  to  say,  sir.^that  my  report  is  not 
answerable  for  any  such  absurdities.  The  as- 
sertions I  refer  to  are  founded  on  certain  statis- 
tical figures  contained  in  the  report,  which  are 
systematically  quoted  apart  from  their  context, 
and  in  defiance  of  the  explanations  therein 
given.  The  actual  conclu.sions  of  the  report, 
as  regards  relative  longevity,  are  as  follows: 

"1.  That  habitual  indulgence  in  alcoholic 
liquors  beyond  the  most  moderate  amounts  has 

A    DISTINCT    TENDENCY    TO    SHOKTEN  IJFE,  the 

average  shortening  l)eing  roughly  proportioned 
to  the  degree  of  indulgence. 

"  3.  That  of  men  who  have  passed  the  age  of 


25,  the  strictly  temperate,  on  the  average,  live 
at  least  10  years  longer  than  those  who  become 
decidedly  intemperate.  (We  have  not,  in  these 
returns,  the  means  of  coming  to  any  C(mclu- 
sion  as  to  the  relative  duration  oi  life  of  total 
abstainers  and  habitually  temperate  drinkers  of 
alcoholic  liquors.)  I  am,  sir,  your  obedient 
servant,  Isambard  Owen,  M.D." 

Mr.  James  Whyte  (the  writer  of  the 
preceding  article)  makes  a  further  ex- 
l)lanation,  as  follows: 

"  The  temperance  movement  is  comparatively 
new,  and,  as  is  well  known,  it  is  among  the 
young  mainly  that,  during  the  last  quarter  of  a 
century  especially,  it  has  been  influential  and 
successful.  Hence  it  is  that  the  'proportion  of 
teetotalers  in  the  section  of  the  community  be- 
tween 25  and  say  35  or  40,  is  enormously 
greater  than  among  that  portion  of  it  whose 
ages  exceed  35  or  40  years.  As  there  is  no  pe- 
riod of  life  at  which  there  are  not  some  people ' 
who  die,  and  as  the  rate  of  mortality  is  very 
much  lower  in  early  manhood  than  it  is  later  in 
life,  we  should  expect  to  find  that  amongst  tee- 
totalers the  deaths  which  have  occurred 
would,  in  proportion  to  the  number  of  teetotal- 
ers living,  be  few,  and,  on  the  average,  would 
have  taken  place  at  a  relatively  early  age." 

And  the  organ  of  the  British  Medical 
Association,  the  British  Medicat  Journal^ 
has  added  its  condemnation  of  the  writers 
who  use  this  report  to  assail  total  absti- 
nence : 

"Rarely  (says  the  JournaT)\iSi%  any  docu- 
ment been  the  subject  of  such  extraordinary 
misconception  and  misrepresentation  as  has 
fallen  to  the  lot  of  Dr.  Isambard  Owen's  report 
of  the  collective  investigation  on  the  connection 
between  drinks  and  diseases.  All  over  the 
kingdom  Dr.  Owen  has  been  represented  as  lay- 
ing down,  from  the  returns  sent  in  to  this  com- 
mittee, that  total  abstainers  do  not  live  so  long 
as  moderate  drinkers,  or  even  as  those  who  are 
actually  intemperate.  We  need  hardly  say  to 
our  readers  that  Dr.  Owen  has  never  said  any- 
thing of  the  kind.  On  the  contrary,  he  dis- 
tinctly stated  that  no  conclusion  could  be  drawn 
from  the  returns  as  to  the  relative  longevity  of 
teetotalers.  It  is  true  that  the  figures  warrant 
the  construction  of  a  table  from  which  a  casual 
ob.server,  ignorant  of  the  subject,  might  sup- 
pose that  the  average  life  of  the  abstainer  was 
some  nine  months  less  tlian  that  of  the  decid- 
edly intemperate.  But  Dr.  Owen  devotes  con- 
siderable space  for  the  exposure  of  such  a  fal- 
lacy. His  explanation  of  the  apparent  anomaly 
is  simply  that,  as  the  greater  number  of  con- 
verts to  abstinence  have  been  from  the  young 
during  the  three  years  embraced  in  the  returns, 
the  average  age  of  adult  ab.stainers  must  have 
been  less  than  the  average  age  of  drinkers.  He 
supports  this  explanation  by  constructing  two 
tal)les  of  the  average  at  death  of  persons  be- 
tween 30  and  40,  and  of  those  above  that  age, 
with  the  result  that  the  relative  proportions  are 
greatly  altered. 

"The  conclusion,  erroneously  attributed  to 
Dr.  Owcu,  is  utterly  unwarrantable,  though  it 


Longevity.] 


408 


[Longevity. 


has  been  paraded  in  high-class  journals  of 
-which  better  things  might  have  been  expected. 
Taking  into  consideration  how  valueless  vital 
st^istrcs  are  without  the  explanations  which 
usually  accompany  them,  it  is  curious  how  so 
many  writers  have  seized  upon  a  few  isolated 
figures,  have  put  an  interpretation  on  them 
which  they  did  not  warrant,  and  have  credited 
conclusions  to  the  editor  of  the  returns  which 
he  not  only  never  drew,  but  actually  showed 
good  reason  for  not  drawing.  A  careful  peru- 
sal of  the  committee's  report  would  have  saved 
not  a  few  literary  critics  from  a  ludicrous  blun- 
der." ' 

In  another  article  (March  IT,  1888), 
the  British  Medical  Journal  reviewed, 
with  considerable  formality,  the  mor- 
tality figures  of  total  abstinence  insur- 
ance societies  as  compared  with  those  of 
companies  that  insure  teetotalers  and 
drinkers  promiscously,  and  made  this 
comment  :  "  There  can  be  little  doubt  as 
to  the  general  tendency  of  these  striking 
tables  in  favor  of  healthfulness  of  ab- 
staining temperance." 

In  the  United  States  the  testimony  of 
experts  in  life  insurance  is  exceedingly 
strong  in  confirmation  of  the  opinion 
that  the  use  of  alcohol  in  any  form, 
even  in  so-called  moderation,  tends  to 
shorten  life.  The  Voice,  in  1884  and 
1885,  submitted  to  the  officials  of  many 
insurance  companies  the  following  state- 
ment from  Jacob  L,  Greene,  President 
of  the  Connecticut  Mutual  Life  Insur- 
ance Company: 

' '  It  has  been  my  duty  to  read  the  records  of 
and  to  make  inquiry  into  the  last  illness  and 
death  of  many  thousand  persons  of  all  classes 
in  all  parts  of  the  country.  .  .  .  Among 
the  persons  selected  with  care  for  physical 
soundness  and  sobriety,  and  who  are,  as  a  rule, 
respectable  and  useful  members  of  society,  the 
death-rate  is  more  profoundly  affected  by  the 
use  of  intoxicating  drinks  than  from  any  other 
one  cause,  apart  from  heredity. 

"I  protest  against  the  notion  so  prevalent 
and  so  industriously  urged  that  beer  is  harm- 
less, and  a  desirable  substitute  for  the  more 
concentrated  liquors.  What  beer  may  be  and 
what  it  may  do  in  other  countries  and  climates, 
I  do  not  know  from  observation.  That  in  this 
country  and  climate  its  use  is  an  evil  only  less 
than  the  use  of  whiskey — if  less  on  the  whole — 
and  that  its  effect  is  only  longer  delayed,  not  so 
immediate!}^  and  obviously  bad,  its  incidents  not 
so  repulsive  but  destructive  in  the  end,  1  have 
seen  abimdant  proof.  In  one  of  our  largest 
cities,  containing  a  great  population  of  beer- 
drinkers,  I  had  occasion  to  note  the  deaths 
among  a  large  group  of  persons  whose  habits, 
in  their  own  eyes  and  in  those  of  their  friends 
and  physicians,  were  temperate;  but  they  were 
habitual  users  of  beer.     When  the  observation 

>  British  Medical  Journal,  Sept.  1, 1888. 


began,  they  were  upon  the  average  something 
under  middle  age,  and  they  were,  of  course, 
selected  lives.  For  two  or  three  years  there  was 
notliing  very  remarkable  to  be  noted  among 
this  group.  Presently  death  began  to  strike  it 
and  luitil  it  had  dwindled  to  a  fraction  of  its 
original  proportions  the  mortality  in  it  was  as- 
tounding in  extent,  and  still  more  remarkable 
in  the  manifest  identity  of  cause  and  mode. 
There  was  no  mistaking  it;  the  history  was  al- 
most invariable — robust,  apparent  health,  full 
muscles,  a  fair  outside,  increasing  weiglit,  tlorid 
faces;  then  a  touch  of  cold  or  a  sniff  of  malaria, 
and  instantly  some  acute  disease,  with  almost 
invariably  typhoid  symptoms,  was  in  violent 
action,  and  ten  days  or  less  ended  it.  It  was  as 
if  the  system  had  been  kept  fair  outside  while 
within  it  was  eaten  to  a  shell;  and  at  the  first 
touch  of  disease  there  was  utter  collapse — every 
fiber  was  poisoned  and  weak.  And  this,  in  its 
main  features — varying,  of  course,  in  degree — 
has  been  my  observation  of  i)eer-drinking 
everywhere.  It  is  peculiarly  deceptive  at  first; 
it  is  "thoroughly  destructive  at  the  last." 

James  W.  Alexander,  Vice-President 
of  the  Equitable  Life  Assurance  Society, 
wrote : 

"  No  one  can  attend  to  the  settlement  of  losses 
in  an  insurance  company  without  being  pain- 
fully reminded  of  the  danger  to  life  arising 
from  intemperance;  and  how  often  what  even 
we  designate  as  moderate  drinking  expands  into 
immoderate  drinking  and  causes  early  death,  is 
hardly  realized  by  those  who  do  not  have  the 
evidence  brought  under  their  eyes  as  we  do.  I 
suppose  that  next  to  pulmonary  diseases  more 
persons  come  to  their  death,  either  directly  or 
indirectly,  by  alcoholism  than  from  any  other 
one  cause.  Hundreds  of  men  who  die  from  liver 
complaint,  kidney  troubles,  etc.,  etc.,  might 
have  been  healthy  men  to-day  if  they  had  not 
poisoned  their  systems  with  alcohol.  .  .  .  We 
have  for  some  time  charged  extra  rates  for  brew- 
ers and  persons  engaged  in  the  manufacture  and 
sale  of  beer  and  spirits,  even  when  the  appli- 
cants themselves  were  abstemious  men,  for  we 
fear  that  persons  so  engaged  cannot  keep  so  near 
the  fire  without  getting  burned.  Other  things 
being  equal,  I  think  we  should  always  give  the 
preference  to  total  abstainers,  excepting  those 
who  have  been  excessive  drinkers  and  who  have 
reformed.  These  we  are  obliged  to  be  cautious 
about  on  account  of  the  terrible  danger  in  which 
a  man  who  has  once  been  a  drinker  stands  of 
falling  back  in  the  habit." 

Walter  R.  Gillette,  Medical  Director  of 
the  Mutual  Life  Insurance  Company, 
wrote : 

"  If  there  is  anything  proved  by  our  mortuary 
experience  it  is  that  those  who  abstain  from  the 
habitual  or  excessive  use  of  alcoholics  have  a  far 
greater  chance  of  long  life  than  those  who  in- 
dulge in  these  beverages.  .  .  .  There  can  be  no 
question  but  that  total  abstainers  have  a  much 
better  chance  of  longevity  than  those  who  drink 
even  in  moderation.  .  .  .  This  ruk;  applies  to 
the  use  of  malt  liquors  as  well  as  to  spirituous 
liquors.      The  fact  is  that   drinkers  of   malt 


Ijouisiana.] 


409 


[Loyal  Temperance  Legion. 


liquors  take  more  spirits  than  the  ordinary  drink- 
ers of  alcoholics,  inasmuch  as  beer  is  a  seductive 
drink  and  it  is  necessary  to  take  a  larger  amount 
of  malt  liquors  to  get  the  equivalent  in  effect  of 
one  or  two  drinks  of  ordinary  spirits.  .  .  .  Our 
experience  is  simply  the  experience  of  all  other 
companies  in  the  matter  ot  alcohol.  We  look 
upon  it  as  a  poison  a.s  it  is  generally  used,  and 
wish  we  could  eliminate  it  entirely  from  the 
drinks  of  our  in.sured;  but  so  long  as  this  cannot 
be  done,  we  shall  use  the  greatest  care  possible 
to  ascertain  their  habits  in  this  regard.  Never- 
theless, with  all  our  care  and  investigations, 
the  Company  is  called  upon  yearly  to  pay  losses 
due  both  directly  and  indirectly  to  the  use  of 
alcohol  which,  could  the  figures  be  accurately 
ascertained,  would  be  appalling." 

Henry  Tuck,  M.D.,  Medical  Director 
of  the  New  York  Life  Insurance  Com- 
jmny,  wrote : 

"  We  are  very  confident  that  total  abstainers 
stand  a  better  chance  of  attaining  a  good  lon- 
gevity than  what  are  known  as  'moderate  drink- 
ers.' '■' ' 

Louisiana. — See  Index. 

Loyal  Temperance  Legion. — In 

the  first  National  Convention,  called  to 
meet  in  Cleveland  in  1874,  for  the  purjDose 
of  organizing  the  Woman's  Christian 
Temperance  Union,  the  Plan  of  Work 
Committee  besought  all  friends  of  the 
cause  to  take  immediate  measures  for 
the  formation  of  Juvenile  temperance 
societies.  The  Committee  on  these  socie- 
ties, consisting  of  "Mother"  Thompson, 
the  Crusade  leader.  Miss  Frances  E.  Wil- 
lard  and  Mrs.  A.  M.  Noe,  recommended 
that  in  the  new  paper,  ordered  by  the 
Convention,  a  department  be  instituted 
for  children  and  youth.  The  same  Com- 
mittee in  1875  authorized  the  preparation 
of  a  Juvenile  song-book  and  manual. 
The  Convention  of  1876,  held  in  Newark, 
N.  J.,  advised  that  the  children  be  organ- 
ized under  the  name  "Juvenile  Temper- 
ance Societies."  In  connection  with  the 
C'Onvention  of  1877,  in  Chicago,  a  chil- 
dren's mass-meeting  was  held  on  Sunday 
afternoon.  The  resolutions  of  this  Con- 
vention dwelt  on  the  need  of  instructing 
the  children  along  the  line  of  scientific 
temperance,  and  the  Juvenile  Committee 
recommended  that  the  stress  of  effort  be 
laid  on  reaching  the  children  through 
Sabbath-schools.  The  Juvenile  Commit- 
tee of  1880  presented  a  constitution 
for  children's  societies,  which  included 
the  pledge  against  all  intoxicating  liquors 

'  For  the  letters  from  which  the  above  quotations  are 
made,  and  numerous  others  from  insurance  companies, 
see  the  Voice  for  Oct.  10, 18&1,  auU  Jau.  1,  8  aud  15, 1885. 


and  tobacco.  This  year  the  system  of 
standing  committees  for  department  work 
was  abolished,  and  that  of  individual 
Superintendents  took  its  place.  Miss 
Elizabeth  W.  Greenwood  of  Brooklyn  was 
l)laced  in  charge  of  the  Juvenile  Depart- 
ment, which,  in  distinction  from  the 
Sunday-school  Department  and  that  of 
Scientific  Temperance  Instruction  in  the 
Public  Schools,  finds  its  expression  in  the 
organized  societies  of  children  auxiliary 
to  the  W.  C.  T.  U.  Time  has  proved  that 
each  of  these  departments,  togetlier  with 
that  of  the  Kindergarten,  since  added, 
has  its  own  special  mission,  all  being 
necessary  to  round  out  the  full  measure 
of  opportunity  for  reaching  the  children. 
In  IS&Z  Miss  Greenwood  was  succeeded 
by  Miss  Nellie  H.  Bailey  of  Chicago.  In 
1883  Mrs.  Anna  M.  Hammer  of  Newark, 
N.  J.,  was  elected  Juvenile  Superintend- 
ent. Her  resignation  in  1887  was  followed 
by  the  appointment  of  the  present 
incumbent.  Previously  to  1886  the  var- 
ious Juvenile  societies  had  existed  under 
many  local  names,  but  at  the  National 
Convention,  held  that  year  in  Minne- 
apolis, it  was  decided  to  give  to  each  of 
these  societies  not  only  a  uniform  plan 
of  organization  but  also  the  name  of 
Loyal  Temperance  Legion,  which  in  each 
State  would  consist  of  as  many  divisions 
as  there  were  districts  or  counties,  the 
local  societies  of  each  division  being 
known  as  Company  A,  Company  B,  etc., 
according  to  date  of  organization.  To 
Mrs.  Caroline  B.  Bxiell,  Corresponding 
Secretary  of  the  National  AY.  C.  T.  U. 
belongs  the  honor  of  having  originated, 
and  to  the  ('onnecticut  W.  C.  T.  \J.  the 
distinction  of  having  been  the  first  to 
adopt,  this  name  and  plan  in  all  their 
essential  features. 

The  original  thought  of  a  temperance 
school,  where  the  instruction  is  given  by 
classes,  is  still  largely  carried  out,  while 
the  frequent  application  of  new  methods 
and  helps  prevents  a  wearisome  monot- 
ony. The  children  not  only  fill  the 
offices  of  Juvenile  President,  Secretary 
and  Treasurer,  under  the  leadership  of 
an  adult  Superintendent,  but  also  serve 
on  various  committees,  whose  reports 
add  to  the  interest  of  regular  meetings. 
The  companies  are  frequently  graded  by 
being  divided  into  platoons,  each  of 
which  has  its  own  leader,  who  is  styled 
Ensign  and  who  is  responsible  for  the 


liOyal  Temperance  Legion.] 


410 


[Lutheran  Church. 


regular  attendance  of  the  platoon.  Care 
is  taken  to  have  frequent  rotation  in  the 
juvenile  offices,  which  can  be  multiplied 
as  circumstances  suggest.  Special  methods 
are  employed  for  holding  the  older  boys 
and  girls.  Bands  of  Mercy  have  been 
largely  introduced  into  the  companies, 
the  endeavor  being  to  foster  all  sweet 
and  tender  graces. 

The  aim  is  not  only  to  make  the 
children  intelligent  total  abstainers,  ready 
always  to  give  a  reason  for  their  prin- 
ciples and  practice,  but  also  to  train  them 
into  efficient  workers  for  Prohibition  in 
State  and  nation.  In  Prohibitory  Amend- 
ment and  no-license  campaigns,  as  well 
as  in  many  other  directions,  they  have 
proved  themselves  valuable  helpers. 
Their  loyalty  to  their  pledge  of  total 
abstinence  against  alcoholic  beverages  of 
every  name,  tobacco  in  any  form,  as  well 
as  all  profanity,  has  repeatedly  stood  the 
test  of  great  temptation,  statistics  show- 
ing that  93  per  cent,  of  those  thus  pledged 
stand  true.  The  delightful  entertain- 
ments given  by  the  children  inust  be 
counted  among  the  most  potent  fac- 
tors for  arousing  Prohibition  sentiment 
in  many  localities,  where  leading  men 
have  not  been  ashamed  to  acknowledge 
the  persuasive  power  of  these  sweet  young 
voices  in  recitation  and  song. 

The  Juvenile  ]])epartment  has  an  ex- 
tensive literature  of  its  own,  in  the  form 
of  Catechisms,  Lesson  Manuals,  Black- 
board Talks,  Pledge-cards,  Song-books, 
"  Loyal  Leaflets "  for  distribution  at 
children's  meetings,  and  choice  temper- 
ance stories  for  home  and  library.  Miss 
Julia  Coleman  of  New  York  was  the 
pioneer  in  the  preparation  of  these  juve- 
nile temperance  supplies,  the  National 
Temperance  Society  being  the  i^ublisher. 
Later  this  work  has  been  taken  up  by 
the  Woman's  Temperance  Publication 
Association  of  Chicago.  Li  addition  to 
the  literature  already  mentioned,  the 
children  have  their  own  official  organ, 
the  Yoiing  Crusader,  edited  by  Miss 
Alice  M.  Guernsey,  and  published  by  the 
W.  T.  P.  A. 

Every  State  and  Territory  has  now  its 
Superintendent  of  this  Department, 
under  whose  leadership  thousands  of 
women  all  over  the  land,  whose  labor  is 
unpaid  save  in  the  coin  of  Heaven,  are 
giving  time,  strength  and  money  to  the 
work.     As  nearly  as  can  be  estimated  the 


present  number  (1890)  of  Loyal  Temper- 
ance Legion  Companies  is  3,97(3,  with  a 
total  pledged  membership  of  200,000  boys 
and  girls,  representing  every  sect,  color 
and  nationality.  All  wear  the  L.  T.  L. 
badge,  and  march  under  the  L.  T.  L, 
motto,  '•  Tremble,  King  Alcohol,  we  shall 


grow  up 


t" 


Helen  G.  Rice, 


National  Superintendent  L.  T.  L. 

Lucas,  Margaret  Bright. — Born 
in  Rochdale,  Lancashire,  Eug.,  July  14, 
1818  ;  died  in  London,  Feb.  4,"l890.  She 
was  of  the  famous  Bright  family,  of 
which  nine  members  sat  in  the  House  of 
Commons  ;  she  was  the  youngest 
daughter  of  Jacob  Bright,  and  the  still 
more  noted  John  Bright  was  her  brother. 
She  shared  the  enthusiasm  for  reform 
and  philanthropy  that  gave  so  peculiar  a 
distinction  to  these  celebrated  men. 
Like  them  she  professed  the  religious 
faith  of  the  Friends.  In  1839  she  was 
wedded  to  Samuel  Lucas,  of  whom  she 
was  bereaved  after  25  years  of  very 
happy  married  life.  At  the  age  of  16 
she  signed  a  pledge  requiring  total 
abstinence  from  all  intoxicating  bever- 
ages  ;  and  therefore  she  was  one  of  the 
earliest  adherents  of  radical  teetotalism 
in  England.  She  became  a  member  of 
the  Good  Templar  Order  during  her  visit 
to  the  Social  Science  Congress  at  Ply- 
mouth, Eng.,  in  1872,  and  was  chosen 
Grand  Worthy  Vice-Templar  of  the 
Grand  Lodge  in  1874,  a  position  to  which 
she  was  re-elected  in  187G  and  1877. 
She  was  President  of  the  British  Women's 
Temperance  Association  and  was  the  first 
President  of  the  World's  W.  C.  T.  U. 
In  1886,  when  68  years  old,  she  came  to 
America  and  attended  the  National  Con- 
vention of  the  W.  C.  T.  U.  at  Minne- 
apolis. Her  energies  were  not  ex- 
hausted in  the  temperance  work  ;  she 
exhibited  active  sympathy  for  many 
other  advanced  movements,  and  was 
especially  devoted  to  the  AVoman 
Suffrage  cause.  Possessed  of  consider- 
able wealth,  she  contributed  liberally  and 
judiciously  to  charitable  enterprises. 

Lutheran  Church  (Unglish 
Branch). — The  General  Synod  of  the 
Evangelical  Lutheran  Church,  in  session 
at  Omaha,  Neb.,  June,  1887,  adojoted  the 
following  : 

"  Resolved,  That  the  right  and  therefore  the 
wisest  and  n;ost  efficient  method  in  dtalini'with 


Lutheran  Church,] 


411 


[Maine  Law. 


the  traffic  in  alcoholic  liquors  for  drinking  pur- 
poses is  its  suppression,  and  that  we  therefore 
also  urge  those  who  comprise  the  church  which 
we  represent  to  endeavor  to  secure  in  every 
State  the  abst)lute  Prohibition  of  the  manufac- 
ture and  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  as  a 
beverage." 

The  last  session  of  this  body,  hekl  in 
Allegheny,  Pa.,  June,  1889,  contented 
itself  with  the  following  deliverance, 
limited  to  a  single  State  campaign  : 

"The  General  Synod  of  the  Evangelical 
Lutheran  Church  in  the  United  States,  in  Alle- 
gheny assembled,  in  accord  with  previous  deliv- 
erances of  the  Synod,  bids  the  Prohibitory  Con- 
stitutional Amendment  in  Pennsylvania  God- 
speed, and  hopes  her  members,  in  the  exercise 
of  their  Christian  liberty  as  citizens,  will  all 
vote  for  it. 

"  Resolved,  That  the  Secretary  be  in- 
structed to  send  a  copy  of  this  action  to  all  our 
churches  in  Pennsylvania,  with  a  request  that 
it  be  read  from  the  pulpit  on  next  Sunday, 
June  16." 

Lutheran      Church       (German 
Branch). — Rev.  F,  Wischan,  editor  of 
the    Missionbote,    official   organ   of   the 
German  Lutheran  Church,  states  that  no 
recent    action    has    been  taken  by   the 
General  Synod  on  the  liquor  question. 
Madagascar. — See  p.  13, 
Madeira. — See  Vinous  Liquors. 
Maine. — See  Index. 

Maine  Lavr. — Maine  was  the  first 
State  to  adoi)t  a  rigorous  general  Prohib- 
itorv  act.  The  measure  became  known 
as  the  "  Maine  law,"  and  similar  statutes 
that  rapidly  followed  in  other  States  were 
similarly  named.  The  term  "  Maine 
law,"  though  having  a  special  application 
to  the  Prohibitory  act  of  Maine,  is  there- 
fore suggestive  also  of  all  the  other 
kindred  State  laws  passed  before  the  Civil 
War  (see  p.  306).  This  article  will  he  con- 
fined, however,  to  a  brief  review  of  the 
Maine  law  in  Maine. 

To  Gen.  James  Appleton  is  justly  attri- 
l)uted  the  honor  of  first  outlining  and 
publicly  advocating,  before  the  people 
and  in  the  Legislature  of  Maine,  the 
policy  of  State  Prohibition.  His  work 
was  begun  soon  after  his  removal  from 
Massachusetts  to  Portland,  and  the  most 
conspicuous  development  of  it  was  the 
rej)ort  in  favor  of  Prohibition  which  he 
submitted  as  Chairman  of  a  joint  select 
committee  in  the  Legislature  of  1837.^ 

■  Mr.  Dow.  the  writer  of  this  article,  refrains  from 
allutliiiff  to  the  chief  intliieiue  in  the  origina:  Maine  law 
agitation — his  own  devoted,  long-continued  and  self- 
Bacrificing  work.     (See    p.  158.;     lu  that  agitation  the 


The  first  Prohibitory  law — a  crude  and 
unsatisfactory  one — was  passed  in  184G. 
The  Maine  law,  joroperly  so-called,  was 
not  enacted  until  June,  1851.  It  passed 
through  all  its  stages  in  one  day,  the 
final  vote  being  18  to  10  in  the  Senate 
and  86  to  40  in  the  House.  It  took 
effect  upon  its  approval  by  the  Governor, 
which  was  on  Monday,  the  2d  of  June. 
It  condemned  all  intoxicating  liquors  of 
whatever  kind  to  be  seized,  confiscated 
and  destroyed,  if  kept  for  unlawful  sale. 

The  comparative  ease  with  which  this 
unprecedented  legislation  was  obtained 
was  due  in  no  small  measure  to  the  mani- 
festly great  evils  inflicted  upon  the  popu- 
lace by  drink.  At  that  time  Maine  was 
overrun  with  distilleries  and  breweries; 
there  were  seven  of  the  former  and  two 
of  the  latter  in  the  small  city  of  Portland 
alone.  There  was  probably  no  State 
where  more  liquor  was  consumed,  in  pro- 
l^ortion  to  population.  A  sum  equivalent 
to  the  value  of  all  the  property  existing 
in  the  State  was  wasted  in  drink  in  every 
period  of  '10  years.  Maine  had  two  princi- 
pal industries,  lumbering  and  the  fisheries. 
The  products  of  these  were  sent  mostly 
to  the  West  India  Islands,  and  the  chief 
commodities  received  in  exchange  were 
rum  and  molasses.  The  imported  molasses 
Avas  converted  into  rum,  and  jjractically  all 
of  the  ardent  spirits,  both  home-made  and 
foreign,  was  consumed  in  Maine,  so  that 
the  State  was  never  a  dollar  the  richer 
for  all  this  large  trade.  The  wealth  of 
the  vast  forests  and  of  the  fisheries  was 
poured  down  the  throats  of  the  people  in 
the  form  of  intoxicating  liquors. 

The  immediate  effect  of  the  law  of 
1851  w^as  the  entire  suppression  of  the 
wholesale  liquor  trade  throughout  tlie 
State,  and  the  abandonment  of  the  liquor 
business  by  persons  who  wished  to  stand 
Avell.  in  the  community  as  honest  men. 
Another  consequence  was  the  suppression 
of  the  manufacture  of  intoxicating 
liquors :  there  is  not  to-day,  and  has  not 
been  for  many  years,  a  distillery  or  brew- 
ery in  Maine.  The  various  municipal 
authorities,  by  j)ublic  notice,  granted  to 
liquor-dealers  a  reasonable  period  of  time 


labors  of  all  other  persons  were  insignificant  in  compari- 
son with  Mr.  Dow's.  The  public  sentiment  that  made  the 
enactment  pos.fible  was  the  result  of  his  untiring  efforts  ; 
the  law  of  18.51  was  framed  by  him  ;  its  passage  through 
the  Legislature  was  due  to  his  persuasion  and  energies. 
Wherever  Prohibition  is  advocated  the  Maine  law  of  1851 
Is  remembered  as  the  lirst  radical  precedent,  and  Neal 
Dow  is  honored  as  its  "Father,'" — Editor. 


Maine  Lavr.] 


412 


[Malt. 


in  which  to  send  their  stocks  of  liquors 
away,  though  warning  them  to  make  no 
sales  within  the  State.  This  concession 
was  generally  accepted  in  a  spirit  of  be- 
coming submissiveness.  One  liquor-seller 
refused  to  ship  his  stock — a  large  one, — 
and  after  some  delay  it  was  seized.  A 
protracted  lawsuit  followed,  but  the  dealer 
obtained  no  relief  from  the  Courts,  and 
besides  losing  his  property  he  was  ruined 
by  the  litigation.  No  lawsuits  involving 
principle  or  right  occur  now  in  connec- 
tion with  the  enforcement  of  the  law. 
All  legal  and  constitutional  points  are 
settled. 

The  retail  liquor  trade  was  immediately 
reduced  to  inconsiderable  proportions, 
being  continued  only  by  persons  without 
respectable  character,  on  the  sly  and  on  a 
very  small  scale.  Supplies  of  liquor  were 
brought  into  Maine  in  disguise,  concealed 
in  flour-barrels,  in  sugar-barrels,  in  dry- 
goods  boxes,  in  travellers'  trunks,  even  in 
coffins,  and  in  many  other  ways.  The 
dealer  in  liquors  came  to  be  regarded  by 
the  public  as  an  infamous  person,  the 
same  as  a  keeper  of  a  gambling-house  or 
house  of  ill-fame.  Another  effect  of  the 
law  was  to  render  disreputable  the  public 
drinking  of  liquors.  Intoxicants  are  now 
rarely  if  ever  seen  at  public  dinners; 
whatever  the  occasion  may  be,  whether 
given  by  Boards  of  Trade  or  to  public 
m6n,  liquors  are  excluded  trom  the  menu. 

In  the  old  rum  times,  as  already  inti- 
mated, the  people  of  Maine  were  very 
hard  drinkers.  Now  the  traffic  is  prac- 
tically unknown  in  more  than  three- 
fourths  of  the  territory  of  the  State,  con- 
taining far  more  than  three-fourths  of 
the  population.  Where  it  exists  at  all  it 
is  mostly  confined  to  the  cities,  and  there 
it  is  carried  on,  in  nearly  all  instances,  in 
a  small  way,  with  more  or  less  secrecy. 
This  is  due  entirely  to  certain  defects  in 
the  law,  that  leaves  to  the  "  trade  "  a  con- 
siderable margin  of  profit,  which  no  Pro- 
hibitory law  should  do.  To  be  thoroughly 
effective  it  should  be  so  constructed  as  to 
make  violations  very  unprofitable  and 
very  uncomfortable  to  those  who  persist. 
All  the  improvements  that  are  still  needed 
will  come  in  due  time,  when  the  politi- 
cians are  shown,  by  popular  sentiment, 
that  it  is  not  safe  to  trifle  with  this  bene- 
ficent system  in  any  manner. 

Before  the  Prohibition  era  Maine  was 
not  only  one  of  the  most  drunken  but 


one  of  the  poorest  States  of  the  Union. 
The  evidences  of  poverty  were  seen 
everywhere — in  neglected  farms,  dilapi- 
dated houses,  decaying  fences  and  general 
unthrift.  All  is  changed  for  the  better. 
Maine  ranks  with  the  most  prosperous 
commonwealths,  saving  as  she  does  prob- 
ably 120,000,000  (directly  and  indirectly) 
that  would  be  squandered  for  drink  if 
any  system  of  license  were  tolerated. 
The  people  have  sustained  the  act  by 
overwhelming  majorities  whenever  they 
have  had  opportunity  to  give  a  verdict 
upon  it  at  the  polls.  The  most  striking 
evidence  of  popular  support  was  provided 
in  188-1:,  when  the  principle  of  Prohibi- 
tion was  imbedded  in  the  Constitution  by 
a  vote  of  three  to  one.         Neal  Dow. 

[The  editor  is  also  indebted  to  N.  F.  Wood- 
bury of  Auburn,  Me.  For  a  digest  of  the 
Maine  law,  as  originally  enacted  and  as  amended 
at  various  times,  see  pp.  806-9.  For  a  further 
statement  of  the  results  of  Prohibition  in  Maine, 
see  Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 

Malt. — The  product  obtained  from  a 
special  treatment  of  barley  or  other 
grain.  The  cereal  is  first  steeped  in 
warm  water  for  a  period  long  enough  to 
induce  germination,  when  the  growth  is 
arrested  by  spreading  and  drying  ;  then 
it  is  ground  or  crushed  between  rollers. 
The  germinating  process  changes  a  por- 
tion of  the  starch  of  the  grain  to  grape- 
sugar — a  change  that  is  an  essential  pre- 
liminary to  vinous  (?'.  e.,  alcoholic)  fer- 
mentation, and  therefore  to  the  brewing 
of  beer,  ale  and  like  beverages.  Theo- 
retically malt  may  be  made  from  any 
cereal,  but  practically  barley  is  the  only 
one  employed  for  the  purpose  in  this 
country  ;  in  some  of  the  northern  na- 
tions of  Europe  here  and  bigg  (which, 
however,  are  mere  varieties  of  barley) 
are  malted.  Of  American  barleys  those 
grown  in  Canada  have  hitherto  been 
most  esteemed  by  maltsters  and  brewers, 
and  large  quantities  of  Canada  barley  have 
been  imported  every  year,  the  amount 
now  imported  averaging  about  10,000,- 
000  busliels. 

Malting,  though  incidental  to  the 
brewing  business,  is  an  independent  and 
sejiarate  trade  ;  few  brewers  go  to  the 
pains  of  malting  their  own  grain.  Ac- 
cording to  the  United  States  Census  re- 
turns, there  were  in  1880  216  malt  manu- 
facturers in  this  country,  with  an  in- 
vested capital  of  $14,390,141,  employing 


Malt  liiquors.] 


413 


[Malt  Liquors. 


2,333  hands,  whose  yearly  wages 
amounted  to  $1,004,548,  using  material 
valued  at  $14,331,433,  and  producing 
merchandise  worth  118,373,103.  ^  The 
following  list  of  the  number  of  malt- 
sters, by  States,  was  specially  prepared 
for  this  work  in  November,  1890,  by  a 
leading  New  York  firm  : 

California,  5;  Delaware,  1  ;  Illinois,  35  ;  Iowa, 
7  ;  Kentucky,  7  ;  Maryland,  4  ;  Massachusetts, 
1;  Michigan,  9;  Minnesota,  3;  Missouri,  11; 
New  York,  117  ;  Ohio,  35  ;  Pennsylvania,  33  ; 
Wisconsin,  13— Total,  349. 

The  largest  malt-houses  are  at  the 
West.  One  Milwaukee  concern  has  a 
yearly  capacity  of  3,000,000  bushels.  The 
chief  malting  cities  are  Chicago,  produc- 
ing annually  between  8,000,000  and  1),- 
000,000  bushels ;  Milwaukee,  4,000,0(H)  to 
5.000,000 ;  New  York,  4,000,000  to  5,000,- 
000;  Buffalo,  4,000,000  to  5,000,000;  St. 
Louis,  1,000,000  to  3,000,000,  and  Oswe- 
go, about  1,000,000. 

In  the  process  of  malting  the  barley 
undergoes  a  slight  shrinkage :  a  bushel  of 
barley  yields  only  0.84  bushel  of  malt. 
The  malt  bushel  in  the  United  States  has 
a  fixed  weight  of  34  lbs.  About  two 
bushels  or  08  lbs.  of  malt  are  required  to 
make  a  barrel  of  beer  of  31  gallons. 

Although  malt  is  distinctively  a  brew- 
ers' material  it  is  consumed  in  consider- 
able quantities  by  the  distillers  also. 
The  Internal  Revenue  records  show  that 
in  the  fiscal  year  ending  June  30,  1889, 
3,343,314  bushels  of  malt  were  destroyed 
in  distillation,  valued  at  $835,134.75.  In 
this  country  Indian  corn  and  rye  are 
cheaper  for  distilling  purposes,  and  are 
regarded  with  greater  favor  by  the  dis- 
tillers, on  the  whole,  than  malt.  But  in 
Scotland  and  Ireland  barley  is  compara- 
tively more  abundant,  and  barley  malt 
plays  a  larger  part  in  distillation  than 
any  other  grain. 

Malt  Liquors. — One  of  the  three 
great  families  of  inebriating  drinks,  in- 
cluding all  fermented  liquors  produced 
from  grain.  Knowing  that  the  ancient 
Chinese,  many  centuries  before  Christ, 
manufactured  intoxicants  from  rice,  it  is 
reasonable  to  suppose  that  they  under- 
stood the  brewing  art,  even  if  the  opin- 
ion is  accepted  that  the  liquors  generally 
in  use  among  them  were  distilled;  for 
fermentation    always    precedes   distilla- 

•  Apropos  of   the  reliability  of  these    statistics,    see 
foot-note,  p.  380. 


tion.  Rice-brewing  was  also  apparently 
practiced  in  ancient  India;  the  drink 
called  sura,  mentioned  in  the  Kig-Vedas, 
is  believed  to  have  been  manufactured 
from  rice.''  But  the  discovery  of  barley- 
brewing  is  attributed  to  the  Egyptians; 
it  is  claimed  that  they  made  beer  from 
barley  as  early  as  3,000  years  before 
Christ,^  and  Herodotus,  about  450  B.C., 
spoke  of  their  barley-beer  (see  p.  337). 
References  to  the  use  by  the  Greeks  of 
beer  from  barlev  appear  in  the  writings 
of  .Eschvlus  (470  B.C.),  Sophocles  (430 
B.C.)  and  Theophrastus  (300  B.C.);  Xen- 
ophon  (400  B.C.)  says  that  the  Arme- 
nians had  a  fermented  drink  that  they 
extracted  from  barley;  Tacitus  (1st  cen- 
tury A.D.)  alludes  to  the  manufacture  of 
beer  by  the  Germans,  and  Pliny  (living 
at  about  the  same  time)  to  its  use  in 
Spain  and  Gaul.'  The  Romans  acquired 
the  secret  of  beer-brewing  and  intro- 
duced it  into  Britain,  where  beer  replaced 
the  ancient  mead  (an  intoxicant  fer- 
mented from  honey).  (See  "Encyclopgedia 
Britannica,  "  article  on  "  Brewing.")  In 
all  modern  nations  malt  liquors  of  differ- 
ent kinds  have  been  prepared.  Even 
among  the  native  tribes  of  Africa  cereals 
are  subjected  to  fermentation  and  the  re- 
sulting liquor  is  eagerly  consumed. 

The  early  grain  beverages,  though 
probably  as  strong  in  alcohol  as  those  now 
produced,  were  manufactured  by  crude 
processes  and  could  not  be  preserved  from 
decay.  Witlt  the  general  employment  of 
hops  (beginning  in  the  17tli  Century)  and 
the  gradual  extension  of  chemical  know- 
ledge, it  was  made  possible  to  keep  the 
beer  fresh  for  a  longer  time,  and  the 
business  of  brewing  expanded  rapidly. 
It  has  reached  its  largest  development  in 
Great  Britain  and  Germany,  and  in  the 
United  States  has  made  great  strides. 
The  quantities  of  malt  liquors  produced 
in  various  nations,  and  other  pertinent 
facts,  are  given  under  the  appropriate 
heads  in  this  work. 

Beer  is  the  popular  name  for  all  the 

2  Foundation  of  Death,  p.  4. 

3  Ibid.  p.  18. 

■•  .\11  the  .several  nations  who  inhabit  the  West  of  Europe 
have  a  liquor  with  which  they  intoxicate  themselves, 
made  of  corn  and  water.  The  manner  of  making  this 
liquor  is  sometimes  different  in  Gaul.  Spain  and  other 
countries,  and  is  called  by  many  various  names:  but  its 
nature  and  properties  are  everywhere  tiie  same.  The  people 
of  Spain,  in  particular,  brew  the  liquor  so  well  that  it  will 
keep  ^ood  a  lon^  time.  So  exquisite  is  the  cunnins;  of 
manknid  in  gratifying  their  vicious  appetites  that  they 
have  thus  invented  a  method  to  make  water  itself  intoxi- 
cate.—P/iny,  Nat.  Hist.,  xiv,  29. 


Malt  Liquors.] 


414 


[Malt  Liquors. 


ordinary  malt  liquors.  In  England  most 
of  the  beer  consumed  is  of  a  kind  recog- 
nized in  the  United  States  as  ale  or  por- 
ter. In  Germany  the  beer  is  called 
"lager  beer,"  and  this  is  also  the  name 
given  it  in  America.  This  beverage  is 
distinguished  by  its  high  amber  color,  its 
bitter  taste  and  the  abundant  froth  that 
gathers  at  the  top  of  the  glass  when  it  is 
drawn  from  the  keg.  The  alcoholic 
strength  of  American  lager  beer  averages 
from"3  to  G  per  cent.  Many  of  the  im- 
ported beers  are  much  stronger,  especi- 
ally the  Bavarian.  The  chemical  com- 
position of  common  beer  is  given  by  Prof. 
B.  A.  Parkes,  in  his  "  Hygiene,"  as  fol- 
lows :  One  hundred  ounces  of  beer  con- 
tains 5  ounces  of  alcohol,  6  ounces  of 
extractives,  dextrine  and  sugar,  125 
grains  of  free  acids  and  65  grains  of  salt. 
Weiss  beer  is  a  considerably  milder 
drink  than  lager,  and  is  fermented  from 
the  malt  of  wheat,  with  a  slight  admix- 
ture of  barley-malt.  Small  beer  also  is 
quite  weak  in  alcohol.  To  show  the  rel- 
ative importance  of  beer  manufacture  in 
American  cities,  the  following  table  is 
reproduced  from  the  Brewers'  Journal:  ^ 


Albany,  N.Y 

Baltimore,  Md 

Boston,  Mass 

Brooklyn,  N.Y 

iBuffalo,  N.Y 

Chicago,  111 

Cincinnati,  0 

'Cleveland,  O 

'Detroit,  Mich 

Louisville,  Ky 

Milwaukee,  Wis 

Newark,  N.  J 

New  Orleans,  La. . . 

New  York  City 

Philadelphia,  Pa. . . 

Pittsburgh,  Pel 

Kochester,  N.  Y.... 
San  Francisco,  Cal. 

St.  Louis,  Mo 

Syracuse,  N.  Y 

Toledo,  O 

Troy,  N.Y 

0 

s 

Barrels. 
359,203 
330.199 
78S.SS2 
993.r,20 
308,964 
743,458 
855,.532 
266.;t34 
197,731 

1,067,610 
619,480 

3,474,.3i4 

1,1.57.728 
200,375 
288,138 
332.620 

1,061,765 

'  205',  163 

i 

> 

w 

a 
> 

S 

H 

a 

0 
> 
P 

Barrels 
367,960 
385,0.33 
811.084 

1,018,863 
365.635 
873.995 
871.876 
241.847 
222,740 

1,115,162 
694,006 

3,662.2i4 

1,. 306.405 

195..541 

289,.582 

3.53.260 

1,079,392 

'  200;465 

00 

00 

Barrel  s. 
376,178 
481,943 
867,039 

1,327,3.58 
462,985 

1,366,769 

1,089,002 
332,1.55 
277,592 

l',286;i2i 
878,869 

4.244,79i 

1,409,478 

304.304 

341,796 

407,675 

1,407,744 

■'236,865 

1 

E  fe  g  s  r2  li  ^  .5!  -:;  f.  .s  ^^  s^W  .s  p  ;i  x  ^f,s^ 

1  °° 

Ale  contains  a  smaller  percentage  of 
lioi)s  than  lager  beer,  is  of  a  paler  color 
and  sweeter  taste,  and  does  not  produce  so 
high  or  so  persistent  a  froth.  Originally 
ale  was  the  sole  name  given  to  malt 
liquors  by  the  English  ;  and  the  old 
British  statutes  invariably  described  the 

1  The  figures  include  malt  liquors  of  all  kinds — ales, 
porters,  etc.,  as  well  as  lager  beer. 


places  where  these  liquors  were  sold  as 
"ale-houses."  The  word  "beer"  was 
at  first  applied  to  the  malt  beverages  pre- 
pared with  hops,  to  distinguish  them 
from  ale,  in  the  manufacture  of  which 
no  hops  were  then  used.  The  amount  of 
alcohol  in  ales  averages  higher  than  in 
American  beers,  being  generally  in  ex- 
cess of  6  per  cent.  The  most  celebrated 
ales  are  those  brewed  in  Ireland,  Eng- 
land and  Scotland.  The  establishment 
of  Guinness  &  Co.  (Dublin,  Ireland) 
produced  in  1889  2,122,800  barrels 
(American  measurement)  of  malt  liquors. 
The  brewery  of  Bass,  Eatcliff,  Gretton 
&  Co.,  Limited  (Burton  on  Trent, 
Eng.),  manufactured  more  than  1,000,- 
000  barrels  ;  and  upward  of  500,000  bar- 
rels each  were  made  by  these  four  con- 
cerns :  Allsop  &  Sons,  Limited  (Burton 
on  Trent),  Coombes  &  Co.  (London), 
Truman,  llanbury  &  Buxton  (London) 
and  Barclay  &  Perkins  (London).  * 
Draught  ale  is  not  an  article  of  large  con- 
sumption in  the  United  States  except  in 
a  few  Eastern  cities.  There  is  no  means 
of  determining  the  exact  quantity  made 
in  this  country,  since  the  official  returns 
make  no  distinction  between  the  differ- 
ent kinds  of  malt  liquors.  But  several 
ale  breweries  are  located  in  the  States  of 
New  York  and  New  Jersey,  and  there 
are  a  few  in  other  States. 

Porter  is  a  black,  bitter,  peculiarly 
flavored  beer.  The  percentage  of  alco- 
hol in  it  is  about  the  same  as  in  ordinary 
lager.  It  is  brewed  from  a  pale  or 
amber  malt,  with  whicli  is  mixed  a  cer- 
tain percentage  of  roasted  malt.  The 
latter  imparts  the  dark  color  as  well  as 
the  burnt  taste  of  the  liquor.  Porter 
was  first  made  in  1722  by  Ilarwood,  a 
London  brewer,  and  its  popularity  among 
the  porters  and  laboring  classes  gave  it 
its  name.  Enormous  quantities  are  drank 
in  England,  but  in  the  United  States  it 
is  one  of  the  less  important  beverages, 
although  wherever  ale  is  made  and  sold 
porter  is  in  request. 

Stout,  or  brown  stout,  is  a  variety  of 
porter,  stronger  and  richer  than  the  com- 
mon stulf.  It,  too,  is  an  English  drink, 
and  there  is  very  little  demand  for  it  out- 
side the  British  Isles. 

[Bee  also  Adui,teration,  Consumption  op 
Liquors  and  Light  Liquoks.] 

2  These  quantities,  however,  stand  for  porter  and  stou 
as  well  as  ale. 


Mann,  Horace.] 


415 


[Mann,  Horace. 


Mann,  Horace. — Born  in  Fmnklin, 
Mass.,  May  4,  1796;  died  in  Yellow 
Springs.  0.,  Aug.  2, 1859.  At  the  age  of  13 
lie  lost  his  father,  who  was  a  poor  farmer. 
His  childhood  and  youth  were  passed  in 
great  poverty ;  he  earned  his  own  school- 
books  by  braiding  straw,  and  from  his 
tenth  to  his  twentieth  year  there  was  no 
year  in  which  he  was  able  to  secure  more 
than  six  weeks  of  schooling.  As  a  lad,  he 
writes,  he  ''  formed  the  resolution  to  be  a 
slave  of  no  habit,"  never  used  tobacco 
and  was  never  under  the  influence  of 
liquor.  His  savings  enabled  him  to  em- 
ploy a  competent  tutor,  and  in  1816  he 
entered  the  sophomore  class  of  Brown 
University.  He  graduated  in  1819  with 
first  honors,  and  was  appointed  a  tutor 
in  Latin  and  Greek.  In  1821  he  began 
the  study  of  law,  and  iii  1823  he  was  ad- 
mitted to  the  bar  at  Dedham.  It  is 
said  that  in  the  14  years  during  which 
he  actively  practiced  his  profession  he 
won  four-fifths  of  his  cases.  His  legis- 
lative career  began  in  1827,  when  he  was 
chosen  a  member  of  the  lower  House  of 
the  Massachusetts  Legislature;  and  for 
10  years  he  served  continuously  in  one 
branch  or  the  other  of  that  body,  uiti- 
matelv  becoming  President  of  the  vSenate. 
JJuriug  this  period  he  exhibited  a  lively 
interest  in  the  cause  of  reform  legisla- 
tion, and  especially  in  behalf  of  temper- 
ance, anti-lottery  and  educational  meas- 
ures. In  1830  he  stood  alone  in  the 
Legislature  for  a  statute  prohibiting  Sun- 
day sales  of  liquor;  for  at  that  time  the 
liquor  laws  of  Massachusetts  still  per- 
mitted selling  on  Sunday.  Seven  years 
later,  while  he  was  President  of  the  Sen- 
ate, the  Sunday  law  was  passed;  and  in 
a  letter  to  a  friend,  while  exulting  over 
the  victory,  he  declared  that  it  was  mere- 
ly a  step  and  not  an  end. 

"  You  asked  me,"  he  wrote,  "  some  time 
since,  what  I  meant  by  the  triumph  of  the  tem- 
perance reform,  and  whether  we  must  not 
always  see  excess.  What  I  meant  by  the  tri- 
umph of  the  temperance  reform  was  the  entire 
Prohibition  of  the  sale  of  ardent  spirits  as  a 
drink,  the  abrogation  of  the  laws  authorizing 
the  existence  of  public  places  for  its  use  or  sale 
— thus  taking  away  those  frequent  temptations 
to  men  whose  appetites  now  overcome  their  re- 
solutions. There  are  thousands  and  tens  of 
thousands  of  inebriates  who  never  would  have 
been  so  had  the  tavern  and  the  dramshop  been 
five  miles  off  from  their  homes."  ' 

•  "  Life  of  Horace   Maun,"   by  Mary  Mauu  (Boston, 
1865),  p.  50. 


In  his  "Journal,*'  May  26,  1837,  he 
Avrote : 

' '  The  annual  meeting  of  the  Massachusetts 
Temperance  Society  took  place  this  evening. 
Pretty  well  attenfled,  and  some  good  speeches  ' 
made.  The  cause  progresses.  I  used  to  feel  a 
faith  in  its  ultimate  triumph,  as  strong  as  proph- 
ecy. The  faith  is  now  in  a  forward  state  of  real- 
ization; and  what  a  triumph  it  will  be!  Not  like  a 
Roman  triumph  that  made  hearts  bleed  and  na- 
tions weep,  and  reduced  armies  to  captivity,  but 
one  that  heals  hearts  and  wipes  teare  from  a 
nation's  eyes,  and  sets  captivity  free."" 

He  became  Secretary  of  the  Massachu- 
setts Board  of  Education  on  June  30, 1837, 
and  for  more  than  11  years  he  devoted 
himself  to  improving  the  public  school 
system  of  the  State  and  promoting  the 
interests  of  education  in  general.  In  this 
work  he  acquired  a  great  reputation.  In 
1843  he  visited  Europe,  and  his  study  of 
the  school  systems  of  foreign  countries  led 
to  the  publication  of  a  very  valuable  re- 
port. In  1844  he  induced  the  State  to 
found  Xormal  Schools,  though  he  had  to 
make  contributions  from  his  private 
j)urse. 

In  1848  he  was  elected  to  Congress  as  a 
Whig  to  succeed  John  Quincy  Adams. 
His  lirst  speech  in  that  body  was  a  plea 
for  the  exclusion  of  slaves  from  the  Ter- 
ritories. His  anti-slavery  aggressiveness 
led  to  a  quarrel  with  Daniel  Webster, 
and  by  Webster's  influence  he  was  de- 
feated for  re-nomination  in  1850.  But 
he  appealed  to  the  people  as  an  inde- 
jiendeut  anti-slavery  candidate  and  was  re- 
elected. In  1852  he  was  nominated  for 
Governor  of  Massachusetts  by  the  Free 
Democracy  (Free-Soilers),  but  was  beaten. 
He  then  became  President  of  Antioch 
College  at  Yellow  Springs,  0.,  retaining 
the  position  until  his  death.  His  labors 
here  were  earnest  and  progressive,  but 
his  efforts  to  build  up  the  institution 
were  counteracted  by  the  gross  financial 
mismanagement  of  his  associates. 

Mr.  Mann's  early  enthusiasm  for  rad- 
ical temperance  legislation  was  not  modi- 
fied in  his  later  years.  He  was  a  pro- 
nounced Prohibitionist  to  the  last.  In  a 
letter  written  from  Washington,  May  18, 
1852,  he  said : 

"Another  great  moral  question  is  profoundly 
agitating  the  people  of  the  Northern  and  Eastern 
States;  it  is  the  question  of  temperance.  Be- 
tween one  and  two  years  ago  such  a  concentra- 
tion and  pressure  of  influence  was  brought  to 
bear  upon  the  Legislature  of  the  State  of  Maine 

2  Ibid,  pp.  71-3. 


Marsh,  John.] 


41G 


[Marsh,  John. 


that  though  it  is  said  that  body  was  principally 
composed  of  anti-temperance  men,  yet  it  passed 
what  has  now  become  famous  in  the  moral  his- 
tory of  mankind— the  Maine  liquor  law.  Its 
grand  features  are  the  search  for  and  the  seizure 
of  all  intoxicating  liquors,  and  their  destruction 
when  adjudicated  to  have  been  kept  for  sale. 
It  goes  upon  the  ground  tliat  the  Government 
cannot  knock  a  human  passion  or  a  depraved 
and  diseased  appetite  upon  the  head,  but  it  can 
knock  a  barrel  of  whiskey  or  rum  upon  the 
head,  and  thus  prevent  the  gratification  of  the 
passion  or  appetite;  and  after  a  time  the  unfed 
appetite  or  passion  will  die  out. "  ' 

Among  his  published  works  are :  "  A 
Few  Thoughts  for  a  Young  Man  "  (1850) ; 
"Slavery:  Letters  and  Speeches"  (1851); 
"Powers  and  Duties  of  Woman"  (1853); 
"Sermons"  (1861);  "  Lectures,  and  An- 
nual Reports  on  Education"  (1867),  and 
"Annual  Reports  on  Education"  (1868). 

Marsh,  John. — Born    in    Wethers- 
field,    Conn.,    April    2,  1788  ;    died   in 
Brooklyn,  N.  Y.>  Aug.  5,,    1868.     At   a 
4th  of  July  celebration  he  became  intoxi- 
cated, but  one  such  experience  was  suffi- 
cient to  make  him  an  abstainer.     L^pon 
finishing    a    course    of    study    at  Yale 
College  he  fitted  himself  for  the  ministry, 
and  in  18013    he    began    preaching.     In 
1818  he  was  installed  pastor  of  the  Con- 
gregational Church  at  Haddam,  Conn., 
where  he  remained  for  14  years.     In  1828 
he  became  one  of  the  officers  of  a  county 
temperance   society,   and  the  next  year 
he  was  chosen  Secretary  and  Agent   of 
the    Connecticut    Temperance     Society 
(organized  at  Hartford,  May  20,  1829). 
As  Agent  he  visited  various  parts  of  the 
State,    addressing    meetings,    founding 
branch  societies  and  colle(;ting  material 
for  his  first  report,  which  was  published 
in  1830.     A  temperance  speech  delivered 
by  him  at  Pomfret,  Conn.,  Oct.  28,  1829, 
entitled  "Putnam  and  the  Wolf,"    was 
printed  and  150,000  copies   Avere    sold. 
In  1831  he  was  employed  by  the  Balti- 
more Temperance  Society  to  conduct  a 
three  months'  campaign  in  that  city  and 
Washington.     He    left    his    church    in 
charge  of  anotlier  and  gave   his   entire 
time  to  the  new  work.     One  of  the  de- 
velopments of  this  engagement  was  the 
famous  temperance  meeting  held  in  the 
Hall  of   the   National    House  of   Repre- 
sentatives, Dec.  16,  1831.     It   was   pre- 
sided   over  by  Lewis  Cass,  and   among 
the  speakers  were  Daniel   Webster,   ex- 
President  John  Quincy  Adams,  Senators 

'  Ibid,  pp.  364-5. 


Theodore     Frelinghuysen     and      Felix 
Grundy     and     Representatives     J.    M. 
Wayne  and  Isaac  C.  Bates.     Mr.  Marsh 
was  one  of  the  440  delegates,  represent- 
ing  21  States,  who  comprised  the  first 
National  Temperance   Convention    that 
met  in  Philadelphia,  May  24,  1833,  and 
he  was  a  Secretary  of  that  body.    During 
the  same  year  he  was  appointed  Agent 
for   the  American  Temperance  Society, 
with  headquarters  in  Philadelphia.    The 
second  National  Convention,  at  Saratoga 
Springs.  N.  Y.,  Aug.  4,  1836  (364  dele- 
gates   being    in    attendance,    and    Mr. 
Marsh  being  Secretary),  reorganized  the 
Society  and  gave  it  the  new  name  of  the 
American     Temperance     Union.      The 
headquarters   were   continued  at  Phila- 
delphia and   a    pledge    requiring    total 
abstinence  from  all  intoxicating  bever- 
ages was  adojjted.     Mr.  Marsh  was  the 
Corresponding  Secretary  and  editor.    He 
had  already  prepared  six  reports  (1831-6, 
inclusive),  which  were  republished  in  a 
volume  entitled  "  The  Permanent  Ameri- 
can Temperance  Documents."  The  Union 
issued  two  periodicals,  called  the  Jour- 
nal of  the  American  Teinpera7ice  Union 
and  the  Youths'  Temperance  Advocate,ot 
which  60,000  and  160,000  copies,  respec- 
tively, were  issued  at  the   time   of   Dr. 
Marsh's  twenty-ninth  (and  last)  annual 
report.     His  work  during  his  connection 
with  the  American  Temperance  Union 
was   so  conspicuous    and  devoted    that 
James  A.  Briggs  declared  in  1865  :  "  Dr. 
John  Marsh  for  the  last  25    years    has 
been  the    American    Union — its    body, 
its    soul,   its    spirit,  its    President,   its 
Executive   Committee,   its    energy   and 
its  everything."     His  active  labors  came 
to  an  end  in  1865,  when  the  Union  was 
replaced    by    the  National  Temperance 
Society.     During  the  Civil  War  he  made 
great   efforts   in   behalf  of    temperance 
among  the  soldiers  of  the  United  States 
Army,  and  in  1861  270  regiments  were 
supplied  with  temperance  tracts  through 
his    exertions.     Besides    numberless  re- 
ports,   tracts    and    pamphlets  he    pub- 
lished a  "  Temperance  Hymn-Book  and 
Minstrel"  (1841);  "Epitome  of  Ecclesi- 
astical History"  (1838;  16th  ed.,  1867)  ; 
"  Half  Century  Tribute  to  the  Cause  of 
Temperance  "  (1851) ;  "  The  Temperance 
Speaker  "  (1860) ;  "  Temperance  Recollec- 
tions— an    Autobiography  "   (1866),  and 
"Prayer  from  Plymouth  Pulpit"  (1867). 


Maryland.] 


417 


[Mathew,  Theobald. 


Maryland. — See  Index. 

Massachusetts. — Sec  Index. 

Mathew,  Theobald.  —  Born  at 
Thomastown  House,  near  (Jashel,  Ireland, 
Oct.  10,  1790  ;  died  in  Queenstown,  Ire- 
land, Dec.  8,  1856.  He  was  educated  for 
the  priesthood  in  the  Roman  Catholic 
C'hurch,  spending  a  year  at  the  celebrated 
college  at  Maynooth,  Ireland,  which  he 
entered  Sept.  10,  180T,  and  completing 
his  studies  at  Dublin.  In  181-4  he  was 
ordained.  He  engaged  in  mission  work 
at  Kilkenny,  where  he  joined  the  Capu- 
chins. Removing  to  Cork  he  shared  for 
many  years  the  labors  of  Father  Donovan 
in  a  humble  mission.  Here  he  estab- 
lished a  female  industrial  school,  a  night- 
school  for  boys  and  little  children  (the 
pupils  numbering  500  in  1824),  and  a  li- 
brary and  reading-rooms.  His  eloquent 
sermons  and  the  wisdom  of  his  counsels 
in  the  confessional  won  for  him  a  wide 
popularity.  Throughout  the  cholera 
epidemic  of  1833  he  was  a  faithful  atten- 
dant in  one  of  the  largest  hosj)itals  of 
Cork,  having  requested,  "as  a  favor," 
that  the  hours  of  his  service  should  be 
from  midnight  to  6  in  the  morning,  when 
he  would  be  exposed  to  the  greatest 
danger  from  contagion.  For  several 
years  he  was  one  of  the  Governors  of  the 
House  of  Industry — the  Cork  workhouse, 
— and  in  his  frequent  visits  to  the  inmates 
he  won  the  friendship  of  another  of  the 
Governors,  William  Martin,  an  old 
Quaker,  who,  with  two  associates  (Rev. 
Nicholas  Dunscombe,  a  Protestant  clergy- 
man, and  Richard  Dowden)  enjoyed  local 
prominence  because  of  their  fanatically 
persistent  but  not  very  fruitful  advocacy 
of  total  abstinence.  In  passing  through 
the  workhouse  in  company  with  the 
priest  it  was  Martin's  custom  to  point 
out  some  of  the  most  wretched  victims 
of  intemperance,  with  the  comment: 
"  Oh,  Theobald  Mathew,  if  than  would 
but  take  the  cause  in  hand  ! "  After 
long  deliberation  Father  Mathew  sent  for 
his  Quaker  friend  one  evening  early  in 
April,  1838,  and  requested  him  to  assist 
in  forming  a  temperance  organization. 
A  meeting  was  held  in  Father  Mathew's 
chapel  on  the  10th  of  April,  resulting  in 
the  formation  of  the  Cork  Total  Absti- 
nence Society,  with  60  enrolled  members, 
each  of  whom  took  the  following  pledge  •} 

'  Dr.  Dawson  Bums's  "  Temperance  History,"  vol.  1, 
pp.  137-9. 


"I  promise  to  abstain  from  all  intoxicating 
drinks,  etc.,  except  used  medicinally  and  by  the 
order  of  a  medical  man,  and  to  discountenance 
the  cause  and  practice  of  intemperance." 

In  his  address  at  this  meeting  Father 
Mathew  said : 

' '  These  gentlemen  are  good  enough  to  say 
that  I  could  be  useful  in  promoting  the  great 
virtue  of  temperance  and  arresting  the  spread  of 
drunkenness.  I  am  quite  alive  to  the  evils  which 
this  vice  brings  with  it,  especially  to  the  lium- 
bler  classes,  who  are  naturally  most  exposed  to 
its  temptations  and  liable  to  yield  to  its  seduc- 
tive inHuences.  .  .  .  If  only  one  poor  soul  could 
be  rescued  from  destruction  by  what  we  are  now 
attempting,  it  would  be  giving  glory  to  God  andi 
well  worth  all  the  trouble  we  could  take.  No 
person  in  health  has  any  need  of  intoxicating 
drinks.  My  dear  friends,  you  don't  require 
them,  nor  do  I  require  them — neither  do  I  take 
them.  ...  I  will  be  the  tirst  to  sign  my  name 
in  the  book  which  is  on  the  table,  and  I  hope  we 
shall  soon  have  it  full."" 

When  he  had  finished  the  priest  sub- 
scribed his  name,  exclaiming,  -'Here 
goes,  in  the  name  of  God  !  " 

The  Society  held  frequent  meetings  on 
week-day  and  Sunday  evenings  and  the 
pledge-signers  multiplied  with  a  rapidity 
far  surpassing  the  fondest  dreams  of  the 
most  sanguine  of  the  reformers.  A  very 
conservative  estimate  places  the  number 
enrolled  at  the  end  of  the  year  1838  at 
10,000.  ^  Many  were  residents  of  the  sur- 
rounding counties,  Kerry,  Waterford, 
Clare,  Tipperary  and  Limerick,  and  the 
distant  County  Galway — nien  who  had 
come  to  Cork  expressly  to  join  Father 
Mathew's  crusade.  In  August,  1839,  the 
members  numbered  21,780,  and  from  this 
date  the  movement  assumed  huge  pro- 
portions ;  the  enrollments  in  August  and 
September  swelled  the  total  to  52,707, 
and  in  October  to  66,360.  A  brief  visit 
to  Tipperary  resulted  in  obtaining  many 
signatures,  while  the  announcement  that 
Father  Mathew  would  preach  a  charity 
sermon  in  Limerick  on  Dec.  1  filled  the 
city  with  such  multitudes  that  standing- 
room  in  cellars,  in  Avhicli  to  pass  the 
night,  was  purchased  at  two  shillings. 
Father  Mathew  spent  the  greater  part  of 
Sunday,  Sunday  night  and  Monday  ad- 
ministering the  pledge;  17,000  names 
were  recorded,  and  the  entire  number  of 
pledge-takers  was  estimated  at  from  100,- 
000  to  150,000.  Two  days'  Avork  at 
Waterford  secured  80,000  signers  and 
one  day   at  Clonmel  30,000,   while   the 

2  Father  Mathew,  by  J.   F.  Maguire,  M.  P.  (London, 

\mr->\  p.  V2. 

3  Temperance  lli.xtory,  vol.  1,  p,  139. 


Mathew,  Theobald.] 


418 


[Mathew,  Theobald. 


growth  of  the  reform  at  Cork  was  un- 
abated. Of  the  effectiveness  of  the  work 
no  better  proof  could  be  adduced  than 
that  afforded  by  the  Excise  returns,  which 
showed  a  falling  off  in  the  consumption 
of  spirits  in  Ireland  from  13,290,342  gal- 
lons in  1838  to  10,815,709  gallons  in  1839. 

While  these  results  must  have  been 
most  gratifying  to  Father  Mathew,  it 
appears  that  from  the  first  he  cherished 
the  hope  that  Ireland  would  be  wholly 
redeemed  from  drink,  lie  expressed 
this  hope  in  an  address  delivered  about 
four  years  after  the  origin  of  the  reform 
at  a  festival  in  the  town  of  Nenaugh : 

"  This  great  temperance  movement  which  we 
witness,"  said  he,  "was  not  lightly  thought  of 
by  me;  it  was  not  the  result  of  sudden  excite- 
ment; it  was  not  the  impulse  of  a  moment  that 
induced  me  to  undertake  the  share  I  have  had 
in  it.  I  pondered  long  upon  it;  I  examined  it 
carefully;  I  had  long  reflected  on  the  degrada- 
tion to  which  my  country  was  reduced — a 
country,  I  will  say,  second  to  none  in  the  uni- 
verse for  every  element  that  constitutes  a  na- 
tion's greatness,  with  a  people  whose  generous 
nature"  is  the  world's  admiration.  I  mourned 
in  secret  over  the  miseries  of  this  country;  1 
endeavored  to  find  out  the  cause  of  those  mis- 
eries, and,  if  that  were  possible,  to  apply  a 
remedy.  I  saw  that  these  miseries  were  chiefly 
owing  to  the  crimes  of  the  people,  and  that 
those  crimes  again  had  their  origin  in  the  use 
that  was  made  of  intoxicating  drinks.  I  dis- 
covered that  if  the  cause  were  removed  the 
■  effects  would  cease;  and  with  my  hopes  in  the 
God  of  universal  benevolence  and  charity,  re- 
posing my  hopes  in  the  Omnipotent,  I  began 
this  mission  in  Cork."  ' 

The  year  1840  was  the  most  remarkable 
in  the  history  of  this  wonderful  agita- 
tion, and  the  results  gained  have  no  par- 
allel in  temperance  annals.  The  princi- 
pal cities  visited  by  Father  Mathew  in 
this  year,  with  the  numbers  of  pledge- 
signers  in  each,  were:  Lismore,  25,000; 
Gort,  40.000 ;  Ennis,  30,000 ;  Loughreagh, 
51,000;  '  Portumna,  20,000;  Kilkenny, 
60,000;  Enniscorthy,  25,000;  Wexford, 
26,000;  Maryborough,  60,000;  Athlone, 
100,000;  Sligo,  78,000;  Castlereagh,  05,- 
000;  three  visits  to  Dublin,  60,000,  72,- 
000  and  46,000  respectively."  In  the 
localities  where  he  introduced  the  pledge 
(including  the  principal  cities  and  towns 
in  about  two-thirds  of  Ireland)  the  ef- 
fects of  his  work  upon  the  liquor  traffic 
were  marked;  many  distilleries,  brew- 
eries and  public  houses  were  forced  to 
close,     and    the   Court    calendars   were 

'  Masiuire's  "  Father  Mathew,"  p.  86. 
•  3  Temperance  History,  p.  173. 


cleared  of  criminal  cases.  Lord  Mor- 
peth, Chief  Secretary  for  Ireland,  re- 
marked :  "  The  duty  of  the  military  and 
police  in  Ireland  is  now  almost  entirely 
confined  to  keeping  the  ground  clear  for 
the  operation  of  Father  Mathew.'"  The 
annual  consumption  of  spirits,  which 
during  the  years  1835  to  1839  averaged 
11,595,536  gallons,  fell  in  1840  to  7,401,- 
051  gallons — a  decrease  of  more  than 
4,000,000  gallons,  resulting  in  a  loss  of  rev- 
enue of  £500,000.^  At  the  close  of  the  first 
three  months  of  the  year  1841  the  num- 
ber of  pledge-takers  had  reached  a  total 
of  4,647,000,  and  by  the  end  of  that 
year  the  number  must  have  been  at 
least  5,000,000  in  a  total  population  of 
8,175,124  (Census  of  1841).  The  num- 
ber of  gallons  of  spirits  consumed  had 
decreased  from  7,401,051  in  1840  to 
6,485,443  in  1841.  The  fact  that  this 
decrease,  however  remarkable,  was  not 
proportionate  to  the  number  of  converts, 
is  readily  accounted  for  when  it  is  re- 
membered that  under  any  circum.stances 
a  great  many  persons  are  bound  to  re- 
lapse from  the  best  resolutions. 

In  1842  the  movement  began  to  ebb, 
but  tens  of  thousands  were  enrolled. 
The  fruits  of  what  had  been  accom- 
plished were  now  enjoyed  at  their  best. 
The  consumption  of  spirits  in  Ireland 
amounted  to  only  5,290,650  gallons  in 
1842,  a  decrease  of  1,194,793  gallons 
since  1841  and  7,005,692  gallons  since 
1838.  The  enthusiasm  excited  by  these 
great  achievements  was  shared  by  the 
most  eminent  persons  of  the  day.  In  a 
letter  to  Mr.  R.  Allen,  Dublin,  written 
from  Edgeworthstown,  Ireland,  Feb.  28, 
1842,  Maria  Edgeworth,  the  novelist, 
said: 

"Beyond  all  calculations — beyond  all  the 
predictions  of  experience  and  all  the  example 
from  the  past  and  all  analogy, — this  wonderful 
crusade  against  the  bad  habits  of  nations,  the 
bad  habits  of  sensual  tastes  of  individuals,  has 
succeeded  and  lasted  for  about  two  years.  It 
is  amazing,  and  proves  the  power  of  moral  and 
religious  influence  and  motive  beyond  any 
other  example  on  record  in  history.  I  consider 
Father  Mathew  as  tne  greatest  benefactor  to 
his  country,  the  most  true  friend  to  Irishmen 
and  to  Ireland."^ 

During  August,  1842,  Father  Mathew 
visited  Glasgow,  where  40,000  took  the 
pledge.     In  1843  Ireland  was  regarded 

s  Ibid,  p.  174. 
4  Ibid,  p.  175. 
^  Father  Mathew,  pp.  134-5. 


Mathew,  Theobald.] 


410 


[Mathew,  Theobald. 


as  redeemed,  and  there  was  a  huge  dem- 
onstration in  Cork,  April  17,  in  honor 
of  Father  Mathew;  bnt  the  Excise  re- 
turns showed  a  consumption  of  5,54G,- 
483  gallons  of  spirits,  an  increase  of 
255,833  gallons  over  1842.  A  tour  of 
England,  made  this  year  by  the  "  Apos- 
tle of  Temperance,"  as  Father  Mathew 
Avas  now  universally  called,  resulted  in 
197,940  pledges,  60,940  of  them  from 
London.  In  1844  the  consumption  of 
spirits  in  Ireland  was  6,451,137  gallons, 
an  increase  of  1,160,487  gallons  over 
1842.  It  was  asserted  that  Father 
Mathew  was  making  enormous  profits 
from  the  sale  of  medals  furnished  to 
pledge-takers — each  signer  being  charged 
Sd  for  his  medal,  if  able  to  pay,  or  re- 
ceiving one  gratuitously,  if  unable.  But 
this  insinuation  was  found  to  be  ground- 
less, for  the  priest  had  impoverished 
himself  for  his  work's  sake. 

In  1845-6,  the  years  of  the  famine,  the 
consumption  of  spirits  advanced  to 
7,605,196  and  7,952,076  gallons,  respect- 
ively. This  increase  greatly  distressed 
Father  Mathew.  At  Lisgoold,  a  village 
near  Cork,  he  said : 

"  I  don't  blame  the  brewers  or  the  distillers — 
I  blame  those  who  make  them  so.  If  they 
could  make  more  inoney  in  any  other  way  they 
would;  but  so  long  as  the  people  are  mad  enough 
to  buy  and  drink  their  odious  manufacture,  they 
will  continue  in  the  trade.  Is  it  not  a  terrible 
thing  to  think  that  so  much  wholesome  grain, 
that  God  intended  for  the  support  of  human 
life,  should  be  converted  into  a  maddening 
poison,  for  the  destruction  of  man's  body  and 
soul?  By  a  calculation  recently  made  it  is 
clearly  proved  that  if  all  the  grain  now  con- 
verted into  poison  were  devoted  to  its  natural 
and  legitimate  use  it  would  afford  a  meal  a  day 
to  every  man,  woman  and  child  in  the  land. 
The  man  or  woman  who  drinks,  drinks  the 
food  of  the  starving.  Is  not  that  man  or  woman 
a  monster  who  drmks  the  food  of  the  starving?  "' 

In  a  letter  dated  Sept.  30,  1846,  ad- 
dressed to  Sir  Charles  Trevelyan,  he  said  : 

' '  It  is  a  fact,  and  you  are  not  to  attribute  my 
alluding  to  it  to  vanity,  that  the  late  provision 
riots  have  occurred  in  the  districts  in  which  the 
temperance  movement  has  not  been  encouraged. 
Our  people  are  as  harmless  in  their  meetings  as 
flocks  of  sheep,  unless  when  inflamed  and  mad- 
dened by  intoxicating  drink.  If  I  were  at  lib- 
erty to  exert  myself,  as  heretofore,  no  part  of 
Ireland  would  remain  unvisited;  but  the  un- 
avoidable expenses  of  such  a  mighty  reformation 
are  now  an  insurmountable  obstacle.  Were  it 
not  for  the  temperate  habits  of  the  greater  por- 
tion of  the    people    of  Ireland  our  unhappy 

1  Ibid,  p.  317. 


country  would  be  before  now  one  wild  scene  oi 
lumult  and  bloodshed."  ^ 

Father  Mathew's  reception  in  the 
United  States,  which  he  visited  in  1849, 
reaching  New  York  on  June  30,  Was 
attended  by  official  honors  rarely  accorded 
to  a  foreigner.  In  New  York  he  was 
welcomed  by  the  City  Council  in  a  body, 
and  addresses  were  presented  to  him  by 
the  President  of  the  Board  of  Aldermen 
and  by  William  E.  Dodge  for  the  Amer- 
ican Temperance  Union.  In  Boston  an 
address  of  welcome  was  made  in  the 
name  of  the  City  Council,  and  Governor 
Briggs  attended  a  reception  given  in  his 
honor.  The  Philadelphia  City  Council 
received  him  in  Independence  Hall.  At 
AYashington  President  Taylor  extended 
a  banquet  to  him  at  the  White  House, 
Dec.  20,  and  the  Senate  voted,  by  33;  to 
18,'  to  admit  him  to  the  bar  of  the  Senate 
Chamber — a  mark  of  distinction  that  had 
been  conferred  on  only  one  other  for- 
eigner. Gen.  Lafayette.  On  this  occasion 
Henry  Clay  pronounced  a  eulogy,  in 
which  he  said: 

"I  think  it  ought  to  be  received  as  a  just 
homage  to  a  distinguished  foreigner,  for  his 
humanity,  his  benevolence,  his  philanthropy  and 
his  virtue,  and  as  properly  due  to  one  who  has 
devoted  himself  to  the  good  of  his  whole  species. 
It  is  but  a  merited  tribute  of  respect  to  a  man 
who  has  achieved  a  great  social  revolution — a 
revolution  in  which  no  blood  has  been  shed,  a 
revolution  which  has  involved  no  desolation, 
which  has  caused  no  bitter  tears  of  widows  and 
orphans  to  flow;  a  revolution  which  has  beea 
achieved  without  violence,  and  a  greater  one, 
perhaps,  than  has  ever  been  accomplished  by 
any  benefactor  of  mankind."  * 

In  1851  Father  Mathew  returned  to 
Ireland  completely  exhausted,  after  a 
tour  of  the  principal  cities  of  the  South 
and  of  the  Mississippi  Valley  made  in 
spite  of  sickness  and  intense  suffering. 
It  is  estimated  that  he  administered  the 
pledge  to  about  600,000  in  this  country. 
In  his  native  land  he  found  the  fruit  of 
his  life's  work  gradually  slipping  away — 

2  Ibid,  p.  236. 

3  This  vote,  was  not  reached  without  protracted  discus- 
sion, due  to  the  action  of  the  Boston  Abolitionists,  who 
after  seeking  vainly  to  obtain  a  statement  from  Piither 
Mathew  atcainst  slavery  republished  a  circuhir,  issued  some 
years  before  and  sit^ned  by  Father  Mathew  and  Daniel 
O'Connell,  in  which  the  strongest  anti-slavery  groundwas 
taken.  Father  Mathew's  desire  to  remain  neutral  on  this 
question  during  his  visit  was  in  order  that  he  might  not 
prejudice  the  temperance  cause  or  impair  his  pow«r  for 
usefulness  as  its  advocate.  The  course  of  the  Abolitionists 
proved  a  serious  bar  to  his  work  in  the  South,  as  he  had 
foreseen.  (See  "King  Alcohol  in  the  Realm  of  King  Cot- 
ton," by  H.  A.  Scomp,  Ph.  D.,  chapter  31 ;  and  "Father 
Mathew,"  chapter  35.) 

*  Father  Mathew,  p.  396. 


Mathew,  Theobald.] 


420 


[Medicine. 


the  consumption  of  spirits  constantly  in- 
creasing; and  his  mature  Judgment  of 
the  means  necessary  for  the  permanent 
destruction  of  intemperance  was  ex- 
pressed in  a  letter  written  to  Rev.  George 
. W.  Pepper  in  1854,  two  years  before  his 
death : 

"The  question  of  prohibiting  the  sale  of 
ardent  spirits  and  the  many  other  intoxicating 
drinks  which  are  to  be  found  in  our  unhappy 
country  is  not  new  to  me.  The  principle  of 
Prohibition  seems  to  me  the  only  safe  and  cer- 
tain remedy  for  the  evils  of  intemperance.  This 
opinion  has  been  strengthened  by  the  hard  labor 
of  more  than  20  years  in  the  temperance  cause. 
I  rejoice  in  the  welcome  intelligence  of  the  for- 
mation of  a  Maine  Law  Alliance,  which  I  trust 
will  be  the  means,  under  God,  of  destroying  the 
fruitful  source  of  crime  and  pauperism." 

Referring  to  the  causes  of  the  gradual 
decline  of  the  Irish  into  their  old  drink- 
ing habits  Dr.  Dawson  Burns  says : 

' '  Added  to  all  oth(;r  causes,  and  greater  than 
all,  was  the  continuance  of  the  legalized  drink 
traffic  in  the  midst  of  the  converted  millions. 
Though  many  liquor-shops  were  closed,  suffi- 
cient numbers  remained  open  to  act  as  snares  to 
the  unwary,  and  as  ever-present  temptations  in 
moments  of  weakness.  Had  the  power  been 
placed  in  the  hands  of  the  people  of  extinguish- 
ing these  centres  of  evil  and  thus  allowing  time 
for  the  free  and  full  formation  of  sober  habits 
and  of  a  stronger  will,  the  results  woidd  have 
been  widely  different.  No  one  understood  this 
better  than  Father  Mathew  himself,  who  became 
a  Vice-President  of  tlie  United  Kingdom  Alli- 
ance in  1853,  and  recognized  in  its  policy  of  the 
legislative  suppression  of  the  liquor  traffic  the 
necessary  guarantee  of  all  permanent  temper- 
ance reformation." ' 

This  statement  is  confirmed  by  a  letter 
from  Father  Mathew  addressed  to  the 
Alliance  from  Cork,  Feb.  21,  1853. 

"My  labors,"  he  wrote,  "with  the  Divine 
aid,  were  attended  with  partial  success.  The 
efforts  of  individuals,  however  zealous,  ai-e  not 
equal  to  the  mighty  task.  The  United  King- 
dom Alliance  strikes  at  the  very  root  of  the 
evil.*  I  trust  in  God  the  associated  efforts  of 
the  many  good  and  benevolent  men  will  effec- 
tually crush  a  monster  gorged  with  human 
gore."  ^ 

IVEedicine. — One  of  the  most  obsti- 
nate obstacles  to  a  successful  propagation 
of  total  abstinence  principles  is  the  drug 
fallacy — a  delusion  founded  on  precisely 
the  same  error  which  leads  the  dram- 
drinker  to  mistake  a  process  of  irritation 

*  Temperance  History,  vol.  1,  pp.  398-9. 

■The  Alliance  was  orsanized  avowedly  "for  the  total 
and  immediate  legisiative  suppression  of  the  traffic  in  in- 
toxicatins;  liquors  as  licverasj;es. "  (See  the  paper  by 
Thomas  U.  Barker,  formerly  Seci-etary  of  the  Alliance,  in 
the  "  Centennial  Temperance  Volume  "  [New  York,lS81J, 
p.  810.) 

«  Father  Mathew,  p.  330. 


for  a  process  of  invigoration.  During 
the  infanc}''  of  the  healing  art  all  medical 
theories  were  biased  by  the  idea  that  sick- 
ness is  an  enemy  whose  attacks  must  be 
repulsed  a  main  forte,  by  suppressing 
the  symptoms  with  fire,  sword  and  poison 
— not  in  the  figurative,  but  in  the  literal 
sense, — the  keystone  dogma  of  the  primi- 
tive Sangrados  having  been  the  following 
heroic  maxim:  "  Quod  medicamenta  non 
curant,  ferrwm  curat;  quod  non  curat 
ferruiu  ir/nis  curat"  (What  drugs  Avon't 
cure  must  be  cured  with  iron  [the  lancet] ; 
if  that  fails,  resort  to  fire).  But  with  the 
progress  of  the  physiological  sciences  the 
truth  gradually  gained  ground  that 
disease  itself  is  a  reconstructive  process, 
and  that  the  suppression  of  the  symp- 
toms retards  the  accomplishment  of  that 
reconstruction.  And  ever  since  that 
truth  has  dawned  upon  the  human  mind 
the  use  of  poison  drugs  has  steadily  de- 
clined among  intelligent  people. 

Alcohol  lingers  in  our  hospitals  as 
slavery  lingers  in  South  America  or  tor- 
ture in  the  Courts  of  eastern  Europe. 
Quacks  prescribe  it  because  it  is  the 
cheapest  stimulant;  routine  doctors 
prescribe  it  because  its  stimulating 
eifect  is  more  infallible  than  that  of 
other  poisons;  empirists  prescribe  it 
at  the  special  request  of  their  patients, 
or  because  they  find  it  in  the  ready-made 
formulas  of  their  dispensatories.  Obser- 
vant physicians,  however,  are  beginning 
to  recognize  the  fact  that  virulent  drugs 
can  at  best  only  force  nature  to  postpone 
the  crisis  of  a  disease  and  interrupt  the 
course  of  a  process  which,  after  all,  is  the 
safest  and  often  the  most  direct  path  to 
the  goal  of  definite  recovery.  The  neces- 
sity of  alcoholic  drugs  has  been  disproved 
by  the  strongest  testimony  ever  accumu- 
lated on  any  medical  question.  Alcohol 
as  a  medicine  can  be  rejected  in  favor  of 
safer  as  well  as  more  efficacious  tonics; 
and  that  it  should  be  thus  rejected  ad- 
mits of  no  doubt,  from  a  moral  point  of 
view,  considering  the  facts  that:  (1) 
Fifteen  per  cent,  of  all  confirmed  topers 
owe  their  ruin  to  the  after  effects  of  medi- 
cal prescriptions,  and  (3)  A  single  dose 
of  alcoholic  drugs  is  sufficient  to  re- 
awaken the  dormant  passion  of  a  re- 
claimed inebriate  or  to  kindle  the  fuel 
gathered  by  the  transmission  of  heredi- 
tary tendencies.  "  I  remember  tlie  case 
of  a  habitual  drinker,"  says  Dr.  Mussej, 


Medicine.]                                          421  [Medicine. 

"  who  in  an  interval  of  contrition  took  a  that  alcoholic  stimulants  are  not  required 

solemn  pledge  that  he   would  touch  no  as  medicines,  and  believe  that  many,  if. 

more  spirits  for  40  years,  never  doubt-  not  a  majority  of  physicians  to-day,  of 

ing,  however,  that  40  years  would  place  education    and  experience,  are  satisfied 

him  in  his  grave.     His  health  improved  that  alcoholic  stimulants  as   medicines 

and  he  actually  kept  his  vow,  but  at  the  are    worse  than    useless,  and  physicians 

expiration  of  the  stipulated  period  ven-  generally  have  only  to  overcome  the  force 

tured  to  take  a  little  liquor,  as  it  seemed  of  habit  and  of  prevailing  fashions  to 

no  more  than  a  friendly  salutation  given  find   a  more  excellent  way,  when  they 

to  an  old  acquaintance — and  in  a  short  will  all  look  back  with  wonder  and  sur- 

time  died  a  sot."  prise  to  find  that  they,  as  members  of  an 

Alcohol  can  in  no  case  be  considered  honored  profession,  should  have  been  so 

an  indispensable  means  either  of  main-  far  compromised." 

taining  or  restoring  the  normal  condition  Felix  L.  Oswald. 
of  the  human  organism.     "  Alcohol    is 

neither  a  food  nor  a  generator  of  force  in  The  relation  of  the  physician  to  the 
the  human  body,"  says  Dr.  N.  S.  Davis,  temperance  reform  is  a  subject  of  such 
ex-President  of  the  American  Medical  importance  that  neither  he  nor  the  gene- 
Association,  "and  /  ]i,ave  found  no  case  ral  public  can  afford  to  ignore  it.  There 
of  disease,  and  no  emergency  arising  from  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  frequent  and 
accident,  that  I  could  not  treat  more  free  use  of  alcoholics  in  the  sick-room 
successfully  without  any  form  of  fer-  has  been  one  of  the  greatest  imjoediments 
menteil  or  distilled  liquor  than  with."  to  the  progress  of  this  reform ;  and  yet  if 
Dr.  Andrew  Clark  of  London,  court-  this  freedom  of  use  is  advantageous  to 
physician  of  the  royal  family,  confesses  the  patient,  if  it  meets  the  requirements 
that  "  Alcohol  is  not  only  not  a  helper  of  as  nothing  else  does,  and  if  the  second- 
work  but  a  certain  hinderer,  and  every  ary  effects  are  desirable  and  satisfactory, 
man  who  comes  to  the  front  of  a  profes-  the  faithful  physician  will  be  slow  to  re- 
sion  in  London  is  marked  by  this  one  linguish  the  practice  even  if  the  liquor 
characteristic,  that  the  more  busy  he  gets  traffic  and  the  drink  haljit  derive  no  in- 
the  less  in  the  shape  of  alcohol  he  takes,  considerable  support  therefrom.  On  the 
and  his  excuse  is:  'I  am  sorry,  but  I  other  hand,  if  the  use  of  intoxicants  in 
cannot  take  it  and  do  my  work.'  "  "  The  the  sick-room  is  largely  empirical,  the 
banishment  of  alcohol,"  says  the  editor  result  of  routine  practice  or  a  matter  of 
of  the  Boston  Journal  of  Chemistry,  convenience;  if  most  serious  secondary 
"  would  not  deprive  us  of  a  single  one  of  results  do  very  often  ensue,  and  if  in 
tne  indispensable  agents  which  modern  most  instances,  if  not  in  every  case,  other 
civilization  demands.  Neither  would  remedies  will  meet  the  indications  quite 
chemical  science  be  retarded  by  its  loss,  as  well  or  very  much  better,  then  not 
In  no  instance  of  disease  is  it  a  remedy  only  as  a  reformer,  a  philanthropist  and 
which  might  not  be  dispensed  with  and  a  good  citizen,  but  also  as  a  scientific 
other  agents  substituted."  Dr.  H.  E.  medical  man,  he  is  bound  to  eschew  in- 
Greene  of  Boston  reminds  us  of  an  addi-  toxicants  and  substitute  other  remedies, 
tional  reason  for  renouncing  the  aid  of  It  is  undeniable  that  many  a  man  is 
the  treacherous  drug.  "  It  needs  no  tottering  to-day  on  the  brink  of  a  drunk- 
argument,"  he  says,  "  to  convince  us  that  ard's  grave  who  can  trace  the  origin  of 
it  is  upon  the  medical  profession  to  a  his  drink  habit  to  a  physician's  prescrip- 
very  great  extent  that  the  rumseller  de-  tion,  and  who  has  thus  suffered  through 
pends  to  maintain  the  respectability  of  all  his  subsequent  career  from  a  so-called 
the  traffic.  It  requires  only  your  own  remedy  which  his  doctor  prescribed  when 
experience  and  observation  to  convince  he  was  sick.  Here,  then,  is  a  risk  which 
you  that  it  is  upon  the  medical  profes-  the  judicious  physician  will  not  fail  to 
sion,  upon  their  prescriptions  and  recom-  consider,  and  he  will  give  the  preference' 
mendatious,  that  the  habitual  dram-  to  remedies  that  are  quite  as  efficient  in 
drinker  depends  for  the  seeming  respect-  primary  results  and  less  dangerous  in 
ability  of  his  drinking  habits.     As  a  re-  secondary. 

suit  of  30  years  of  professional  experience  Physicians    have  without   doubt    fre- 

and  practical  observation,  I  feel  assured  quently  administered  alcoholics  with  a 


IMEedicine.] 


422 


[Medicine. 


view  to  tlieir  food  value;  but  the  uncon- 
tradicted evidence  of  all  authorities  is 
that  alcohol  is  a  poison.  All  our  dispen- 
satories and  medical  dictionaries — Eng- 
lish, French  and  American — agree  on 
this  point,  and  probably  all  physicians 
will  agree  that  a  food  is  not  a  poison  and 
a  poison  is  not  a  food.  The  diiference 
between  these  two  classes  of  substances 
lies  in  their  inherent  qualities,  and  the 
one  does  not  run  into  the  other.  But  even 
if  some  degree  of  nutrition  could  be 
claimed  for  alcohol,  we  have  in  milk  an 
article  of  positive  and  undeniable  food 
value  that  is  always  at  hand  and  never 
open  to  the  objections  that  lie  against 
the  intoxicants. 

It  is  also  claimed  by  some  that  alcohol 
is  of  value  as  a  heat-producer,  and  the 
fact  that  much  of  that  which  is  taken 
into  the  system  cannot  be  found  by  the 
chemist  has  given  some  jjlausibility  to 
this  theory ;  but  after  three  years  of  care- 
ful experiment,  Dr.  B.  W.  Kichardson 
expresses  his  full  conviction  that  alcohol 
is  not  a  supporter  and  sustainer  of  the 
animal  temperature.  Other  eminent 
physiologists  who  have  given  the  subject 
much  attention — such  as  Carpenter,  Ait- 
ken  and  Lees — fully  agree  with  him; 
while  the  practical  experience  of  polar 
navigators  seems  to  settle  the  matter  be- 
yond a  peradventure,  for  they  have  in- 
variably found  that  the  total  abstainers 
could  resist  the  extreme  cold  far  better 
than  those  who  attempted  to  warm  them- 
selves with  intoxicants. 

But  the  physician  most  frequently  re- 
sorts to  the  use  of  intoxicants  for  the 
sick  in  those  later  stages  of  fever  and 
other  exhaustive  diseases  where  the  vital 
powers  begin  to  flag  and  some  stimulant 
seems  to  be  indicated.  The  opinion  has 
been  quite  prevalent,  both  in  the  profes- 
sion and  out  of  it,  that  under  these  cir- 
cumstances the  patient  can  be  kept  up 
or  "run  along"  by  the  use  of  intoxi- 
cants— that  these  supply  a  stimulation 
suited  to  the  exigencies  of  the  case ;  but 
it  now  appears  very  probable,  if  not  ab- 
solutely certain,  that  we  have  been  seri- 
ously deceived  here,  as  it  has  been  shown 
that  patients  can  be  kept  up  and  "  run 
along"  quite  as  well  with  other  reme- 
dies, and  it  is  now  seriously  questioned 
whether  alcohol  is  in  any  proper  sense  a 
stimulant.  It  is  universally  admitted 
that  in  its  secondary  effects  it  is  a  para- 


lyzer  of  nervous  power.  This  is  shown 
in  the  uncertain  gait  of  a  person  under 
its  influence,  and  it  becomes  piore  mani- 
fest in  the  obtuseness  of  nervous  sensi- 
bility when  one  is  farther  advanced.  In 
the  light  of  investigations  made  within 
the  last  quarter  of  a  century  it  is  quite 
probable,  if  not  certain,  that  its  first 
effect  also  is  a  partial  paralysis  of  the 
terminal  nerves,  whereby  the  tension  of 
the  ca|3illary  is  so  much  relaxed  that  the 
heart's  action  is  increased — not  because 
fresh  power  has  been  given  it,  but  be- 
cause the  normal  resistance  to  its  action 
has  been  diminished.  If  however  the 
old  theory,  that  the  first  action  of  alco- 
hol is  really  that  of  a  stimulant,  is  con- 
ceded, the  wise  physician  will  consider 
whether  we  have  not  in  ammonia  and 
other  substances  stimulants  of  greater 
value,  and  those  that  are  free  from  the 
serious  objections  that  belong  to  the  al- 
coholics. 

Any  physician  who  would  honor  his 
profession  and  serve  his  patrons  well 
must  give  to  the  non-alcoholic  treatment 
that  patient  investigation  and  candid 
consideration  which  its  importance  de- 
mauds,  and  then  pursue  the  course 
which  the  broadest  philanthropy  and  the 
most  enlightened  medical  science  dic- 
tate. John  Blackmee. 

However  unsatisfactory  the  attitude  of 
the  medical  profession  at  large  may  ap- 
pear to  be  in  the  estimation  of  those  who 
are  in  accord  with  the  views  expressed  in 
the  foregoing  articles,  there  has  been  a 
very  marked  growth  of  sentmient  m  the 
last  50  years.  The  evidences  of  it  are  seen 
not  alone  in  the  uncompromising  attacks 
upon  alcohol  made  in  many  medical 
books  of  great  authority,  and  in  utter- 
ances from  a  multitude  of  eminent  prac- 
titioners and  investigators,  as  Avell  as  in 
the  increasing  favor  with  which  total  ab- 
stinence is  regarded  by  leading  medical 
journals,  but  also  in  important  declara- 
tions, issued  with  much  formality  and 
representing  the  best  thought  of  the  pro- 
fession. 

Three  famous  "  medical  declarations  " 
on  the  alcohol  question  have  been  put 
forth  in  England.  The  first  was  drawn 
up  in  1839  by  Julius  Jeffreys,  and  was 
signed  by  78  scientists  of  distinction,  in- 
cluding Sir  Benjamin  Brodie,  Dr.  W.  F. 
Chambers,   Sir  James   Clarke,    Bransby 


Medicine.] 


423 


[Medicine. 


Cooper,  Dr.  D.  Davis,  Sir  J.  Eyre,  Dr.  A. 
Ferguson,  Mason  Good,  Dr.  Marshall 
Hall,  Dr.  J.  Hope,  C.  A.  Key,  Herbert 
Mayo,  R.  Partridge,  Richard  Quain,  Dr. 
A.  T.  Thomson,  R.  Travers,  Dr.  Andrew, 
and  Alexander  Ure  (the  Queen's  physi- 
cian).   It  was  as  follows : 

"  An  opinion  handed  down  from  rude  and  ig- 
norant times,  and  imbibed  l\y  Englislimen  from 
their  youth,  has  become  very  general,  that  the 
habitual  use  of  some  portion  of  alcoholic  drink, 
as  of  wine,  beer  or  spirit,  is  beneficial  to  health, 
and  even  necessary  to  those  who  are  subjected 
to  habitual  labor.  Anatomy,  physiology  and 
the  experience  of  all  ages  and  countries,  when 
properly  examined,  must  satisfy  every  mind 
well-informed  in  medical  science  that  the  above 
opinion  is  altogether  erroneous.  Man,  in  ordi- 
nary health,  like  other  animals,  requires  not 
any  such  stimulants,  and  cannot  be  benefited  by 
the  habitual  employment  of  any  quantity  of 
them,  large  or  small  ;  nor  will  their  use  during 
his  lifetime  increase  the  aggregate  amount  of 
his  labor.  In  whatever  quantity  they  are  em- 
ployed they  will  rather  tend  to  diminish  it. 
When  he  is  in  a  state  of  temporary  debility 
from  illness  or  other  causes,  a  temporary  use  of 
them,  as  of  other  stimulant  medicines,  may  be 
desirable  ;  but  as  soon  as  he  is  raised  to  his 
natural  standard  of  health  a  continuance  of 
their  use  can  do  no  good  to  him,  even  in  the 
most  moderate  quantities  ;  while  larger  quanti- 
ties (yet  such  as  by  many  persons  are  thought 
moderate)  do,  sooner  or  later,  prove  injurious 
to  the  human  constitution,  without  any  excep- 
tions." 

The  second  declaration  was  prepared 
in  1847  by  John  Dnnlop,  Esq.,  and  sign- 
ed by  more  than  2,000  physicians  and 
surgeons,  of  Avhom  a  few  were :  Dr.  Ad- 
dison, Dr.  Niel  Arnot,  J.  Moncrieff  Ar- 
not,  Esq.,  Dr.  B.  G.  Babington,  Dr. 
Beattie,  Sir  J.  Risdon  Bennett,  Dr.  A. 
Billing,  Dr.  John  Bostock,  Dr.  Gold- 
ing  Bird,  Dr.  R.  Bright,  W.  Bowman, 
Esq.,  Sir  B.  C.  Brodie,  Sir  W.  Burnett, 
Dr.  G.  J?udd,  Sir  G.  Burrows,  Dr.  W. 
B.  Carpenter,  Dr.  W.  F.  Chambers, 
Sir  J.  Clark,  Dr.  Copland,  Sir  J.  Eyre, 
Dr.  A.  Farre,  Dr.  Robert  Ferguson, 
Sir  AVilliam  Ferguson,  Sir  J.  Forbes, 
R.  D.  Grainger,  Esq.,  Dr.  Guy,  Dr.  Mar- 
shall Hall,  Sir  H.  Holland,  Sir  Aston 
Key,  F.  Kiernan,  Esq.,  W.  B.  Langmore, 
Esq.,  Dr.  P.  M.  Latham,  Sir  J.  McGregor, 
Dr.  J.  A.  Paris,  Dr.  Peacock,  Dr.  Pereira, 
Dr.  Pettigrew,  Dr.  Prout,  Dr.  Toynbee, 
Dr.  Wilks,  Erasmus  Wilson,  Esq.,  Dr. 
Forbes  Winslow,  Prof.  Adams,  Dr.  Ait- 
ken,  Prof.  Alison,  Dr.  S.  Begbie,  W. 
Braithwaite,  Esq.,  Dr.  Buchanan,  Dr.  P. 
Crampton,  Prof.  Curran,  Dr.  Keith,  Sir 
H.  Marsh,  Dr.  Q.  E.  Paget,  Prof.  Pirrie, 


Prof.  J.  Reid,  Prof.  Syme,  T.  P.  Teale, 
Esq.,  Dr.  Andrew  Wood  and  Dr.  Wylie. 
This  declaration  spoke  with  increased 
emphasis  in  behalf  of  total  abstinence, 
and  did  not  hint  at  the  necessity  of 
using  alcoholic  drinks  in  cases  of  sick- 
ness.    The  following  is  the  text : 

"We,  the  imdersigned,  are  of  opinion:  (1) 
That  a  very  large  proportion  of  human  misery, 
including  poverty,  disease  and  crime,  is  induced 
by  the  use  of  alcoholic  or  fermented  liquors  as 
beverages.  (2)  That  the  most  perfect  health  is 
compatible  with  total  abstinence  from  all  such 
intoxicating  beverages,  whether  in  the  form  of 
ardent  spirits  or  as  wine,  beer,  ale,  porter,  cider, 
etc.,  etc.  (3)  That  persons  accustomed  to  such 
drinks  may  with  perfect  safety  discontinue  them 
entirely,  either  at  once  or  gradually,  after  a 
short  time.  (4)  That  total  and  universal  abstin- 
ence from  alcoholic  liquors  and  beverages  of  all 
sorts  would  greatly  contribute  to  the  health,  the 
prosperity,  the  morality  and  the  happiness  of 
the  human  race." 

The  third  and  final  English  medical 
declaration,  written  by  Prof.  Parkes  in 
1871,  was  signed  by  George  Burrows, 
M.  D.,  F.  R.  S.,  President  of  the  Royal 
College  of  Physicians,  etc.,  by  George 
Busk,  F.  R.  S.,  President  of  the  Royal 
College  of  Surgeons,  by  a  large  number 
of  the  leading  physicians  and  surgeons  of 
London,  and  by  69  eminent  practitioners, 
heads  of  medical  institutions  in  various 
cities  and  towns  of  England.  It  is  re- 
produced below. 

"  As  it  is  believed  that  the  inconsiderate  pre- 
scription of  large  quantities  of  alcoholic  liquids 
by  medical  men  for  their  patients  has  given  rise 
in  many  instances  to  the  formation  of  intemper- 
ate habits,  the  undersigned,  wliile  unable  to 
abandon  the  use  of  alcohol  in  the  treatment  of 
certain  cases  of  disease,  are  yet  of  opinicMi  that 
no  medical  practitioner  should  prescribe  it  with- 
out a  sense  of  grave  responsibility.  They  be- 
lieve that  alcohol,  in  whatever  form,  should  be 
prescribed  with  as  much  care  as  any  powerful 
drug,  and  that  the  directions  for  its  use  should 
be  so  framed  as  not  to  be  interpreted  as  a  sanc- 
tion for  excess,  or  necessarily  for  the  continu- 
ance of  its  use  when  the  occasion  is  past.  They 
are  also  of  opinion  that  many  people  immensely 
exaggerate  the  value  of  alcohol  as  an  article  of 
diet,  and  since  no  class  of  men  see  so  much  of 
its  ill  effects,  and  possess  such  power  to  restrain 
its  abuse,  as  members  of  their  own  profession, 
they  hold  that  every  luedical  practitioner  is 
bound  to  exert  his  utmost  influence  to  inculcate 
habits  of  great  moderation  in  the  use  of  alcoholic 
liquids. 

"  Being  also  firmly  convinced  that  the  great 
amount  of  drinking  of  alcoholic  liquors  among 
the  working  classes  of  this  country  is  one  of  the 
greatest  evils  of  the  day,  destroying — more  than 
anything  else — the  health,  happiness  and  wel- 
fare of  those  classes,  and  neutralizing  to  a  large 
extent  the  great  industrial  prosperity  which 


Medicine.] 


424 


[Medicine. 


Providence  has  placed  within  the  reach  of  this 
nation,  the  nndersiuned  would  gladly  support 
any  wise  legislation  which  would  tend  to  restrict, 
within  proper  limits,  the  use  of  alcoholic  bever- 
ages, and  gradually  introduce  habits  of  temper- 
ance. " 

At  the  International  Medical  Congress 
held  at  Washington,  D.  C,  in  1887,  the 
following,  prepared  by  the  editor  of  the 
Foice,  was  circulated  for  signatures :  and 
although  the  work  was  not  systematically 
done,  or  under  favorable  circumstances, 
the  names  of  78  delegates  were  olitained 
(including  distinguished  physicians  from 
foreign  countries),  the  list  being  headed 
with  the  signature  of  Dr.  N.  S.  Davis, 
President  of  the  Congress : 

"  In  view  of  the  alarming  prevalence  and  ill 
effects  of  intemperance,  with  which  none  are  so 
familiar  as  members  of  the  medical  profession, 
and  which  have  called  forth  from  eminent 
physicians  all  the  world  over  the  voice  of  warn- 
ing concerning  the  use  of  alcoholic  beverages, 
we,  the  undersigned,  members  of  the  Interna- 
tional Medical  Congress,  unite  in  the  declaration 
that  we  believe  alcohol  should  be  classed  with 
other  powerful  drugs;  that,  when  prescribed 
medicinally,  it  should  be  with  conscientious 
caution  and  a  sense  of  grave  responsibility. 

' '  We  are  of  the  opinion  that  the  use  of  alco- 
holic liquor  as  a  beverage  is  productive  of  a 
large  amount  of  physical  disease,  that  it  entails 
diseased  appetites  upon  offspring,  and  that  it  is 
the  cause  of  a  large  percentage  of  the  crime  and 
pauperism  of  our  cities  and  country. 

"  We  would  welcome  any  judicious  and  ef- 
fective measures  which  would  tend  to  confine 
the  traffic  to  the  legitimate  purposes  of  medical 
and  other  sciences,  art  and  mechanism."  ' 

From  all  this  it  is  perfectly  plain  that 
total  abstinence  is  unqualifiedly  recom- 
mended by  the  deliberate  judgment  of 
physicians  so  numerous  and  reputable 
as  to  be  considered  thoroughly  represen- 
tative of  the  profession,  that  the  care- 
less prescription  of  alcohol  or  liquors  is 
solemnly  condemned  by  them,  and  that 
they  exhibit  a  distinct  friendship  for 
legislation  against  the  beverage  traffic. 
Individual  doctors  may  dissent  from 
their  conclusions  and  even  hold  fast  to 
the  old-time  practices  of  indifference  or 
recklessness;  but  these  "declarations" 
are  absolutely  unchallenged  by  the  pro- 
fession in  general.  No  counter-declara- 
tions have  been  formulated.  If  alcohol 
were  good  for  man,  if  total  abstinence 
were  injurious  or  unnecessary,  if  mode- 
rate indulgence  were  promotive  of  health 
in  any  way,  surely  such  declarations  as 
those  printed  above,  issued  with  so  much 

>  See  the  Voice,  Sept.  83, 1887. 


formality  and  aggressiveness,  would  not 
be  permitted  to  stand  as  the  representa- 
tive utterances  of  the  medical  profession. 
There  remain  two  propositions,  ad- 
vanced by  the  radical  anti-alcohol  scien- 
tists, that  physicians  still  seem  slow  to 
accept — first,  that  even  if  alcohol  has  a 
remedial  value,  its  virtues  lie  wholly  in 
the  spirits  at  the  basis  of  liquors,  and 
therefore  that  so  far  as  this  substance  is 
prescribed  it  should  invariably  be  given 
in  the  form  of  ]oure  alcohol  and  not  in  the 
disguised  form  of  beer,  wine,  ale,  brandy, 
etc. ;  second,  that  even  pure  alcohol  as  a 
medicinal  agent  may  be  dispensed  with, 
advantageously  or  without  serious  dis- 
advantage, in  nearly  (if  not  quite)  all 
cases.  But  conservative  prejudices  arc 
gradually  giving  way  before  the  convic- 
tion that  those  who  make  claims  for  al- 
cohol cannot  consistently  prefer  the  di- 
luted drinks  to  the  pure  article  when  the 
sole  aim  is  to  obtain  a  therapeutic  effect ; 
while  the  epigrammatic  saying  of  the  dis- 
tinguished Dr.  John  Higginbottom,  that 
in  reality  "alcohol  is  neither  food  nor 
physic,"  finds  confirmation  in  numerous 
practical  experiments.  The  results  pro- 
duced in  the  London  Temperance  Hos- 
pital have  received  widespread  attention. 
This  institution  was  founded  Oct,  3, 
18  73,  with  a  view  to  treating  disease  Avith- 
out  recourse  to  alcohol;  and  although  its 
supporters  struggled  for  several  years 
under  serious  difficulties  it  has  for  some 
time  been  on  a  tolerably  good  financial 
footing.  In  1889  it  treated  5,390  pa- 
tients, of  whom  789  were  in-patients. 
Of  the  .5,390,  2.844  were  cured,  2,049 
were  relieved,  329  died,  127  were  unre- 
lieved and  41  still  remained  under  medi- 
cal care — making  a  death-rate  of  only 
6.10  per  cent,  for  in  and  out-patients 
combined,  certainly  a  very  low  death- 
rate  for  a  metropolitan  hospital.  The 
report  of  the  hospital  for  the  10^  years 
ending  April  30,  1884,  gave  the  following 
statistics  for  in-patients  treated  in  that 
period : 

Total  number  admitted,  3,378  ;  cured,  1,872  ; 
relieved,  850  ;  died,  113  ;  still  under  treatment, 
43 — average  death-rate  for  the  10)^'  years,  5.05 
per  cent. 

In  the  same  period  of  10^  years,  53 
cases  of  typhoid  fever  were  treated ;  and 
47  of  the  53  patients  recovered.  Of  the 
six  who  died,  five  were  non-abstainers, 
and  the  other  one  had  been  an  abstainer 


Mennonites.] 


425      [Methodist  Episcopal  Church. 


for  only  six  months.  Indeed,  it  was  in- 
variably found  that  the  patients  whose 
ailments  were  most  stubborn  were  non- 
abstainers.  The  results  in  surgical 
cases  were  no  less  remarkable  than  in 
typhoid  fever  cases.  In  the  period  from 
March  35,  1875,  to  April  30,  1884,  Dr. 
Edmunds,  of  the  hospital  staff,  had 
under  his  care  401  "surgical  cases  of 
such  severity  as  to  require  treatment  in 
the  beds  of  the  hospital,"  and  in  no  case 
did  he  administer  alcohol  in  any  form; 
yet  only  eight  deaths  occurred — a  mor- 
tality of  but  2  per  cent. 

Concerning  the  methods  practiced  in 
the  Temperance  Hospital,  Mr.  Axel  Gus- 
tafson  says : 

"Part  of  the  success  is  due  to  the  distinction 
of  its  medical  staff,  to  the  model  character  of 
the  hospital  and  to  the  devoted  ladies  who 
superintend  the  nursing.  But  a  large  part  of 
the  success  is  undoubtedly  due  to  the  fact  that 
alcohol  is  practically  disused.  The  visiting  phy- 
sicians and  surgeons  are  in  no  way  tied  with  re- 
gard to  the  use  of  alcohol,  if  they  deem  it  de- 
sirable to  use  it  as  a  medicine.  It  is  only 
stipulated  that  in  the  event  of  any  such  excep- 
tional case  they  fully  report  the  matter  to  the 
Board.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  alcohol  has  only 
been  used  in  oae  or  two  experimental  cases 
during  these  ten  years  (1873-84),  and  in  these 
cases  without  beneticial  residts.  As  an  article 
of  food  and  as  a  pharmaceutical  vehicle,  the  use 
of  alcohol  is  formally  excluded  from  the  hos- 
pital."' 

Mennonites  . — The  Mennonite 
Church  has  a  membership  of  about  250,- 
000  in  the  United  States.  Its  newspaper 
organs  and  District  Conferences  have 
taken  strong  ground  for  total  abstinence 
and  against  the  liquor  traffic,  but  the 
General  Conference  has  not  in  recent 
years  made  a  distinct  record. 

Methodist  Episcopal  Church. — 

This  church,  ever  since  its  foundation, 
has  manifested  a  strong  interest  in  the 
drink  question.  The  Wesleys  were  un- 
compromising opponents  of  drunken- 
ness and  drinking,  and  also  of  the  spiritu- 
ous liquor  traffic.  The  rules  formulated  by 
them  for  the  United  Societies  of  Metho- 
dists in  1743  declared  that  all  "  members 
were  expected  to  evidence  their  desire 
of  salvation,  first,  by  doing  no  harm; 
by  avoiding  evil  of  every  kind,  especi- 
ally that  which  is  most  generally  prac- 
ticed, such  as  .  .  .  drunkenness, 
buying  or  selling  spirituous  liquors,  or 
drinking  them,   except   in  cases  of  ex- 

>  Fouudatiou  of  Death,  pp.  210-11. 


treme  necessity."     (See  Wesley,  John.) 

Upon  the  organization  of  the  Methodist 

Episcopal   Church  in   America  in  1784, 

the  following  was  made  a  part  of  the 

minutes : 

"  Q.  Should  our  friends  be  permitted  to 
make  spirituous  liquors,  and  sell  and  drink 
them  in  drams? — A.  By  no  means." 

The  rule  of  Wesley  was  modified  in 
1790  so  as  to  read,  "drunkenness  or 
drinking  spirituous  liquors,  unless  in 
cases  of  necessity," — the  words  "  buying 
and  selling "  and  "  extreme "  being 
omitted.  I'liis  less  aggressive  attitude 
of  the  church  continued  for  a  number  of 
years.  Even  as  late  as  1812  the  Gen- 
eral Conference  voted  down  (after  it  had 
been  called  up  five  successive  times)  the 
following  resolution : 

"Resolved,  That  no  stationed  or  local 
preacher  shall  retail  spirituous  or  malt  liquors, 
without  forfeiting  his  ministerial  character 
among  us. " 

Eadicalism  gradually  came  into  favor 
again.  The  labors  of  men  like  Wilbur 
Fisk  were  instrumental  in  bringing  the 
church  back  to  its  first  position.  In  1836, 
1840  and  1844  attemjjts  were  made  in 
the  General  Conference  to  restore  Wes- 
ley's rule;  but  although  a  very  large 
majority  in  the  affirmative  was  obtained 
in  each  of  these  years,  the  necessary 
three-fourths  of  all  the  elected  delegates 
could  not  be  controlled.  The  division  of 
the  church  into  Northern  and  Southern 
branches  occurred  in  1844.  In  1848  the 
General  Conference  re-enacted  the  rule 
by  a  vote  of  2,011  ayes  to  21  nays.  The 
Southern  branch  had  already,  at  its  first 
General  Conference  in  1846,  declared 
that 

"From  the  high  ground  so  early  and  long 
maintained  by  the  Methodist  EpiscopalChurch  in 
her  disciplinary  provisions  against  drunken- 
ness and  the  needless  use  of  ardent  spirits,  it  is 
doubtless  expected  by  the  lovers  of  pure  moral- 
ity that  she  continue  to  evince  by  every  possible 
method,  and  especially  in  the  expressions  of 
her  supreme  councils,  a  decided  and  irrevocable 
opposition  to  intemperance,  and  that  such  un- 
equivocal avowals  be  constantly  sustained  in 
the  teaching  of  her  ministry  and  in  the  uncom- 
promising administration  of  her  discipline; 
therefore 

"Resolved,  That  we  recommend  all  the 
members  of  our  churches  to  xmite  their  efforts 
in  promoting  the  great  temperance  reformation 
now  in  successful  operation." 

THE   NORTHERN   BRANCH. 

The  Methodist  Episcopal  Church, 
Norths  at  its  last  General  Conference,  held 


Methodist  Episcopal  Church.]      426      [Methodist  Episcopal  Church. 


in  New  York  in  May,  1888,  adopted  an 
extended  temperance  report  (May  24), 
which  endorsed  and  emphasized  the  fol- 
lowing strong  words  contained  in  the 
address  submitted  by  the  Bishops  of  the 
church : 

"  The  liquor  traffic  is  so  pernicious  in  all  its 
bearings,  so  inimical  to  the  interests  of  honest 
trade,  so  repugnant  to  the  moral  sense,  so  inju- 
rious to  the  peace  and  order  of  society,  so  hurt- 
ful to  the  homes,  to  the  church  and  to  the  body 
politic,  and  so  utterly  antagonistic  to  all  that  is 
precious  in  life,  that  the  only  proper  attitude 
toward  it  for  Christians  is  that  of  relentless  hos- 
tility. It  can  never  be  legalized  without  sin. 
No  temporary  device  for  regulating  it  can  be- 
come a  substitute  for  Proliibition.  License, 
high  or  low,  is  vicious  in  principle  and  power- 
less as  a  remedy." 

Tlie  report  touched  upon  nearly  all 
the  separate  questions  of  policy  arising 
from  the  temperance  agitation.  On  the 
subject  of  total  abstinence  it  said : 

"  We  renew  our  time-honored  testimony  in 
favor  of  total  abstinence  from  all  alcoholic 
liquors.  The  best  modern  science  has  irrefra- 
gably  demonstrated  that  there  is  no  legitimate 
place  for  alcohol,  not  even  in  the  form  of  the 
milder  liquors,  and  in  however  moderate  quan- 
tities, in  a  healthy,  living  organism.  This  tes- 
timony of  science  has  been  independently  con- 
firmed by  the  impartial  demonstrations  of  life- 
insurance  experts,  critically  seeking  sure  bases 
on  which  to  conduct  great  financial  interests. 
Total  abstinence  is  now  fully  vindicated  as 
something  more  than  'a  dietetic  whim  '  or  a  fan- 
atical craze  ;  and  we  can  accept  of  nothing  less 
than  this  as  security  for  personal  safety  and  as 
the  basal  principle  of  the  temperance  reform." 

Speaking  of  the  rules  of  conduct  that 
should  govern  individual  Methodists,  the 
following  extreme  opinion  was  advanced : 

' '  We  approve  the  action  of  the  Lay  Electoral 
Conference  of  California,  condemning  the  rais- 
ing and  selling  of  grapes  for  the  manufacture 
of  fermented  wine,  and  we  think  the  time  has 
come  for  a  broader  utterance  upon  this  subject. 
We  warn  our  members  against  raising  and  sell- 
ing, not  only  grapes,  but  also  other  fruits,  hops 
and  grain,  for  the  manufacture  of  alcoholic 
liquors,  as  inconsistent  with  the  Christian  pro- 
fession, benumbing  to  the  conscience  and  hurt- 
ful to  the  cause  of  temperance  and  true  piety. 
These  practices  bring  the  church  into  complic- 
ity witli  the  great  liquor  nuisance,  paralyze  our 
efforts  and  afford  comfort  to  the  greatest  enemy 
of  modern  Christianity." 

The  political  recommendation  adopted 
by  the  General  Conference  in  1884  was 
re-affirmed  (May  25),  as  follows : 

"  We  are  unalterably  opposed  to  the  enact- 
ment of  laws  that  propose,  by  license,  taxing  or 
otherwise,  to  regulate  the  drink  tratfic,  because 
they  provide  for  its  continuance  and  afford  no 
protection  against  its  ravages.     We  hold  that 


the  proper  attitude  of  Christians  toward  this 
traffic  is  one  of  uncompromising  opposition, 
and  while  we  do  not  presume  to  dictate  to  our 
people  their  political  affiliations,  we  do  express 
the  opinion  that  they  should  not  permit  them- 
selves to  be  controlled  by  party  organizations 
that  are  managed  in  the  interest  of  the  liquor 
traffic.  We  advise  the  members  of  our  church 
to  aid  in  the  enforcement  of  such  laws  as  do 
not  legalize  or  endorse  the  manufacture  and  sale 
of  intoxicants  to  be  used  as  beverages;  and  to 
this  end  we  favor  the  organization  of  Law  and 
Order  Leagues  wherever  practicable.  We  pro- 
claim as  our  motto:  Vohmtary  total  abstinence 
from  all  intoxicants  as  the  true  ground  of  per- 
sonal temperance,  and  complete  legal  Prohibi- 
tion of  the  traffic  in  intoxicating  drinks  as  the 
duty  of  civil  government." 

In  some  of  its  minor  parts  the  report 
was  not  wholly  satisfactory  to  the  most 
radical  Prohibitionists.  There  was  a 
paragraph  advising  voters  to  labor  for 
political  reform  through  the  caucuses 
and  primaries;  and  since  this  was  the 
only  explicit  suggestion  concerning  the 
method  of  political  action,  it  was  re- 
garded by  some  as  a  hint  that  the  ene- 
mies of  the  saloon  might  without  incon- 
sistency (in  the  judgment  of  the  Confer- 
ence) continue  in  affiliation  with  the 
anti-Prohibition  parties.  In  view,  how- 
ever, of  the  above-quoted  utterances, 
this  indirect  justification  of  a  conserva- 
tive  course  (if  indeed  it  may  rightly  be 
interpreted  as  even  an  indirect  justifica- 
tion) was  deprived  of  positive  signifi- 
cance. Another  minor  expression  that 
occasioned  regret  among  the  radicals  was 
embraced  in  that  portion  of  the  report 
which  dealt  with  legislation ;  besides  ap- 
proving Constitutional  Prohibition,  the 
policy  of  "no-license  votes  under  a  Local 
Option  regime "  was  favored.  Local 
Option,  as  is  well-known,  no  longer  re- 
ceives the  undivided  support  of  advanced 
temperance  people. 

The  inferior  Conferences  uniformly 
advocate  Prohibition  and  condemn  li- 
cense in  the  strongest  terms,  and  fre- 
quently show  a  most  aggressive  political 
tendency.  The  following  extracts  from 
30  recent  Conference  reports  have  been 
selected  with  impartiality:  ' 

California  (1888). — "  We  favor  the  abolition 
of  the  Government  tax  on  intoxicating  liquors 
as  making  the  State  and  nation  particeps  crimi- 
nis  in  the  liquor  traffic;  and  we  are  unalterably 
opposed  to  all  measures  that  propose  by  license, 
taxing  or  otherwise  to  regulate  the  drink 
traffic." 

»  The   Voice,  Oct.  84, 1889. 


Methodist  Episcopal  Church.]      427     [Methodist  Episcopal  Church. 


Cincinnati  (1888). — "As  consistent  and  cour- 
ageous Christian  men,  we  must  ever  protest 
against  any  form  of  license  which  shall  legalize 
the  importation,  manufacture  and  sale  of  intox- 
icating beverages." 

Colorado  (1888). — "To  license  such  a  busi- 
ness [the  liquor  traffic]  for  the  purpose  of  reve- 
nue, or  for  any  other  motive,  is  a  crime,  and 
the  revenue  obtained  is  the  price  of  our  broth- 
ers' blood." 

Dakota  (1888).  —  "  Intemperance  is  a  sin 
against  the  individual,  the  home  and  the  State; 
and  license,  high  or  low,  insures  the  perpetua- 
tion of  this  great  evil.  .  .  .  We  are  uncompro- 
misingly opposed  to  High  License." 

Des  Moines  (1888). — "  We  declare  uncompro- 
mising hostility  to  the  liquor  traffic,  and  de- 
mand its  unconditional  surrender." 

Detiwt  (1888). — "'License,  high  or  low,  is 
vicious  in  principle  and  powerless  as  a  remedy.' 
.  .  .  We  will  make  every  effort  to  secure 
its  [the  liquor  traffic's]  complete  suppression  by 
constitutional  and  statutory  enactment." 

Genesee  (1888). — "We  deprecate  and  resent 
the  effort  of  politicians  of  any  phase  of  political 
belief  who  would  minify  the  utterances  of  the 
highest  authority  of  the  church  to  harmonize 
with  their  predilections,  or  who  would  magnify 
the  meaning  of  the  .same  for  purely  partisan 
purposes.  The  saloon  must  go.  It  is  mur- 
derous. We  are  opposed  to  license.  It  is  no 
remedy." 

Illinois  (1888). — "  The  manufacture  and  sale 
of  alcoholic  licjuors  is  the  moral  plague  of  the 
19th  Century.  .  .  .  We  are  opposed  to  all 
license  of  the  liquor  traffic,  either  high  or  low." 

India7ia  (1888). — "The  peace  of  society  de- 
mands not  a  modification  but  the  overthrow  of 
the  whole  traffic." 

Indiana,  North  (1888). — "We  favor  nothing 
but  uncompromising  opposition.  No  license, 
no  tax,  but  complete  legal  Prohibition,  and 
that  only." 

Indiana,  Northwest  (1888). — "It  is  not  the 
prerogative  of  civil  government  to  '  frame  iniq- 
uity by  law,'  and  we  look  upon  all  legislation 
which  is  designed  by  any  method  to  legalize 
the  liquor  traffic  as  being  both  inexi^edient  and 
wrong." 

Indiana,  Southeast {\88't). — "  We  regard  .  .  . 
complete  legal  Prohibition  of  the  traffic  in 
intoxicating  drinks  as  the  duty  of  civil  gov- 
ernment." 

Iowa,  Northwest  (1888). — "We  favor  the  un- 
conditional and  immediate  abandonment  of  all 
revenue  from  the  liquor  traffic,  in  order  more 
readily  to  suppress  the  business  and  put  an  end 
to  the  scandal  of  Government  deriving  support 
from  the  poverty,  degradation  and  vices  of  the 
people." 

lo^ca.  Upper  (1887). — "  There  can  be  no  com- 
promise with  the  .saloon." 

Kansas  (1888). — "Partisan  friendship  with 
the  saloon  must  be  accepted  as  hostility  to  the 
church,  the  home  and  all  that  is  valuable  in  so- 
ciety. No  party  is  worthy  the  support  of 
Christian  men  that  fails  to  antagonize  the  sa- 
loon." 


Kansas,  Northimst  (1888)-. — "  On  no  ground 
will  we  make  peace  with  the  traffic.  The  con- 
flict must  go  on  to  the  end." 

Kansas,  South  (1888). — "We  stand  unaltera- 
bly opposed  to  any  measure  that  in  any  way 
looks  to  the  supplanting  of  our  Prohibitory  law 
by  any  license  system." 

Kentucky  (1888). — "  No  organization,  whether 
social,  political  or  ecclesiastical,  should  have 
our  support  in  any  form  or  manner  that  di- 
rectly or  indirectly  favors  license  or  taxation." 

Michigan  (1888).— "  The  church  demands 
that  this  Government  cease  protecting  the  sa- 
loon by  the  baneful  system  of  revenue  and  li- 
cense laws,  and  forever  prohibit  this  traffic 
within  our  borders." 

Minnesota  (1888). — "  We  in  no  measure  ac- 
cept the  license  system  as  a  solution,  to  any  ex- 
tent, of  this  [liquor]  problem. 

Nebraska,  North  (1888).— "  The  liquor  traffic 
being  the  greatest  of  all  evils  that  afflict  our 
land,  it  is  the  greatest  of  sins  to  consent  to  its 
license."  , 

New  York,  Central  (1888\— "  We  will  not  I 
parley  with  the  enemy,  nor  compromise  with  \ 
any  policy  which,  under  the  guise  of  restriction,  i 
puts  principle  and  practice  at  variance.  It  is  ' 
not  license,  high  or  low,  not  restriction,  so- 
called,  but  absolute  Prohibition  for  which  we 
contend." 

Neio  York,  Northern  {1888). — "We  are  unal- 
terably opposed  to  all  forms  of  license,  high  or 
low." 

Ohio  (1888). — "  No  system  of  license  or  taxa- 
tion can  be  accepted  as  a  settlement  of  the  issue, 
and  nothing  short  of  the  abolition  of  the  sa- 
loons can  ever  furnish  ample  protection  to 
society." 

Ohio,  Central  (1888). — "We  condemn  as  con- 
trary to  the  law  of  God  and  the  best  interests  of 
the  State  the  licensing  and  taxation  of  the 
liquor  traffic." 

Ohio,  East  (1888).— "The  liquor  traffic  can 
never  be  legalized  without  sin,  and  we  will 
give  it  no  quarter. " 

Ohio,  North  (1888).—"  We  denounce  all  sys- 
tems of  [liquor]  license  or  taxation,  high  or 
low.  State  or  national." 

Oregon  (1888). — "A  licen.se  to  keep  open 
saloon  is  an  unjust  and  wicked  regulation  of 
government  ;  produces  vice  and  corruption  in 
society.  The  privilege  to  sin  and  ruin  manhood 
and  souls  should  not  be  sold  at  any  price." 

Pennsylvania,  Central  (1888). — "The  legal- 
izing of  the  liquor  traffic  is  a  violation  of  God's 
law  and  detrimental  to  the  peace  and  prosperity 
of  society  and  the  progress  of  the  church." 

Philadelphia.  (1888). — "High  License  is  not 
a  temperance  measure.  It  is  a  trap  adroitly  set 
for  timid  and  half-informed  temperance  men. 
It  was  originally  offered  and  is  now  urged  as  a 
compromise  by  the  influential  political  friends 
of  the  saloon.  Their  object  is  to  kill  the  move- 
ment for  Prohibition,  and  prevent  the  threat- 
ened annihilation  of  the  liquor  traffic.  We 
pray  God  to  open  the  eyes  of  those  who  have 
been  deceived." 


Methodist  Protestant  Church.]    428 


[Mexico. 


Pittsburfih  (1888).— "We  endorse  the  senti- 
ment expressed  in  the  episcopal  address  to  the 
late  General  Conference  in  reference  to  the 
liquor  traffic.  '  It  can  never  be  legalized  with- 
out sin. '  " 

Rock  River  (1888).— "The  license  system  is 
essentially  sinful  ;  it  affords  no  remedy  for  the 
evils  of  alcoholism,  and  provides  for  its  con- 
tinuance." 

7^?'02/ (1888).— "License,  both  high  and  low, 
is  wrong  in  principle,  and  instead  of  suppressing 
the  enormities  of  the  traffic  provides  for  their 
continuance. " 

Vermont  (1888). — "The  licensing  or  taxing 
of  the  liquor  traffic  is  wrong  in  principle  and 
disastrous  in  practice." 

West  Virginia  (1888). — "License,  high  or 
low,  is  vicious  in  principle  and  is  no  remedy  for 
the  evils  of  intemperance." 

Wisconsin,  TFes^  (1888).— "  We  believe  it  to 
be  the  duty  of  the  State  to  declare  this  traffic 
criminal  and  to  outlaw  it  as  such." 

THE   SOUTHERN    BRANCH. 

The  Methodist  Episcopal  Church, 
South,  at  the  General  Conference  held 
iti  St.  Louis,  May,  1890,  incorporated  the 
following  words  in  its  deliverance  on 
temperance  : 

"  We  are  emphatically  a  Prohibition  church. 
We  stand  out  squarely  and  before  the  whole 
world,  certainly  in  theory,  and  for  the  most 
part  in  practice,  foi"  the  complete  suppression 
of  the  liquor  traffic.  We  offer  no  compromise 
to  and  seek  no  terms  from  a  sin  of  this  heinous 
quality.  We  are  opposed  to  all  forms  of  license 
of  this  iniquity,  whether  the  same  be  '  high '  or 
'low.'  It  cannot  be  put  so  'high'  that  the 
prayers  of  God's  people  for  its  suppression  will 
not  rise  above  it,  nor  so  '  low,'  though  it  makes 
its  bed  in  hell,  that  the  shrieks  of  the  souls  lost 
through  its  accursed  agency  will  not  descend 
beneath  it." 

In  its  Discipline,  this  provision  ap- 
pears : 

"Let  all  our  preachers  and  members  faith- 
fully observe  our  General  Rules,  which  forbid 
'  drunkenness,  or  drinking  spirituous  liquors, 
except  in  cases  of  necessity.'  In  cases  of 
drunkenness  let  the  Discipline  be  administered 
as  in  cases  of  immorality,  drunkenness  being  a 
crime  expressly  forbidden  in  the  word  of  God. 
In  cases  of  drinking,  except  in  cases  of  neces- 
sity, let  the  Discipline  be  administered  as  for 
imprudent  or  iminopc-r  conduct.  Let  all  our 
preachers  and  members  abstain  from  the  manu- 
facture and  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  to  be 
used  as  a  beverage  ;  and  if  any  shall  engage  in 
such  manufacture  or  sale,  let  the  Discijiline  be 
administered  as  m  case  of  imprudent  or  im- 
proper conduct. " 

Methodist  Protestant   Church. 

— The  General  Conference,  held  in  1890, 
declared,  in  part : 

"  We  rejoice  in  the  success  of  any  effort  and 
any  measure  used  to  cripple  and  finally  destroy 


the  traffic  in  alcoholic  drinks,  and  will  gladly 
join  in  any  effort  for  its  restriction  which  will 
not  compromise  our  Christian  character ;  but 
as  every  form  of  so  called  '  restriction '  by  li- 
cense or  taxation  tends  to  entrench  the  traffic 
behind  the  cupidity  of  the  tax-payer  and  ren- 
ders us  partes  participens  to  the  crime  of  its 
continuance,  we  therefore  believe  that  the  only 
successful  way  of  destroying  this  hydra-headed 
monster  is  b}'  Constitutional  Prohibition,  State 
and  national  ;  and  that  the  only  efforts  in  which 
we  as  Christian  people  can  engage  are  those 
which  look  toward  this  end  ;  therefore 

"  Resolved,  That  we  are  unalterably  op- 
posed to  any  form  of  license,  high  or  low,  as 
being  wrong  in  principle  and  pernicious  in 
practice. 

"Resolved,  That  any  minister  or  member 
who  makes,  buys,  sells,  or  signs  a  petition  for 
license  to  sell,,  uses,  or  gives  to  others  as  a  bever- 
age any  spirituous  or  malt  liquors,  is  guilty  of 
immorality  and  shall  be  dealt  with  accord- 
ingly. 

' '  Resolved,  We  believe  the  time  has  fully 
come  when  Christian  men  should  rise  above 
party  prejudice  and  sectional  jc^alousy  and  give 
their  suffrages  to  any  party  which  has  for  its 
object  the  protection  of  our  homes  by  the  de- 
struction of  the  unholy  traffic. " 

Mexico. — The  peculiar  conditions  of 
Mexican  life,  the  vast  tracts  of  territory 
over  which  there  is  but  little  Govern- 
mental control,  and  the  consequent  lack 
of  system  and  completeness  in  statistical 
reports,  render  difficult  the  collection  of 
exact  information  regarding  the  drink 
habits  of  the  people.  Briefly,  it  may  be 
said  that  the  use  of  intoxicants  is  almost 
universal,  aiid  to  this  cattse,  perhaps  as 
much  as  to  any  other,  is  to  be  attributed 
the  low  condition  of  the  inferior  classes 
of  that  conntry. 

The  principal  liquors  used  are  imlque, 
mescal,  aguardiente,  mishla,  ulung,  pesso, 
caraca,  acchioc,  beer  and  imported  wines, 
whiskey  and  brandy.  Pulque  is  the 
national  drink  and  the  national  curse  of 
the  aboriginal  races,  and  of  those  people 
descended  from  the  ancient  occui^ants  of 
the  soil.  The  upper  classes  in  Mexico 
use  it  less,  choosing  rather  the  costlier 
beverages  that  are  imported.  Pulque  is 
made  from  the  maguey  plant,  or  Ameri- 
can aloe,  which  reaches  great  perfection 
on  the  high  table-land  of  the  Eepublic. 
In  central  and  Southern  Mexico  it  can 
be  seen  growing  wild  upon  the  mount- 
ains, springing  up  in  uncultivated  places 
and  spreading  over  large  tracts  of  country 
where  it  is  cultivated  with  great  dili- 
gence. It  does  well  in  both  rich  and  poor 
soils,  being  often  found  where  nothing 


Mexico.] 


429 


[Mexico. 


else  will  grow.  The  plant  itself  is  ex- 
tremely useful  to  the  Mexican,  its  fibre 
furnishing  him  with  thread,  cloth,  bag- 
ging, ropes,  paper,  brooms,  white-wash 
brushes,  scrubbing-brushes  and  combs 
for  the  hair.  But  its  chief  value,  in 
the  eyes  of  the  native,  arises  from  the 
intoxicating  liquid  it  produces  so  bounte- 
ously. The  plant  soon  after  it  reaches 
its  tenth  year  puts  forth  a  blossom, 
which,  if  not  interfered  with,  shoots  up 
to  a  heio-ht  of  15  or  20  feet  and  crowns 
itself  with  a  cluster  of  beautiful  flowers. 
Such  is  the  century  plant,  or  agave  Am- 
ericana. But  the  cultivator  who  is  on 
the  watch  for  the  blossom,  at  its  appear- 
ing cuts  from  it  its  heart,  leaving  an 
open  basin  or  cavity  in  the  plant,  into 
which  a  sap  exudes,  milky  in  appear- 
ance and  containing  when  fermented 
water,  gluten  and  alcohol.  It  has  the 
taste  of  sour  buttermilk  or  spoiled  beer. 
-From  four  to  eight  pints  per  day  are  taken 
from  each  plant,  for  a  period  of  tAvo  or 
three  months.  To  extract  this  fluid  from 
the  cavity  into  which  it  has  run.  the 
Mexican  uses  a  long  hollow  gourd  per- 
forated at  each  end,  and  sucks  it  full  of 
the  liquor,  which  he  empties  iiito  a  pig- 
skin carried  on  the  shoulders.  To  con- 
vert the  juice  or  "  honey -water "  into 
pulque,  all  that  is  necessary  is  to  put 
into  it  a  little  of  the  same  material  that 
has  been  permitted  to  become  sour,  and 
fermentation  soon  takes  jolace.  So  sensi- 
tive is  the  liquor  to  the  presence  of  any 
foreign  substance  tbat  a  pinch  of  salt 
dropped  into  one  of  the  bottles  will,  in' 
time,  ruin  the  product  of  an  entire  plant- 
ation. The  laws  against  adulteration  are 
very  stringent. 

The  pulque  is  seldom  sold  at  whole- 
sale. Each  plantation  seeks  to  have  its 
own  shops  in  town.  In  these  the  stuff 
is  dispensed  to  throngs  of  peons,  Indians 
and  the  laboring  classes  generally,  while 
jars  and  bottles  filled  with  it  are  carried 
away  for  home  consumption.  In  the 
city  of  Mexico  nearly  300,000  \)\nXs,  of 
pulque  are  consumed  daily  by  a  popula- 
tion of  330,000.  The  revenue  derived 
by  the  Government  from  its  sale  in  the 
three  cities  of  Mexico,  Puebla  and  To- 
luca  is  over  $900,000.  The  consumer 
jjays  for  it  from  G  to  25  cents  a  quart. 
In  the  large  cities  of  Southern  Mexico 
the  pulque  is  to  a  great  extent  responsi- 
ble for  the  gambling,  drunkenness  and 


fighting  that  prevail,  the  use  of  the 
knife  being  very  common.  The  police 
report  for  the  city  of  Mexico  for  the 
year  1888  gave  the  following  figures, 
in  round  numbers:  400  pulque-shops 
open,  yielding  a  revenue  to  the  city  Gov- 
ernment of  175,000;  S  breweries  in  oper- 
ation (the  beer  from  which  is  sold  mostly 
to  foreigners,  Americans  and  Germans) ; 
600  grocers'  shops,  in  which  liquor  is* 
sold  by  the  drink,  yielding  a  revenue  to 
the  city  Government  of  about  $30,000; 
140  cafes,  eating-houses  and  "fondas," 
v.'hich  pay  to  the  city  about  $5,000  an- 
nually. The  arrests  for  the  year  were : 
221  men  and  youth  and  180  women  for 
disorderly  conduct;  1,270  men  and  1,941 
women  for  excessive  drinking  (lying 
in  the  gutter,  or  reeling  in  the  pub- 
lic parks) ;  401  men  and  122  women 
for  robbery;  191  men  and  87  Avomen  on 
suspicion  of  being  concerned  in  house- 
breaking and  petty  larceny;  131  men 
and  27  women  as  pickpockets;  31  men 
and  4  women  for  murder;  800  men  and 
27G  women  for  assault  and  battery,  re- 
sulting in  wounds;  271  men  and  91 
Avomeu  for  carrying  forbidden  weapons; 
40  men  who  had  escaped  from  prison; 
GO  persons  for  false  pretences;  371  men 
and  421  women  for  adultery  and  forni- 
cation; 320  men  and  327  women  for 
violations  of  public  decency;  70  delin- 
quent youth  to  the  House  of  Correction. 
These  figures  do  not  begin  to  number 
the  brawls,  knife-fights,  etc.,  at  the 
pulque-shops  and  in  the  vicinity  of  the 
bull-rings,  in  which  both  men  and 
women  engage. 

There  are  no  laws  to  restrict  the  traf- 
fic, excepting  those  requiring  each  seller 
to  obtain  a  license.  The  pulque-shops, 
however,  must  be  closed  at  6  o'clock  in 
the  evening,  and  few  attempts  are  made 
to  violate  the  statute.  The  restaurants, 
gilded  barrooms,  etc.,  where  the  higher- 
priced  liquors  are  sold,  remain  open,  the 
poverty  of  the  lower  classes  debarring 
their  entrance.  No  figures  are  obtaina- 
ble to  show  the  revenue  derived  from  the 
sale  of  imported  liquors. 

Mescal  is  a  liquor  that  is  obtained 
from  the  fleshy  and  white  portion  of  the 
maguey  leaves.  It  resembles  Holland 
gin  and  is  much  used  in  Northern  Mex- 
ico, Avhere  pulque  cannot  be  had.  Te- 
qnila  is  another  liquor  produced  from 
the  maguey  in  the  district  of  that  name. 


Michigan.]                                             430  [Moderation. 

It  is  said  to  have  the  flavor  of  Scotch  of  common  observation.  There  are,  it  is 
whiskey.  true,  among  moderate  users  those  who 
In  Yucatan  a  favorite  drink  is  minhla,  escape.  Some  are  saved  "  so  as  by  fire."' 
prepared  from  the  roots  of  the  cassava  Others  maintain  to  the  end  the  mastery 
plant;  other  fermented  drinks  are  made  of  their  inclinations.  But  the  number 
from  bananas  and  pineapples.  Young  annually  passing  from  the  ranks  of  the 
women  chew  the  roots  of  the  cassava  and  moderate  consumers  to  those  of  the 
mix  the  spittle  with  cold  water,  allowing  drunkards  is  enormous;  and  if  the  facts 
the  whole  to  ferment.  Plantains  are  were  known,  probably  it  would  be 
kneaded  in  warm  water  and  allowed  to  found  that  there  is  almost  no  one  who, 
stand  until  the  mixture  ferments.  Uliing  using  intoxicating  liquor  at  all,  does  not 
is  made  from  powdered  cocoa  and  sugar-  go  beyond  the  limit  that  his  own  con- 
cane  ;  the  pesso  from  lime-rinds,  corn  science  and  reason  jirescribe.  Thus  the 
and  honey.  The  cocoa-nut  palm  yields  risk  that  every  moderate  drinker  incurs 
monthly  a  large  quantity  of  liquor  is  very  great.  When  the  doctrine  of 
known  as  caraca,  resembling  the  toddy  chances  is  candidly  applied,  the  odds  he 
of  India.  Its  seeds,  when  crushed  and  must  see  to  be  against  him,  and  the 
steeped  in  hot  water,  yield  the  acchioc,  thought  of  the  fate  that  awaits  him  if 
which  is  freely  drunk  by  the  inhabitants  his  chances  fail  is  enough  to  make  him 
of  Yucatan,  Tabasco  and  Chiapas.  tremble. 

There  is  no  work  done  in  Mexico  to  The  immorality  of  moderate  drinking 
check  the  universal  indulgence  in  fer-  turns  largely  upon  this  element  of  risk, 
mented  liquors,  except  that  performed  No  doubt  it  is  often  the  duty  of  men  to 
by   missionaries.     An   occasional    news-  incur  risk.     There  are  useful  and  praise- 
paper  article  appears  calling  attention  to  worthy   callings   in   which   the   risk  to 
the  monstrous  evils  connected  with  the  bodily  health  and  sometimes  to  moral 
traffic,  but  thus  far  no  real  effort  has  purity  is  constant  and   often   extreme, 
been  made  to  put  a  stop  to  the  plague.  But  needless  exposure  to  danger  shocks 
William  H.  Sloan.  the  moral  sense.     The  man  who  reck- 
.                    c      T    1  lessly   leaps   from   Brooklyn   Bridge  or 
Michigan.— bee  index.  ^^.-^..^g  ^^^^^  Niagara  Falls  in  a  barrel  corn- 
Minnesota. — See  Index.  mits  a  crime,  even  in  the  eye  of  the  law. 
Mississippi.— See  Index.  His  body,  his  life,  is  not  his  own  in  the 

sense   that   he   may  wantonly  throw  it 
away.     The  risk  incurred  is  culpable  in 


Missouri. — See  Index. 


Moderation. — The  unsoundness  of  the  degree  in  which  it  is  unnecessary. 

the   moderation   doctrine   must   be   ad-  When  the  use  of  opium  to  assuage  in- 

mitted  upon  due  consideration,  first,  of  tense  pain  has  entailed  the  opium  habit, 

the  danger  to  one's  self,  and  second,  of  the  the  victim  is  less  censurable  than  if,  in 

injury  to  others.  thoughtless  self-indulgence,  he  has  be- 

The  danger  to  one's  self  is  apparent,  come  needlessly  a  slave.     The  sin  of  the 

The  poisonous    effect  of    alcohol   upon  moderate  drinker  is  incurred  by  his  will- 

the  human  system,  even  whe)i  moderately  ingness,  for  the  sake  of  a  passing  grati- 

used,  is  now  generally  conceded  by  scien-  fication,  to  imperil  his  body  and  his  soul, 

tific  authorities.     15ut  the  danger  to  the  He  cannot  plead  necessity,  for  the  expe- 

user  would  still  remain  even  if  alcohol  rience  of  the  last  75  years  incontestably 

were  proved  to  be  food  rather  than  poi-  proves  that  alcohol  as  a  beverage  is  not 

son.     In  fact  the  direct  physical  effect  necessary.     Total  abstinence  has  passed 

of  alcohol  is  its  least  alarniing  quality,  beyond  the  stage  of  experiment.  _   Thou- 

The  result  that  should  make  every  mod-  sands  of    individuals  and  families,  and 

erate  drinker_  turn  pale  with  apprehen-  not  a  few  whole  communities,  have  lived 

sion  is  the  appetite  which  it  engenders,  happily  and  well  without   intoxicating 

Every  draught  taken  is,  without  ques-  drink.     He  cannot  plead  that  in  his  es- 

tion,  another  step  toward  that  abnormal  pecial  case  the  risk  is  not  considerable, 

condition  in  which  desire  passes  beyond  This  no  man  can  say  beforehand.     The 

control  and  the  victim  becomes    bond-  power  of  physical  and  moral  resistance 

slave  to   the   habit.     No  medical  testi-  can  never  be  known  until  the  experiment 

mony  is  needed  as  to  this.     It  is  matter  has  been  tried,  and  no  intelligent  being, 


Moderation.] 


431 


[Moderation. 


in  the  presence  of  what  is  now  known  as 
to  the  nature  and  effects  of  alcohol,  can 
be  Justified  in  trying  the  experiment.  It 
is  but  to  cast  himself  from  a  precipice  in 
the  hope  that  God  or  fate  will  save  him. 

The  other  consideration  that  imposes 
abstinence  is  that  coming  from  recog- 
nition of  the  injury  done  to  others.  This 
involves  the  effect  of  one's  example  upon 
his  family,  friends  and  acquaintances, 
and  his  relations  to  the  drink  evil  as  it 
exists  in  society  at  large.  Every  moder- 
ate drinker  not  only  imperils  his  own 
safety  but  throws  the  weight  of  his  ex- 
ample in  the  scale  against  the  safety  of 
others.  When  these  others  are  known 
to  be  peculiarly  susceptible  to  tempta- 
tion, or  are  in  any  way  especially  com- 
mitted to  his  guardianship,  his  respons- 
ibility is  immensely  increased.  There  is 
nothing  upon  which  the  righteous  indig- 
nation of  the  community  more  heavily 
and  Justly  descends  than  upon  a  man's 
teaching  vice,  to  children  for  example. 
The  most  deadly  charge  against  Socrates 
that  malice  could  invent  was  that  he 
"corrupted  the  youth."  No  moderate 
drinker  is  free  from  this  sin  against  the 
souls  of  his  fellows.  Even  if  he  could 
be  supernaturally  assured  of  his  own 
security,  nothing  can  relieve  him  from 
blood-guiltiness  in  the  cases  of  others. 
The  power  of  example  is  more  obscure 
and  subtile  than  a  physical  cause,  but  no 
less  potent.  If  one  could  administer  some 
material  poison  to  a  friend  which  would 
unconsciously  transform  him  into  a  dip- 
somaniac, such  an  act  would  be  no  more 
culpable  than  to  lure  him  by  the  seduc- 
tiveness of  personal  example  to  a  drunk- 
ard's doom.  The  far-famed  Mexican 
tnloacTii,  or  weed  of  madness,  a  few  drops 
of  the  milk  of  which  secretly  introduced 
into  your  friend's  soup  act  immediately 
upon  the  brain,  producing  at  first  violent 
madness  and  then  hopeless  idiocy,  is  a 
fitting  illustration  of  the  fatal  influence 
of  the  moderate  drinker  upon  the  young 
and  innocent.  He  is  employed,  whether 
willingly  or  not,  as  Satan's  decoy  to  be- 
tray the  weak  and  temj^ted  to  disease 
and  death. 

The  same  reasoning  applies  to  society 
at  large.  The  evil  of  intemperance  stands 
to-day  like  the  pyramid  of  Cheops  amid 
the  evils  of  the  world.  Especially  in  our 
own  land,  owing  to  climatic  influ- 
ences, the  nervous  temperament  of  our 


people  and  the  skill  and  abundance  with 
Avhich  alcoholic  beverages  are  produced, 
the  burden  upon  society  has  become  vast 
and  insupportable.  No  one  denies  the 
unutterable  woes  that  the  curse  entails. 
The  only  question  is  as  to  how  they  may 
be  removed.  Experience  has  developed 
one  thoroughly  practicable  and  effective 
method,  namely,  the  complete  disuse  of 
intoxicating  drink.  Alcohol  as  a  bever- 
age can,  if  all  agree,  be  driven  from  the 
land.  No  great  evil  could  come  from 
such  a  course.  Neither  the  public  health 
nor  wealth  could  suffer.  To  do  without 
it  has  been  proved,  over  and  over  again, 
to  be  perfectly  feasible  and  perfectly 
safe.  One  thing  only  keeps  the  destroyer 
among  us — the  self-indulgence  of  the 
drinker.  Under  such  circumstances  the 
obligation  to  abstinence  would  seem  to 
be  almost  boundless.  The  moderate 
drinkers  of  our  land  have  power  of  them- 
selves to  staunch  this  stream  of  sin  and 
woe.  Without  their  patronage  the  traffic 
could  not  endure.  To  neglect  such  an 
opportunity,  to  heedlessly  suffer  such 
limitless  good  to  escape,  is  incapable  of 
Justification.  But  the  moderate  con- 
sumer not  only  neglects  the  good,  he  en- 
courages the  evil.  Every  glass  that  he 
takes  tends  to  perpetuate  and  multiply 
these  miseries.  He  does  what  he  can  to 
maintain  the  drinking  habits  of  commun- 
ity and  make  the  use  of  the  cup  preva- 
lent and  popular.  How  can  he  escape  the 
disaj^proval  of  his  own  conscience  and 
the  condemnation  of  mankind? 

The  argument  for  total  abstinence  is 
often  presented  in  such  a  way  as  largely 
to  rob  it  of  its  moral  power.  All  things, 
it  is  said,  are  lawful,  but  not  all  things 
are  expedient.  Again,  however  right 
in  itself  the  moderate  use  of  intoxicants 
may  be,  it  is  well  to  abstain  as  Paul  ab- 
stained from  meat,  lest  the  weak  should 
be  made  to  stumble.  Men  are  called 
upon,  not,  in  view  of  the  danger  to 
themselves  and  the  injury  to  others,  to 
perform  a  solemn  duty,  but  for  the  sake 
of  their  too  self-indulgent  brethren,  and 
from  the  standpoint  of  Christian  charity, 
to  surrender  a  so-called  personal  right. 
Temperance,  it  is  admitted,  is  obliga- 
tory; but  total  abstinence,  it  is  claimed, 
while  perhaps  commendable,  is  discre- 
tionary. But  it  is  seriously  to  be 
dov;bted  whether  the  temperance  reform 
can  ever  be  carried  on  the  basis  of  such 


Moderation.] 


432 


[Moderation. 


optional  morality.  Men  need  to  feel 
the  weighty  impact  of  a  divine  obliga- 
tion iipon  their  souls.  The  case  from 
Paul  is  by  no  means  a  parallel.  If  the 
eating  of  meat  offered  to  idols  had  been 
fraught  with  such  untold  sorrows  as  the 
use,  in  our  day,  of  intoxicating  drink, 
Paul  would  have  made  no  explanation  of 
his  abstinence:  the  reason  would  have 
been  apparent  enough.  The  tolerance 
of  a  foolish  superstition  for  sweet  charity's 
sake  is  one  thing,  the  arrest  of  a  miglity 
evil  by  the  weight  of  one's  personal  in- 
fluence and  example  is  another.  It  is 
the  moderate  drinker  who  is  chiefly  re- 
sponsible for  the  continuance  of  the 
liquor  curse.  The  drunkard  long  ago 
parted  with  reason  and  self-control.  He 
is  the  victim  of  physical  disease,  con- 
fessedly helpless  and  hopeless  and,  to  a 
great  degree,  irresponsible.  The  moder- 
ate drinker  on  the  other  hand  boasts 
of  his  balance,  his  ability  to  refrain,  and 
then  with  intelligent  deliberation  incurs 
infinite  personal  risk,  corrupts  by  his  ex- 
ample his  family  and  friends,  and  does 
what  in  him  lies  to  perpetuate  the  evil 
in  the  nation  and  the  world. 

William  Kincaid. 

It  was  to  the  complete  failure  of  the 
"  moderation  "  plan  as  a  means  of  check- 
ing the  evils  of  intemperaiicc  that  the 
total  abstinence  movement  owed  its  rise. 
Both  in  America  and  the  British  Isles 
the  first  j)ractical  attempts  in  behalf  of 
temperance  reform  were  based  oii  the 
opinion  that  abstinence  (especially  ab- 
stinence from  wine  and  beer)  was  unnec- 
essary, and  that  men  could  be  made  to 
cease  the  excessive  use  of  intoxicants  if 
sentiment  against  the  abuse  could  be 
suitably  developed.  Consequently  for 
many  years  the  moderationists  had  the 
field  of  argument  and  effort  entirely  to 
themselves,  and  the  temperance  societies 
were  founded  on  the  moderation  rather 
than  the  teetotal  idea.  Moderation 
therefore  had  a  thorough  and  prolonged 
practical  trial ;  and  the  results  were  in- 
variably discouraging  and  almost  uni- 
formly led  temperance  workers  to  the 
acceptance  of  total  abstinence.  To-day 
there  is  in  the  United  States  but  one 
temperance  organization  of  any  promi- 
nence that  does  not  insist  on  abstinence; 
and  this  one,  while  permitting  its  adult 
members     to     choose     the    moderation 


pledge  if  they  prefer,  requires  all  who 
are  under  21  years  to  abstain,  and  rec- 
ommends abstinence  equally  with  mod- 
eration to  the  adults.  (See  p.  81.)  The 
influence  of  this  organization  counts 
for  little  in  the  general  temperance 
work,  although  it  is  identified  with  a 
powerful  and  wealthy  church.  The  at- 
tempt made  by  Dr.  Howard  Crosby  some 
years  ago  to  found  a  non-sectarian  mod- 
eration society  received  so  little  support 
that  it  expired  witliout  accomplishing 
anything  save  a  demonstration  of  the 
futility  of  such  undertakings.  However 
sincere  the  individual  apologists  for 
moderation  may  be,  and  by  whatever 
arguments  they  may  defend  their  posi- 
tion, they  are  looked  upon  by  the  tem- 
perance public  as  obstructionists;  and 
while  most  people  may  be  willing  to 
view  tliem  charitably,  few  except  those 
directly  interested  in  the  liquor  traffic 
or  those  who  take  a  pro-liquor  attitude, 
fi.nd  it  possible  to  praise  their  judgment. 
Nothing,  indeed,  is  more  cordially  wel- 
comed by  the  liquor-sellers  of  America 
at  the  present  time  than  pleas  from  re- 
spectable persons  in  behalf  of  the  "  mod- 
derate  "'  and  "  temperate  "  use  of  intoxi- 
cants. This  is  shown  by  the  eagerness  with 
which  they  reprint  and  circulate  articles 
and  j)amphlets  from  the  pens  of  conser- 
vative clergymen,  as  well  as  by  the  gen- 
erous remuneration  awarded  by  the 
liquor  organizations  to  all  reputable  men 
and  women  who  have  a  desire  to  derive 
pecuniary  advantage  from  their  advocacy 
of  "  light  liquors  "  and  so-called  ''  true 
temperance." 

In  the  nations  of  continental  Europe 
the  al)andoned  programme  of  the  early 
Britisli  and  American  agitators  is  being 
tested  anew,  and  nowhere  are  there  indi- 
cations of  a  successful  outcome,  unless 
the  increasing  total  abstinence  sentiment 
is  regarded  as  an  indication  of  approach- 
ing success.  .  Certain  it  is,  there  is  no 
evidence  that  the  moderation  movement 
in  Europe  has  had  beneficial  results  in 
any  instance.  This  is  the  more  signifi- 
cant when  it  is  remembered  that  the  al- 
cohol evil  has  been  discussed  on  the  con- 
tinent by  many  scientists  of  great  emi- 
nence, and  thus  much  has  been  done 
toward  removing  the  popular  ignorance 
concerning  alcohol  that  has  prevailed  for 
ages.  Along  with  acceptation  of  the 
moderation  idea  goes  inertness — that  is 


Mohammedans.] 


433 


[Mohammedans. 


the  lesson  taught  by  the  existing  state  of 
aifairs  in  every  continental  country.  The 
restrictive  measures  of  a  certain  kind 
that  have  been  inaugurated  in  a  few  na- 
tions, like  Sweden,  Jlolland  and  Switzer- 
land, are  far  beneatii  the  standard  of  legis- 
lation in  America,  where  the  total  absti- 
nence doctrine  governs  temperance 
action ;  and  the  common  aim  of  all  re- 
formers, to  reduce  the  drink  traffic  and 
mitigate  its  sad  consequences,  has  not 
been  noticeably  promoted  by  them. 

Mohammedans. — Islamism,  or  the 
religion  of  entire  resignation  to  the  will 
of  God,  as  the  Moslems  or  true  believers 
in  Allah  call  their  faith,  founded  by  Mo- 
hammed, is  professed  by  nearly  200,000,- 
000  people  in  Asia  and  Africa,  though 
only  about  6,000,000  adherents  of  the 
crescent  are  found  in  Europe.  Though 
the  nurse  of  polygamy  and  slavery,  and 
jirobably  fitted  only  for  nations  in  a  state 
of  semi-civilization,  Mohammedanism  is 
tlie  promoter  of  temperance.  The  lover 
of  mankind  must  feel  grateful  to  the 
founder  of  Islam  for  his  attitude 
toward  intemperance  and  his  clear  and 
unmistakable  prohibition  of  intoxicating 
liquors.  It  may  be  broadly  affirmed  that 
the  law  of  the  Koran  concerning  absti- 
nence from  wine  is  very  generally  obeyed, 
and  that  drunkenness  in  Mohammedan 
society  is  exceptional.  In  comparison 
with  a  certain  phase  of  the  so-called 
Christian  civilization,  Moslems  have  in 
this  regard  cause  for  congratulation  and 
pride.  The  abundant  testimony  of  many 
travellers  in  many  centuries  is  nearly 
unanimous  as  to  the  general  habit  of 
abstinence  from  intoxicating  liquors 
among  the  vast  majority  of  good  Mos- 
lems. The  liquor  which  has  been  and  is 
imported  by  millions  of  gallons  into 
Africa  and  Asia  is  from  the  stills  of 
Ciiristian  countries  in  Europe  and  Amer- 
ica. The  missionaries  of  the  Prophet  in 
Africa  and  the  propagandists  of  Islam  in 
the  East  Indies  and  other  Asian  coun- 
tries make  much  of  this  argument  of 
contrast.  They  point  to  the  drunken- 
ness among  Christians  and  the  traffic 
which  they  carry  on  among  the  natives  to 
the  destruction  of  the  latter.  They  quote 
and  enforce  the  teachings  of  the  Koran, 
which  explicitly  forbids  the  use  of  wine 
as  a  beverage  and  which  commands  tem- 
perance as  a  positive  and  necessary  vir- 


tue. From  George  Sale's  translation  of 
the  Koran  (Warne's  ed.,  London,  1888, 
pp.  23,  85)  we  quote: 

"  But  they  who  beheve  .  .  .  will  ask  thee 
concerniug  wine  and  lots:  Answer,  In  both 
there  is  great  sin,  and  also  some  things  of  iise 
iinto  men;  but  their  sinfulness  is  greater  than 
their  use." 

"O  true  believers,  surely  wine  and  lots  and 
images  and  divining  arrows  are  an  abomination 
of  the  work  of  Satan;  therefore  avoid  them 
that  ye  may  prosper.  Satan  seeketh  to  sow 
dissension  among  you  by  wine  and  lots,  and  to 
diverting  you  from  remembering  God  and  from 
prayer;  will  ye  not  therefore  abstain  from 
themV" 

The  comment  made  upon  these  and 
other  passages  in  the  Moslem's  bible,  by 
Mr.  Sale  (pp.  95-6)  is,  as  follows: 

"The  drinking  of  wine,  under  which  name 
all  sorts  of  strong  and  inebriating  lifjuors  are 
comprehended,  is  forbidden  in  the  Koran  iu 
more  places  than  one.  Some,  indeed,  have 
imagined  that  e.xcess  therein  is  only  forbidden, 
and  that  the  moderate  use  of  wine  is  allowed 
by  two  passages  in  the  same  book;  but  the 
more  received  opinion  is  that  to  drink  any 
strong  liquors,  either  in  lesser  quantity  or  in  a 
greater,  is  absolutely  unlawful;  and  though 
libertines  indulge  themselves  in  a  contrary  prac- 
tice, )'et  the  more  conscientious  are  so  strict, 
especially  if  they  have  performed  the  pilgrim- 
age to  Mecca,  that  they  hold  it  unlawful  not 
only  to  taste  wine  but  to  press  grapes  for  the 
making  of  it,  to  buy  or  to  sell  it,  or  even  to 
maintain  themselves  with  the  money  arising 
by  tlie  sale  of  that  liquor.  The  Persians,  how- 
ever, as  well  as  the  Turks,  are  very  fond  of 
wine;  and  if  one  asks  them  how  it  comes  to 
pass  that  they  venture  to  drink  it,  when  it  is  so 
directly  forbidden  by  their  religion,  they  an- 
swer that  it  is  with  them  as  with  the  Chris- 
tians, whose  religion  prohibits  drunkenness  and 
whoredom  as  great  sins,  and  who  glory,  not- 
withstanding, some  in  debauching  girls  and 
married  women,  and  others  in  drinking  to  ex- 
cess. .  .  . 

"Several  stories  have  been  .told  as  to  the 
occasion  of  Mohammed's  prohibiting  the  drink- 
ing of  wine;  but  the  true  reasons  are  given  in 
the  Koran,  viz.,  because  the  ill-effects  of  that 
liquor  surpasses  its  good  ones,  the  common 
effects  thereof  being  quart  els  and  disturbances 
in  company,  and  neglect  or  at  least  indecencies 
in  the  performance  of  religious  duties.  For 
these  reasons  it  was  that  the  priests  were  by  the 
Levitical  law  forbidden  to  drink  wine  or  strong 
drink  when  they  entered  the  tabernacle,  and 
that  the  Nazarites  and  Rechabites,  and  many 
pious  persons  among  the  Jews  and  primitive 
Christians,  wholly  abstained  therefrom;  nay, 
some  of  the  latter  went  so  far  as  to  ctnidemn 
the  use  of  wine  as  sinful.  But  Mohammed  is 
said  to  have  had  a  nearer  example  than  any  of 
these  in  the  more  devout  persons  of  his  own 
tribe." 

It  will  be  seen  from  the  above  that  the 
law  of  the  Koran  is  that  of  prohibition 


Montana.] 


434 


[Moral  Suasion. 


and  not  merely  temperance.  Providen- 
tially this  feature  of  Mohammedanism 
has  been  a  great  blessing  to  a  large  part 
of  mankind,  and  it  should  provoke  Chris- 
tians to  the  good  work  of  at  least  staying 
the  flood  of  intoxicants  that  issues  from 
the  distilleries  in  Christian  lands  for  the 
bestializing  of  the  uncivilized  races  of 
Africa  and  Asia. 

William  Elliot  Geiffis. 

Montana. — See  Index. 

Moral  Suasion. — All  experience 
shows  that  moral  suasion  will  never 
make  the  drink  curse  less,  because  the 
open  saloon  is  a  more  powerful  influenc- 
ing agent  than  mothers'  prayers,  wives' 
entreaties,  children's  pleadings  or  re- 
formers' arguments.  No  amount  of  out- 
side restraining  power  will  counter- 
balance the  temptations  of  the  dramshop 
when  once  a  person  becomes  the  victim 
of  appetite.  The  reason  is  obvious. 
The  will  power  of  every  slave  of  drink  is 
weak.  He  is  incapable  of  abiding  by  vir- 
tuous conclusions.  His  heart  may  be  right 
but  his  head  is  all  wrong.  Hence  though 
his  impulses  may  be  the  very  best,  his 
acts  may  be  the  very  worst. 

From  moral  suasion  work,  as  such,  pros- 
ecuted for  a  century  and  longer,  few  per- 
manent  results   of   relative   importance 
have    come.      There    have    been    great 
moral       suasion        movements — Father 
Mathew,  Washingtonian,  Gough,    Mur- 
phy,  llibbon.    Gospel   Temperance   and 
Woman's     crusades, — that     have     won 
hundreds  of  thousands,  nay,  millions,  of 
temporary  converts  to  total  abstinence, 
and  in   the   judgment  of  their  enthusi- 
astic promoters  have  even  promised  to 
sweep  liquor  out  of  existence.     It  is  not 
undervaluing  the   good   that   has   been 
done  to  say  that  while  individuals  have 
been   benefited   public   policy    has    not 
been  materially  changed  for  the  better, 
save  indirectly.     Father  Mathew's  moral 
suasion   agitation,    certainly    the    most 
widespread  one  ever  conducted,  did  not 
fipply  to  drink  conditions  in  Ireland  any 
lasting    remedy.     The    Washingtonians 
redeemed  no  State  from  the  license  sys- 
tem.    The  Woman's  Crusade  secured  no 
concessions  from  the  Legislature  of  Ohio. 
The  work  of  Francis  Murphy  is  hardly 
to  be  reckoned  as  one  of  the  factors  to 
which  the  general  diminiition  of  intem- 
perance, crime,  etc.,  in   certain  political 


divisions  of  the  United  States  at  the 
present  day  is  due.  On  the  other  hand 
those  who  have  fought  the  liquor  traffic 
essentially  as  a  matter  of  public  policy 
can  point  to  decisive  victories  :  by  them 
Maine  was  won,  and  Kansas,  Iowa,  Ver- 
mont and  the  Dakotas,  and  through 
their  efforts  it  is  impossible  to  sell  or  ob- 
tain drink  in  many  hundreds  of  towns 
and  counties.  Moral  suasion  has  culti- 
vated sentiment,  spread  education, 
brought  new  workers  to  the  cause  and 
created  or  strengthened  organizations  ; 
but  standing  alone  it  has  never  jsroduced 
lasting  reform.  A  sterner  method  is 
necessary. 

The  saloon  makes  the  drunkard.  Shut 
a  man  up  in  a  prison  for  a  term  of  years 
and  he  will  lose  the  craving  for  liquor. 
Let  the  manufacture,  sale  and  importa- 
tion of  intoxicants  be  done  away  with, 
and  the  released  prisoner  will  be  able  to 
lead  Just  as  temperate  a  life  outside  the 
Jail  as  he  did  inside.     But  the  chances 
are  that  if  he  encounters  the  saloon  when 
he  becomes  free  he  will  renew  his  appe- 
tite.     The  liquor-dealer  has  persuasive 
powers  before  which  all  the  capabilities 
of  the  reformer  must  yield.     He  appeals 
to  weak  humanity  through  the  attrac- 
tions of  his  place.     Missions,  churches, 
ennobling   sentiment   and   better   Judg- 
ment cannot  compete  with  these  attrac- 
tions.     The   self-interest    of  the    rum- 
seller  keeps  him  ever  on  the  alert,  while 
reform  work  is  spasmodic  at  best.     At 
every  step  the  reformer  meets  discourage- 
ments, hinderances  and  rebuffs.     Public 
approval  is  not  volunteered  to  him  Avith 
alacrity.     He  grows  faint-hearted  unless 
he  has  an  indomitable  will,  great  courage 
and   never-failing   faith.      The    saloon- 
keeper, moreover,  is  strengthened  by  a 
most   respectable   backing.      Presidents 
are  elected  by  his  permission,  Vice-Presi- 
dents become  beneficiaries  of  his  "  trade," 
political  parties  move  just  as  he  wills, 
and  even  clergymen  are  not  unwilling  to 
fabricate  expediency  arguments  that  are 
especially  delightful  to  his  ears.      News- 
paper editors  and  legislators  are  prone  to 
feel  a  higher  esteem  for  the  "  boodle  "  of 
the  rum  power  than  for  temperance  sta- 
tistics or  Conference  deliverances.     The 
nation  makes  way  for  the  rumster  and 
his  business  much  as  a  crowd  does  for  a 
steam  fire-engine  rushing  through  the 
streets  to  a  fire.     Women's  prayers,  chil- 


Moravian  Church.] 


435 


[Mortality. 


dren's  parades,  Sunday-school  songs  and 
meek  petitions  to  politicians  will  be  dis- 
regarded so  long  as  they  are  not  re-in- 
forced  by  an  inexorable  political  pur- 
pose, skillful  management  and  votes. 
The  moral  and  educative  agencies  will 
not,  however,  be  dispensed  with,  but  will 
be  multiplied  with  the  adoption  of  more 
vigorous  methods.  More  intelligent  ag- 
gression means  greater  success ;  and  with 
practical  progress  goes  increased  ardor 
all  along  the  line. 

Eliza  Trask  Hill. 

Moravian  Church. — The  General 
Synod  met  at  Bethlehem,  Pa.,  in  Sep- 
tember, 1888,  and  among  many  other 
things  bearing  on  the  subject  of  temper- 
ance declared : 

"That  this  Synod  re-affirms  all  its  former 
recommendations  and  resolutions  referring  to 
the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  and  the  position 
our  church  has  taken  on  the  temperance  ques- 
tion. .  .  .  That  this  Synod  recommends  to  the 
ministers  of  tliose  congregations  especially  where 
the  vice  of  intemperance  in  the  use  of  intoxicat- 
ing drinks  prevails,  to  preach  the  Word  of  God 
with  close  and  special  reference  to  this  growing 
sin,  as  the  only  remedy  to  effect  its  radical  cure. 
That  this  Synod  is  opposed  to  all  traffic  in  in- 
toxicating drinks,  and  the  use  as  a  beverage  of 
hard  cider,  beer,  ale,  whiskey,  wine,  brandy, 
gin,  rum,  patent  bitters,  etc." 

Mortality.— The  great  influence  of 
alcohol  as  a  shortener  of  life  is  well 
established.  (See  Longevity.)  But  the 
exact  percentage  of  the  total  mortality 
for  whicli  it  is  responsible  is  at  present 
indeterminate.  Alcoholism  as  a  cause  of 
death  is  a  factor  in  the  vital  statistics  of 
all  large  cities;  but  under  this  head  are 
included  only  a  small  proportion  of  the 
deaths  occasioned  wholly  or  in  part  by 
indulgence  in  intoxicants.  Fatal  illness- 
es due  to  intemperance,  or  accelerated 
or  influenced  by  liquors,  are  reported 
by  physicians  under  a  multitude  of 
names  that  give  no  suggestion  of  the 
ruin  done  by  drink.  This  arises  in  part 
from  the  fact  that  most  deaths  are  class- 
ified by  specific  disease-names  which 
indicate  the  ultimate  disorder  but  not 
necessarily  the  peculiar  contributing 
agent,  and  in  part  also  from  the  willing- 
ness with  which  many  physicians  respect 
the  sensitiveness  of  drinkers'  families 
and  refrain  from  putting  the  humiliating 
truth  on  record.  There  is  also  a  vast 
number  of  deaths  from  accident,  vio- 
lencCj    murder,   insanity,    suicide,    epi- 


demics, lack  of  nutrition,  improvidence, 
etc.,  which,  if  the  circumstances  were 
systematically  incy^iired  into,  would  be 
attributed  entirely  to  drink,  or  to  drink 
more  than  any  other  cause. 

But  we  are  not  without  expert  testi- 
mony indicative  of  the  magnitude  of 
mortality  from  alcohol.  In  another  art- 
icle in  this  volume  Dr.  B.  W.  Richardson, 
whose  competence  to  discuss  the  subject 
authoritatively  is  admitted  by  all  well- 
informed  persons,  estimates  that  there 
are  annually  more  than  50,000  deaths  in 
England  and  Wales  from  alcohol,  this 
number  being  10  per  cent,  of  the  total 
deaths,  and  that  alcohol,  as  one  of  the 
causes  of  mortality,  is  "  at  the  head  of 
those  causes."  ^  (See  pp.  25-6.)  The  emi- 
nent Dr.  Norman  Kerr  has  given  pro- 
longed and  careful  study  to  drink  mor- 
tality, and  in  his  "  Mortality  of  Intem- 
perance" (London,  1879)  informs  us  that 
he  ])egan  his  inquiries  "  with  the 
avowed  object  of  demonstrating  and 
exposing  the  utter  falsity  of  the  perpetual 
teetotal  assertion  that  00,000  drunkards 
died  every  year  in  the  United  Kingdom." 
In  his  "  Inebriety  "  (pp.  379-82)  Dr.  Kerr 
presents  his  own  conclusions  and  the 
evidence  furnished  by  a  number  of  men 
thoroughly  qualified  by  their  experience 
to  bear  witness.  We  quote  from  what 
Dr.  Kerr  says : 

"  It  has  been  my  painful  duty  to  com- 
pute the  mortality  from  inebriety  within 
our  borders,  and  the  estimate  which  after 
careful  inquiry  I  was  enabled  to  lay  be- 
fore several  scientific  and  learned  socie- 
ties was  pronounced  '  moderate '  and 
*  within  the  truth,'  and  has  never  been 
seriously  disputed.  There  is  first  the 
num])er  of  deaths  occurring  annually  in 
the  United  Kingdom  from  personal  alco- 
holic inebriety,  which  I  reckon  at  40,000. 
It  is  true  that  only  between  1,400  and 
1,500  deaths  have  been  certified  as  arising 
from  alcohol  in  one  year.  But  it  is  well 
known  that  the  figures  of  the  registration 
returns  are  no  criterion  of  the  actual  num- 
ber of  deaths  from  alcoholic  excess.  .  .  . 

"  I  arrived  at  my  estimate  of  40,000  by 
taking  the  proportion  of  alcoholic  deaths 
to  all  the  deaths  certified  by  me  in  the 
course  of  one  year,  and  applying  that 


1  The  Harveian  Society  report  concludes  that  14  per 
cent,  of  the  mortality  aiiionq  adults  is  due  to  alcohol, — 
i  «.,  about  39,000  in  England  and  Wales,  or  52,000  in  Great 
^xiVAw..— Foundation  of  Death.,  p.  206. 


Mortality.] 


436 


[Mortality. 


proportion,  with  certain  necessary  cor- 
rections, to  the  total  nnmber  of  practi- 
tioners throughout  the  kingdom.  This 
calculation  1  checked  in  a  variety  of 
ways.  First,  by  taking  tlie  average  of  17 
years'  practice,  comprising  278  fatal  cases, 
Next,  by  the  summary  of  the  causes  of 
332  deaths  in  the  practice  of  12 
medical  men,  some  located  in  cities  and 
some  in  the  country.  Next,  by  taking 
out  from  the  general  mortality  returns  a 
certain  proportion  for  alcoholic  deaths  in 
hospitals,  workhouses,  from  violence  and 
accident  arising  through  drink,  and  for 
the  alcoholic  mortality  among  publicans, 
beer-sellers  and  licensed  grocers. 

"Dr.  Wakeley,  M.P.,  late  editor  of  the 
Lancet,  and  Coroner  for  Middlesex,  af- 
forded ample  corroboration  of  the  mod- 
eration of  my  figures.  Of  1,500  inquests 
held  by  him  yearly,  he  attributed  at  least 
900  to  hard  drinking,  and  he  believed 
that  from  10,000  to  15,000  persons  died 
annually  from  drink  in  the  metropolis, 
on  whom  no  inquest  was  held.  Taking 
London  as  one-tenth  of  the  population 
of  the  United  Kingdom,  this  would  give 
100,000  deaths  from  alcoholic  indulgence 
over  the  country.  It  is  often  impossible 
to  elicit  a  verdict  of  alcohol-poisoning, 
or  alcohol-acceleration  of  death,  even 
when  the  evidence  is  strong.  As  the 
jury  have  often  been  neighbors  of  the  de- 
ceased they  are  naturally  unwilling  to 
return  a  verdict  reflecting  on  his  char- 
acter. Yet,  owing  to  the  gradual  en- 
lightenment of  the  public  mind,  juries 
ai-e  steadily  becoming  more  alive  to  the 
truth  and  less  reluctant  to  refer  to  alco- 
hol. Even  when  both  Coroner  and  jiiry  are 
ready  to  acknowledge  the  facts  as  to  the 
habits  of  the  deceased,  it  is  difficult  to 
elicit  the  whole  truth  from  the  witnesses. 
I  have  seen  inquests  at  which  the  medical 
testimony  showed  the  presence  of  alco- 
hol-poisoning, when  the  friends  declared 
that  their  dead  relative  was  a  perfectly 
sober  individual,  but  after  the  proceed- 
ings were  closed  admitted  that  he  '  took 
far  too  much,'  Dr.  Edwin  Lankester, 
F.R.S.,  Coroner  for  Middlesex,  was  of 
opinion  that  one-tenth  of  our  entire 
mortality  was  the  direct  result  of  poison- 
ing by  alcohol;  and  his  successor.  Dr. 
Hardwicke,  pronounced  my  estimate  of 
the  direct  and  indirect  mortality  from 
alcohol  to  be  'far  within  the  truth.'  Dr. 
Noble  of  Manchester  believes  that  one- 


third  of  our  disease  is  due  to  intemper- 
ance, and  Dr.  B.  W.  Richardson  that  one- 
third  of  the  vitality  of  the  nation  might 
be  saved  but  for  strong  drink." 

In  this  summary  Dr.  Kerr  does  not  in- 
clude all  the  valuable  testimony  that  has 
been  furnished  him.  "  Prompted  by  my 
friend  Dr.  Norman  Kerr,"  writes  W. 
AVynn  Wescott,  M.  B.,  Deputy  Coroner 
for  Central  Middlesex,  "  I  have  made  an 
analysis  of  1,220  consecutive  inquests 
held  by  me  in  London,  and  I  cannot  re- 
frain from  making  the  results  public.  I 
am  not  and  have  never  been  a  total  ab- 
stainer or  an  advocate  of  that  cause,  so 
there  need  be  no  fear  that  the  figures  are 
exaggerated.  Of  1,220  cases  of  deaths, 
including  deaths  from  violence,  sudden 
deaths,  persons  found  dead  and  deaths 
with  regard  to  which  no  medical  certifi- 
cate is  forthcoming,  470  were  infants, 
children  and  persons  below  the  age  of  16 
years.  These  may  be  presumably  re- 
moved from  the  list  of  deaths  from  alco- 
holic excess.  Of  the  remaining  750 
deaths,  no  less  than  143  are  recorded  as 
beinor  the  result  of  chronic  alcoholic 
disease,  acute  alcoholism,  deliruim  tre- 
mens, suicide  caused  by  drink,  or  of  acci- 
dental death  while  drunk,  or  of  accidents 
arising  because  of  incapal)ility  when  in- 
toxicated— that  is,  one  death  in  every 
5.24.  .  .  .  Only  nine  of  the  cases  were  of 
persons  under  30  years  of  age,  and  but  21 
cases  were  of  persons  over  (JO  years  old."  ^ 

Of  course  it  is  not  to  be  arbitrarily 
concluded  that  these  calculations  and 
opinions  may  be  applied,  without  qualifi- 
cations, to  the  United  States.  If  such  a 
conclusion  were  adopted,  and  Dr.  Rich- 
ardson's 10  per  cent,  estimate  were  used 
as  a  basis,  the  number  of  deaths  from 
drink  in  the  United  States  in  1880 
(taking  the  Census  vital  statistics  as  v.Vl- 
thoritv)  would  have  been  somewhere  be- 
tween''98,000  and  100,000,"  and  Dr.  Rich- 
ardson expresses  the  belief  that  his  10 
percent,  estimate  is  "under  the  mark," 
• — an  opinion,  so  far  as  it  relates  to  Great 
Britain,  that  seems  to  be  sustained  by 
the  figures  of  other  experts  cited  above. 
On  the  other  hand  it  may  be  reasonably 
claimed   that  since  the  per  capita  con- 


'  National  Temperance  Leas^ue's  Annual  for  1889  (Lon- 
don), p.  111. 

■•i  The  Census  for  18S0  reports  756,893  fleaths.  But  this 
number  (it  is  stated  in  tlie  Census)  represents  only  a'lout 
tiU  or  70  per  tent,  of  the  entire  number  of  deaths  in  1B80. 


Mortality.] 


[Mott,  Lucretia. 


sumption  of  alcohol  is  larger  in  Great 
Britain  than  in  the  United  States,  the 
ratio  of  deaths  from  drink  must  be 
lighter  in  the  latter  country. 

Mr.  E.  J.  Wheeler,  in  his  very  able 
work,  "  Prohibition  :  The  Principle, 
the  Policy  and  the  Party,"  has  under- 
taken (pp.  59-G())  to  compute  the  vol- 
ume of  mortality  from  alcohol  by  using 
the  recent  returns  of  the  British  Medical 
Association.  He  reckons,  from  these 
returns,  that  "  intemj)erance  kills  be- 
tween 30,000  and  35,000  each  year  in 
England;"  and  (after  making  generous 
allowance  for  the  smaller  consumption  of 
liquors  in  this  country)  that  "  in  the 
United  States,  Jan.  1,  18S9,  of  sixty-five 
millions,  there  were  nearly  2,500,000  of 
hard  drinkers,  120,000  of  whom  die  each 
year,  and  30,000  of  whom  owe  their 
deaths  directly  to  intemperance."  These 
estimates  are  the  most  conservative  ones 
yet  obtained,  and  if  they  are  accepted  in 
preference  to  others  the  number  of 
deaths  annually  caused  by  the  liquor 
habit  will  still  be  appalling.  But,  as  we 
have  seen,  there  is  good  authority  for 
the  opinion  that  they  are  too  low. 

In  the  Voice  for  May  8,  1890,  were 
printed  a  number  of  valuable  opinions 
from  editors  of  medical  journals,  officers 
of  medical  organizations,  superinten- 
dents of  medical  institutions,  professors 
and  practicing  physicians — specialists 
who  were  consulted  by  the  Voice  solely 
with  reference  to  their  ability  to  give 
weighty  opinions,  and  whose  names  were 
chosen  with  the  assistance  of  the  editors 
of  two  leading  medical  magazines.  The 
opinions  were  in  response  to  a  series  of 
explicit  questions  touching  the  influence 
of  alcoholic  indulgence  upon  mortality 
in  cases  of  diseases  of  the  respiratory 
system  (such  as  pneumonia,  pleurisy, 
asthma,  croup,  etc.),  diseases  of  the  ner- 
vous system  (such  as  apoplexy,  convul- 
sions, epilepsy,  menengitis,  lorain  and 
spinal  diseases),  diseases  of  the  digestive 
system  (such  as  gastritis,  peritonitis  and 
diseases  of  the  stomach,  liver  and  intes- 
tines), consumption,  urinary  diseases 
(such  as  Bright's  disease,  and  diseases 
of  the  bladder  and  kidneys),  diseases  of 
the  heart  and  circulatory  system,  acci- 
dents, and  in  cases  of  surgical  opera- 
tions. The  answers  showed  much  varia- 
tion, but  the  general  tendency  was  to 
charge   a   heavy   percentage   of    deaths 


under  nearly  all  these  heads  to  alcohol. 
For  instance.  Dr.  Charles  H.  Hughes, 
editor  of  the  Alienist  cdkI  Neurologid, 
estimated  that  15  per  cent,  of  diseases  of 
the  nervous  system,  10  per  cent,  of  the 
diseases  of  the  digestive  system,  10  per 
cent,  of  the  diseases  of  the  heart  and 
circulatory  system  and  20  per  cent,  of 
all  accidents  were  due  directly  or  indi- 
rectly to  drink.  E.  J.  Deering,  President 
of  the  Medico-Legal  Society,  made  these 
estimates :  Diseases  of  the  digestive  sys- 
tem, 20  per  cent. ;  urinary  diseases,  40 
per  cent. ;  diseases  of  the  heart  and  cir- 
culatory system,  20  per  cent. ;  accidents, 
30  per  cent.  Averaging  the  estimates 
given,  the  total  percentage  of  mortality 
from  drink  would  appear  to  approxi- 
mate, in  the  United  States,  the  percent- 
age calculated  by  Dr.  Richardson  for 
England  and  Wales. 

Mott,  Lucretia,  daughter  of 
Thomas  Coffin,  was  a  pioneer  Abolition- 
ist, a  leader  in  the  earliest  efforts  to  win 
equality  for  woman,  one  of  the  first  to 
champion  total  abstinence  principles  and 
a  preacher  of  celebrity  among  the  Ilicks- 
ite  Quakers.  She  was  born  in  Nan- 
tucket, Jan.  3,  1793,  and  was  descended 
from  the  original  proprietors  of  the 
island.  Rugged  qualities  and  self-reli- 
ance were  a  part  of  her  inheritance 
and  were  strengthened  by  the  associations 
of  her  childhood.  Her  father  removed 
to  Boston  when  she  was  12  vears  old. 
Although  he  possessed  ample  meaiis  ho 
sent  his  daughter  to  the  public  school, 
desiring  that  she  should  esteem  herself 
no  better  than  others.  Pie  also  wished 
her  to  have  a  thoroughly  practical  train- 
ing. Wlien  she  had  passed  beyond  the 
lower  grades  he  placed  her  in  a  Friends' 
boarding-school  in  New  York.  There 
she  met  James  Mott,  whom  she  married 
at  the  age  of  18.  Her  anti-slavery  sen- 
timents had  already  been  moulded  ;  sym- 
pathy for  the  slave  had  been  aroused  in 
her  by  the  lessons  taught  in  her  school 
reading-books  in  New  England  and  by 
Clarkson's  pictures.  Her  experience  as  a 
teaclier  impelled  her  to  advocate  justice 
for  woman  ;  although  she  j)ossessed  a 
man's  qualifications  and  performed  a 
man's  services  she  received  only  half  a 
man's  salary. 

After  her  marriage  Philadelphia  be- 
came her  place  of  residence.     Here  she 


Narcotics.] 


438 


[Narcotics. 


found  abundant  work  to  do  in  behalf  of 
the  slaves  and  woman's  rights.  At  the 
age  of  25  she  began  her  career  as  a  minis- 
ter, receiving  official  recognition  from 
her  church.  Soon  afterward  the  Uni- 
tarian doctrines  of  Elias  Hicks  created 
dissension  among  the  Quakers,  and  she 
ardently  espoused  the  Hicks  movement. 
In  1833  a  convention  was  held  in  Phila- 
delphia to  organize  a  National  Anti- 
Slavery  Society,  and  her  aggressive 
speeches  had  an  effect  no  less  stimulat- 
ing than  the  impression  made  by  the 
appearance  of  a  woman  on  the  platform 
at  such  an  assemblage  was  sensational. 
The  toleration  shown  to  Mrs.  Mott  on 
this  occasion  was  certainly  uncommon. 
Seven  years  later  eight  women  were 
among  the  delegates  sent  to  the  World's 
Anti-Slavery  Convention  in  London,  but 
they  were  excluded  from  the  floor. 

For  half  a  century  Lucretia  Mott  was 
a  pronounced  total  abstainer.  She  was 
quick  to  realize  the  full  significance  of 
the  evils  of  the  social  drinking  customs, 
and  her  influence,  example  and  pen 
were  devoted  to  the  cause  of  reform.  As 
a  proj)agandist  of  radical  and  unpopular 
ideas  she  suffered  great  persecution, 
ridicule  and  denunciation,  but  in  her  old 
age  she  was  regarded  with  peculiar  ten- 
derness and  veneration.  She  died  at  the 
age  of  87.  "  Far  beyond  the  common 
limit,"  said  Samuel  Longfellow,  at  the 
memorial  meeting  held  in  the  Unitarian 
Church  in  Germantown,  Pa.,  "the  light 
of  that  countenance  has  been  before  us 
and  that  voice  heard  wherever  an  un- 
popular truth  needed  defense,  wherever 
a  popular  evil  needed  to  be  testified 
against,  wherever  a  wronged  man  or 
woman  needed  a  champion.  There  she 
stood,  there  she  spoke  the  word  that  the 
spirit  of  truth  and  right  bade  her  speak. 
How  tranquil  and  serene  her  presence  in 
the  midst  of  multitudes  that  mio-ht  be- 
come  mobs.  How  calm  yet  how  search- 
ing her  judgment  against  wrong-doing. 
No  whirlwind  of  passion  or  lightning 
of  eloquence;  it  was  rather  the  dawn 
of  clear  day  upon  dark  places  and 
hidden." 

Narcotics,  strictly  speaking,  are 
paralyzing  poisons,  whose  effect  when 
taken  in  certain  moderate  quantities  is 
to  induce  languor,  and  in  laVger  quanti- 
ties lethargy,  complete  insensibility  and 


death.  The  most  prominent  types  are 
opium,  morphia,  Indian  hemp,  bella- 
donna, atropia  and  henbane.  Hops,  to 
which  the  stupefying  effects  of  beer  are 
due,  are  also  classed  with  the  character- 
istic narcotics.  There  is  much  conflict 
of  opinion  among  medical  authorities 
as  to  the  proper  limitations  of  tlie  term 
"narcotic."  Some  are  even  disinclined 
to  ajiply  it  to  such  substances  as  ether, 
chloral,  cocaine  and  chloroform,  since 
these  are  volatile  anaesthetics  whose  influ- 
ence passes  away  after  a  comparatively 
brief  period  of  time.  Still  more  unwill- 
ing are  other  authorities  to  rank  alcohol 
and  tobacco  with  the  narcotics ;  for  there 
is  a  tendency  to  regard  the  immediate 
effects  of  these  articles  as  essentially 
stimulating  or  exhilerating  and  there- 
fore deserving  of  separate  ciassiflcation. 
But  the  growing  recognition  that  the  so- 
-called  stimulating  properties  of  alcohol 
are  deceptive  and  treacherous,  and  that  its 
paralyzing  and  poisonous  nature  is  really 
its  distinctive  quality^  causes  an  increas- 
ingly persistent  application  to  it  of  the 
definition  "  narcotic." 

Indeed,  in  the  popular  acceptation  of 
the  term,  the  suggestion  of  a  diseased 
craving  and  appetite  is  always  implied 
Avhen  allusion  is  made  to  the  narcotic 
effect.  Any  drug  that  excites  morbid 
desire  for  repetitions  of  that  drug  and  so 
gives  development  to  the  poison  vice,  is 
popularly  regarded  as  a  narcotic.  The 
term,  as  applied  to  inebriants  and  en- 
slaving poisons  of  all  kinds,  has  the  ad- 
vantage of  superior  descriptiveness  and 
comprehensiveness,  and  is  not  subject  to 
the  qualifications  and  restricted  mean- 
ings that  attach  to  such  a  word,  for  ex- 
ample, as  "intoxicant,"  which  refers 
peculiarly  to  alcohol  and  can  hardly 
1)0  extended  to  substances  like  opium, 
hasheesh  and  chloroform.  The  distinc- 
tions involved  in  the  employment  of 
words  of  comparatively  narrow  applica- 
tion, like  "  intoxication  "  and  even  "  in- 
ebriety," call  for  a  broader  scientific 
name  which  will  convey  a  general  im- 
pression of  all  forms  of  alcoholism,  in- 
temperance, intoxication,  opium-eating, 
tobacco-craving,  etc. ;  and  Dr.  Norman 
Kerr  has  accordingly  coined  the  new 
term  "narcomania" — "in  other  words," 
says  he,  "  a  mania  for  narcotism  of  every 
kind,  an  inexi)ressibly  intense  involuntary 
morbid  crave  for  the  temporary  antes- 


National  Prohibition.] 


439 


[National  Prohibition. 


thetic  relief  promised  by  every  form  of 
narcotic."  ^ 

National  Prohibition. — The  traffic 
in  alcoholic  beverages  is  recognized  as 
an  existing  and  integral  part  of  the 
general  bn'siness  of  the  country  by  the 
Constitution  and  laws  of  the  United 
States;  and,  subject  to  such  disabilities 
as  may  have  been  imposed  upon  it  by 
statutes  of  the  United  States  and  Terri- 
torial enactments  and  by  the  legislation 
of  the  States  within  tlieir  several  juris- 
dictions (which  are  limited  both  in  legal 
scope  and  geographical  boundaries),  this 
trade  has  all  the  presumptions  in  its  favor 
which  belong  to  traffic  in  the  necessa- 
ries of  life.  Like  other  occupations  and 
their  productions  it  is  the  subject  of 
local  law  in  the  States  so  far  as  the 
National  Government  is  not  directly  or 
indirectly  supreme  under  the  powers 
vested  in  the  National  Constitution.  By 
Section  8  of  the  first  x\rticle  of  the  Con- 
stitution Congress  has  power  to  regulate 
(not  to  destroy)  commerce  with  foreign 
nations  and  among  the  several  States 
and  with  the  Indian  tribes ;  therefore  the 
property  rights  growing  out  of  this  occu- 
pation are  under  the  protection  of  the 
general  Goverment,  both  at  home  and 
abroad,  and  there  is  no  legal  presumption 
whatever  against  it  any  more  than  there 
would  have  been  against  the  slave  trade 
had  there  been  no  reference  made  to  it 
in  the  Constitution.  The  Constitution 
applies  to  trades,  occupations  and  rights 
of  all  kinds  as  it  finds  them,  and  pro- 
tects whatsoever  by  express  provision  or 
necessary  implication  it  does  not  destroy. 
In  other  words,  there  being  nothing  in 
the  Constitution  referring  to  the  traffic 
in  alcoholic  beverages,  either  domestic  or 
foreign,  all  legal  presumptions  are  in  its 
favor,  just  as  they  are  in  favor  of  any 
other  existing  and  regular  business,  and 
the  national  powers,  legislative,  judicial 
and  executive,  are  and  Avill  be  in  its  favor 
until  their  action  is  reversed  or  modified 
by  laws  which  may  be  properly  enacted 
under  the  Constitution  as  it  is  or  shall  be- 
come by  changes  made  by  the  people  in 
the  Constitution  itself  and  by  statutes 
thereafter  enacted  bv  Congress  in  accord- 
ance  with  such  Amendments  of  the  fun- 
damental law.  Property  subject  to  taxa- 
tion is  entitled  to  protection  and  cannot 

1  Inebriety,  p.  34. 


be  destroyed  unless  it  be  done  by  express 
authority  of  law  and  by  due  process  of 
law. 

The  Constitution  itself  already  pro- 
vides methods  for  its  peaceful  amend- 
ment. Were  this  not  so  a  written  Con- 
stitution would  be  intolerable.  Every  im- 
portant change  which  might  become 
necessary  would  imply  revolution  and 
oftentimes  war.  The  methods  of  its 
amendment  are  prescribed  as  follows  in 
the  5th  Article  : 

"The  Congress,  whenever  two-thirds  of 
both  Houses  shall  deem  it  necessary,  shall  pro- 
pose Amendments  to  this  Constitution,  or  on 
application  of  the  Leiicislatures  of  two-thirds  of 
the  several  Spates  shall  call  a  Convention  for  pro- 
posing Amendments,  which  in  either  case  shall 
be  valid  to  all  intents  and  purposes  as  part  of 
this  Constitution  when  ratified  by  the  Legisla- 
tures of  three-fourths  thereof,  as  the  one  or  the 
other  mode  of  ratification  may  be  proposed  by 
the  Congress." 

So  far  all  Amendments,  15  in  ntimber, 
have  been  proposed  by  Congress  and 
ratified  by  the  Legislatures  of  the  several 
States  pursuant  to  the  above-quoted  pro- 
visions. 

The  object  of  National  Prohibition  is 
to  secure  the  absolute  Prohibition  by  the 
National  Constitution  and  the  necessary 
legislation  in  pursuance  thereof  of  the 
manufacture,  sale,  importation,  ex2:)orta- 
tion  and  transportation  of  alcohol,  in  all 
its  forms,  preparations  and  adtilterations, 
for  use  by  htiman  beings  as  a  drink ;  and 
a  perfect  measure  should  include  all  pos- 
sible methods  of  consumption  by  the 
human  organism,  whether  as  a  beverage 
or  otherwise,  except  as  a  medicine  or 
under  those  conditions  when  the  admin- 
istration of  a  poison  is  justified.  The 
individual  should  not  be  at  liberty  to 
poison  himself  according  to  law.  Some 
believe  that  National  Prohibition  should 
include  every  poison  as  well  as  alcohol, 
and  the  personal  itse  as  well  as  the  traffic. 
This  is  but  the  application  of  the  com- 
mon law  in  the  prohibition  of  suicide 
and  voluntary  self-inflicted  injuries  to 
life  and  health.  Sumptuary  laws  do  not 
relate  to  the  use  of  poisons,  and  the  hurt- 
ful personal  use  as  well  as  the  traffic  in 
any  poison  should  be  prohibited  by  an  effi- 
cient law  of  the  land.  The  efforts  of  the 
friends  of  National  Constitutional  Pro- 
hibition, however,  have  not  so  far  been 
carried  to  that  extent.  It  is  doubted  by 
many  whether  the  national  power  should 


National  Prohibition.] 


440 


[National  Prohibition. 


be  exerted  beyond  the  manufacture  and 
traffic  in  the  poisonous  article.  In  prac- 
tical measures  we  must  consider  not  only 
what  is  right  but  what  is  in  our  time 
possible. 

Up  to  the  present  time  three  joint 
resolutions  proposing  Federal  Prohibi- 
tory Amendments  have  been  introduced 
in  Congress.  The  first  was  offered  by  the 
writer  of  this  article,  as  a  member  of  the 
House  of  Representatives  of  the  44tli 
Congress,  Dec.  12,  1876.  The  proposed 
Amendment  was  in  the  following  words: 

"  Article  — . 

"  Sec.  1. — From  and  after  the  year  of  our 
Lord  1900  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  distilled 
alcoholic  intoxicating  liquors,  or  alcoholic 
liquors  any  part  of  which  is  obtained  by  distilla- 
tion or  process  equivalent  thereto,  or  any  intoxi- 
cating liquors  mixed  or  adulterated  with  ardent 
spirits  or  with  any  poison  whatever,  except  for 
medicinal,  mechanical,  chemical  and  scieutitic 
purposes,  and  for  use  in  the  arts,  anywhere 
within  the  United  States  and  the  Territories 
thereof,  shall  cease;  and  the  importation  of  such 
liquors  from  foreign  states  and  countries  to  the 
United  States  and  Territories,  and  the  exporta- 
tion of  such  liquors  from  and  the  transportation 
thereof  within  and  through  any  part  of  this 
coimtry,  except  for  the  use  and  purposes  afore- 
said, shall  be,  and  hereby  is,  forever  thereafter 
prohibited. 

"Sec  2. — Nothing  in  this  Article  shall  be 
construed  to  waive  or  abridge  any  existing  power 
of  Congress,  nor  the  right,  which  is  hereby  rec- 
ognized, of  the  people  of  any  State  or  Territory 
to  enact  laws  to  prevent  the  increase  and  for  the 
suppression  or  regulation  of  the  manufacture, 
sale  and  use  of  liquors  and  the  ingredients  there- 
of, any  part  of  w^hich  is  alcoholic,  intoxicating 
or  poisonous,  within  its  own  limits,  and  for  the 
exclusion  of  such  liquors  and  ingredients  there- 
from at  any  time,  as  well  before  as  after  the 
close  of  the  year  of  our  Lord  1900;  but  until 
then,  and  until  10  years  after  the  ratification 
hereof  as  provided  in  the  next  section,  no  State 
or  Territory  shall  interfere  with  the  transporta- 
tion of  said  liquor  or  ingredients,  in  packages 
safely  secured,  over  the  usual  lines  of  traffic,  to 
other  States  and  Territories  wherein  the  manu- 
facture, sale  and  use  thereof  for  other  purposes 
and  use  than  those  excepted  in  the  l.st  Section 
shall  be  lawful;  provided  that  the  true  destina- 
tion of  such  packages  be  plainly  marked  thereon. 

"Sec  3. — Should  this  Article  not  be  ratified 
by  three-fourths  of  the  States  on  or  before  the 
last  day  of  December,  1890,  then  the  1st  Sec- 
tion hereof  shall  take  effect  and  be  in  force  at 
the  expiration  of  10  years  from  such  ratification; 
and  the  assent  of  any  State  to  this  Article  shall 
not  be  rescinded  nor  reversed. 

"  Sec  4. — Congress  shall  enforce  this  Article 
by  all  needful  legislation." 

The  second  proposition  was  submitted 
in  the  Senate  during  the  46th  Congress  by 
the  Hon.  Preston  13.  Plumb  of  Kansas. 


It  was  prepared  by  Mr.  A.  M.  Powell  for 
the  National  Temperance  Society,  and 
was  essentially  the  Kansas  State  Consti- 
tutional Amendment  applied  to  the  Avhole 
country.  It  provided  for  Prohibition 
of  both  distilled  and  fermented  liquors. 

The  third  joint  resolution  was  intro- 
duced by  the  writer  in  the  Senate  of 
the-  50th  Congress,  Dec.  12,  1887,  and 
the  text  of  it  was  agreed  upon  "  in 
personal  conference  between  Mr.  Powell, 
Mr.  John  N.  Stearns  and  Mr.  Blair  upon 
two  occasions,  and  by  correspondence 
with  Miss  Frances  E.  Willard,  John  B. 
Finch  and  other  leading  Prohibitionists." 
It  was  a  compromise  of  differences  of 
opinion  as  to  the  form  of  the  proposed 
Amendment,  in  order  that  there  might 
be  united  effort  to  secure  the  substance 
of  what  was  desired  by  all.  It  was  as 
follows : 

"  Artict,e  — . 

"Sec  1. — The  manufacture,  importation,  ex- 
portation, transportation  and  sale  of  all  alco- 
holic liquors  as  a  beverage  shall  be,  and  hereby 
is,  forever  prohibited  in  the  LTnited  States  and 
in  every  place  subject  to  their  jurisdiction. 

"Sec  2. — Congress  shall  enforce  this  Article 
by  all  needful  legislation." 

Reports  prepared  by  the  writer  favor- 
insf  the  submission  of  the  Amendment  to 
the  States  were  made  by  the  Senate  Com- 
mittee (upon  the  first  of  the  three  joint 
resolutions)  in  the  49th  Congress,  and  by 
the  Senate  Committee  (upon  the  third 
proposition)  in  the  50th  Congress.  But 
neither  the  Senate  nor  the  House,  as  a 
body,  has  yet  given  the  requisite  vote. 
The  Amendment  in  its  present  form 
(as  last  quoted  above)  seems  to  be  satis- 
factory to  all  the  supporters  of  the 
movement  and  will  probably  be  pressed 
by  the  temperance  sentiment  of  the 
country  until  it  becomes  a  part  of  our 
fuiuiamental  legislation. 

It  is  not  possible  to  enter  upon  even  a 
summary  statement  of  the  arguments  in 
favor  of  National  Proliibition  in  this 
article,  but  these  considerations  mav  be 
noted : 

1. — That  the  traffic  in  alcohol  is  a  unit 
and  diffused  like  poison  in  the  atmos- 
])here  throtighout  the  whole  nation.  It 
is  as  impossible  for  States  alone  to  con- 
trol it  even  within  their  own  borders  as 
it  would  be  for  them  to  deal  effectually 
with  a  permanent  pestilence  already  es- 
tablished in  all  parts  of  the  country. 
There   must   be  a  national  quarantine, 


National  Prohibition.] 


411 


[National  Prohibition. 


and  both  national  and  State  effort 
tliroughout  our  whole  geogra2)hical  ex- 
tent. There  should  also  be  international 
combination  to  suppress  the  traffic.  The 
business  should  everywhere  be  out- 
lawed. It  does  more  harm  than  the 
slave  trade  ever  did  and  there  should  be 
no  delay  on  the  part  of  any  single  nation 
to  demand  of  all  others  the  suppression 
of  this  pernicious  traffic  in  human  bodies 
and  souls. 

2. —  It  is  manifestly  impossible  for  one 
or  for  several  States  fully  to  prohibit, 
prevent  or  punish  as  a  crime  that  which 
is  sanctioned  and  protected  as  a  legiti- 
mate business  by  the  remaining  States, 
in  the  Territories  and  District  of  Colum- 
bia, and  by  the  overshadowing  power  of 
the  general  Government  everywhere. 
This  national  recognition  of  the  traffic  is 
the  destruction  of  the  rights  of  the 
States  in  their  efforts  to  secure  Prohibi- 
tion within  their  own  borders.  If  Pro- 
hibition in  the  States  does  not  prohibit 
it  is  because  the  national  power  every- 
where prevents,  and  in  effect  prohibits 
Prohibition.  The  Constitution  of  the 
United  States  is  practically  a  supreme 
law  of  the  land  in  favor  of  free  rum.  A 
poison  gas  which  escapes  anywhere 
is  confined  nowhere.  Besides,  it 
should  be  remembered  that  the  dignity 
and  power  pertaining  to  the  national 
administration  of  the  law  render  the 
nation  a  much  more  formidable  antago- 
nist to  this  tremendous  alcoholic  power 
than  are  the  people,  officers  and  tribu- 
nals of  the  States. 

3. — National  Prohibition  is  necessary  in 
order  to  protect  and  jsreserve  the  very 
existence  of  the  police  power  of  the 
States.  The  police  power,  which  be- 
longs to  the  States,  is  for  the  preserva- 
tion of  order  and  the  protection  of  the 
life,  health  and  safety  of  the  people; 
but  the  protection  of  the  liquor  trade 
by  the  nation  and  by  the  surrounding 
States  renders  null  and  void  the  efforts 
of  those  States  which  would  exercise 
their  admitted  right  within  their  own 
borders  to  suppress  the  traffic  in  order 
that  they  may  preserve  the  life,  health 
and  property  of  their  citizens.  This 
shows  the  unsoundness  of  the  pretended 
objection  to  such  an  Ameiidment  that  it 
would  be  an  interference  with  or  viola- 
tion of  the  police  rights  of  the  States. 
It  would  only  be  a  guaranty  of  their  ex- 


istence and  complete  exercise  against 
the  worst  enemy  which  assails  public 
order,  life,  liberty,  health  and  property 
in  any  State.  It  might  as  well  be  said 
that  the  existing  national  guaranty  of  a 
republican  form  of  government  to  the 
States  is  a  violation  of  their  right  to 
governments  republican  in  form. 

4. — Should  it  be  conceded  that  Con- 
gress may  so  regulate  commerce  that 
there  shall  be  no  infringement  by  na- 
tional statutes  upon  the  local  police 
power  in  a  State,  still  so  long  as  aiiy 
State  is  permitted  to  manufacture  and  sell 
it  will  be  practically  impossible  to  sup- 
press the  traffic  even  in  the  States  which 
enact  the  most  stringent  Prohibitory 
laws.  Besides,  should  Congress  by  stat- 
ute prohibit  the  importation  from  other 
countries  and  also  the  importation  from 
one  State  to  another  in  which  the  traffic 
were  prohibited  such  national  legislation, 
like  that  in  the  States,  would  be  fluctu- 
ating and  transitory  and  could  be  per- 
manently secured  only  by  constitutional 
law. 

5. — Even  if  the  National  Constitution 
were  a  blank  upon  the  subject  and 
every  State  were  like  an  independent 
nation,  with  absolute  legal  poAver  over 
the  liquor  traffic  within  its  own  borders, 
still  there  should  be  a  National  Consti- 
tutional Amendment  for  its  prohibition 
because  no  State,  any  more  than  an  indi- 
vidual, should  be  permitted  to  so  use  its 
real  or  personal  property  or  its  powers 
of  any  kind  as  to  injure  other  States  and 
tlieir  people.  No  State  should  be  al- 
lowed to  create  and  trade  in  a  universal 
calamity.  Unless  there  be  assistance  af- 
forded rather  than  opposition  made  by 
tiie  National  Constitution  and  laws  to  the 
States  in  the  exercise  of  the  local  police 
power  for  the  protection  of  their  people, 
those  States  which  enact  Prohibitory 
laws  will  be  justified  in  resorting  to  the 
war  power  which  is  inherent  as  the  es- 
sence of  the  police  power  and  in  a  State 
is  the  right  of  self-defense — whenever, 
after  exhausting  all  peaceable  efforts,  it 
shall  plainly  be  necessary  in  order  to 
protect  the  lives,  health  and  property  of 
the  people.  Therefore  in  order  to  pre- 
serve the  national  peace  in  the  last  resort 
there  should  be  National  Prohibition. 

(3. — No  one  nation  can  wholly  extin- 
guish even  within  its  own  borders  this 
great  crime  against  civilization.  Prohibi- 


National  Temperance  League.]   442  [National  Temperance  Society. 


tion  by  the  world  is  necessary.  Bat  in 
order  to  secure  this  greatest  end  there 
must  be  action  by  individual  nations. 
Let  the  United  States  be  the  first.  As 
England  abolished  the  slave  trade,  so  let 
America  abolish  the  still  worse  trade  in 
poison-drink,  first  within  her  own  bor- 
ders and  then  by  a  dignified  but  deter- 
mined demand  of  the  nations  of  the  earth 
that  the  international  traffic  in  alcoholic 
beverages  shall  cease. 

The  subject  is  more  fully  discussed  in 
"The  Temperance  Movement,  or,  The 
Conflict  of  Man  with  Alcohol,"  and  in 
the  speeches  and  reports  made  by  the 
writer  in  the  House  and  Senate  of  the 
United  States. 

Heney  W.  Blair. 

National  Temperance  League 
(England). — Organized  in  I85(i  through 
a  consolidation  of  the  National  Temper- 
ance Society  and  the  London  Temper- 
ance League.  Its  avowed  object  is  "The 
promotion  of  temperance  by  the  practice 
and  advocacy  of  total  abstinence  from 
intoxicating  beverages."  A  person  of 
either  sex  is  eligible  to  membership  who 
signs  the  total  abstinence  pledge  and 
pays  2.S  6d  per  annum.  "  The  League's 
agencies  are  comprehensive  and  un- 
sectarian.  It  assists  local  societies  and 
individual  workers,  and  seeks  to  ac- 
complish its  great  object  by  means  of 
public  meetings,  lectures,  sermons,  tract 
distribution,  domiciliary  visitation;  con- 
ferences with  the  clergy,  medical  practi- 
tioners, schoolmasters,  magistrates  and 
other  persons  of  influence ;  deputations 
to  teachers  and  students  in  universities, 
collegeSjtraining  institutions  and  schools ; 
missionary  efforts  among  sailors,  soldiers, 
the  militia,  the  police  and  other  classes." 
Besides  securing  many  thousand  pledges 
at  the  military  and  naval  stations,  the 
League  has  issued  valuable  temperance 
school-books  that  have  been  widely  cir- 
culated. Its  influence  on  the  medical 
profession  is  worthy  of  special  notice. 
In  1871  it  secured  the  signatures  of  2(i9 
eminent  physicians  to  an  important  and 
aggressive  declaration  touching  the  true 
nature  of  alcohol.  Another  result  was 
the  arrangement  of  a  course  of  lectures 
by  Dr.  B.  W.  Richardson  to  the  medical 
students  of  metropolitan  hospitals  in 
1887,  and  the  organization  of  the  British 
Medical  Temperance  Association,  num- 


bering (in  1889)  387  medical  abstainers, 
with  115  associated  students.  The  news- 
papers published  are  the  Tempernnce 
Record  and  the  Mediad  Temperance 
Journal.  The  headquarters  are  at  33 
Paternoster  Row,  London,  E.  C.  Chief 
officers  (1889):  President,  Right  Rev. 
Frederick  Temple,  D.D.,  Lord  Bishop  of 
London;  Secretary,  Mr.  Robert  Rae. 

National  Temperance  Society 
and  Publication  House. — The  most 
important  general  temperance  organiza- 
tion in  the  United  States.  It  was  founded 
in  18G5,  "  for  the  special  work  of  creat- 
ing and  circulating  a  sound  temperance 
literature,  to  promote  the  cause  of  total 
abstinence  from  the  use,  manufacture 
and  sale  of  all  alcoholic  beverages,  and 
to  unify  and  concentrate  the  temperance 
sentiment  of  the  nation  against  the 
drink  and  the  drink  traffic."  It  has 
uniformly  and  uncompromisingly  ad- 
vocated total  abstinence  for  the  individ- 
ual and  Prohibition  for  the  State;  but 
it  has  no  connection  with  partisan  pol- 
itics and  is  strictly  non-sectarian  in 
religion,  and  among  its  Vice-Presidents 
(including  representative  leaders  in  all 
the  States  and  Territories)  are  persons 
attached  to  all  political  organizations 
and  creeds.  The  life-membership  fee  is 
120;  and  anyone  in  agreement  with  the 
purposes  of  the  Society  may  become  a 
Life-Director  and  have  a  life-voice  and 
vote  in  all  the  meetings  by  paying  $100. 
Its  income  is  derived  from  subscriptions, 
bequests  and  the  sale  of  publications; 
for  the  year  1889-90  the  receipts  aggre- 
gated 148,843.23  and  the  expenditures 
$49,512.09.  More  than  1,850  different 
publications  are  included  in  its  catalogue. 
Its  chief  periodical  is  the  National  Tem- 
perance Advocate  (monthly),  an  able 
journal.  The  Yonth's  Tevtperance  Ban- 
ner, for  children,  has  a  monthly  circula- 
tion of  more  than  100,000.  The  Water 
Lily,  another  periodical  for  children,  has 
40,000  subscribers. 

The  Society  has  been  prominently  and 
actively  identified  with  nearly  all  the 
important  work  done  for  total  abstinence 
and  Prohibition  in  the  United  States  in  , 
the  last  25  years.  It  has  given  particular 
attention  to  the  cultivation  of  temper- 
ance sentiment  auiong  the  freedmen  of 
the  South,  sending  to  them  speakers, 
missionaries  and  great  quantities  of  lit- 
erature.    The  fundamental  interests  of 


ITazarites.] 


443 


[Nebraska  Campaign. 


the  temperance  canse  have  also  been 
promoted  by  holding  conventions,  confer- 
ences and  mass-meetings,  introducing 
temperance  text-books  into  the  schools 
and  scattering  literature  in  jails,  hospitals, 
etc.  It  has  taken  especial  interest  in  the 
Prohibitory  Amendment  cam23aigns  in 
the  various  States,  providing  literature 
in  abundance  and  furnishing  speakers. 
The  Society  has  drafted  and  urged  the 
passage  of  several  of  the  representative 
measures  introduced  in  Congress — no- 
tably the  proposed  Federal  Prohibitory 
Amendment  and  the  bill  to  create  a 
Federal  Commission  to  investigate  the 
drink  traffic.  "  In  the  political  arena," 
says  the  twenty-fifth  annual  report,  "  the 
agitation  has  become  intense,  as  never 
before  during  the  history  of  our  Society, 
and  awakened  largely  by  our  energies." 

The  first  President  of  the  Society  was 
William  E.  Dodge.  Mr.  Dodge  died  in 
1883,  and  was  succeeded  bv  Mark  Hop- 
kins, D.D.  In  1885  Theodore  L.  Cuy- 
ler,  D.D.,  was  chosen  President,  and  he 
is  still  at  the  head.  The  Secretary  is 
J.  X.  Stearns;  Treasurer,  W.  D.  Porter. 

Nazarites  were  those  persons  in 
ancient  Israel  who  were  either  separated 
to  God  by  consecration  from  birth,  as 
in  the  cases  of  Samson  (Judg.  13:7), 
Samuel  (I  Sam.  1:  11,  22,  28)  and  John 
the  Baptist  (Luke  1:  15),  or  by  vow  for 
a  definite  period,  as  provided  in  Numbers 
6 :  3-6,  where  the  law  of  the  Nazarite  is 
given  as  follows :  "  When  either  man  or 
woman  shall  separate  themselves  to  vow 
a  vow  of  a  Nazarite,  to  separate  tliem- 
selves  unto  the  Lord,  he  shall  separate 
himself  from  wine  and  strong  drink,  and 
shall  drink  no  vinegar  of  wine,  or  vine- 
gar of  strong  drink,  neither  shall  he 
drink  any  liquor  of  grapes,  nor  eat  moist 
grapes,  or  dried.  All  the  days  of  his 
separation  shall  he  eat  nothing  that  is 
made  of  the  vine-tree,  from  the  kernels 
even  to  the  husk.  All  the  days  of  the 
vow  of  his  separation  there  shall  no  razor 
come  upon  his  head ;  until  the  days  be 
fulfilled,  in  the  which  he  separateth  him- 
self unto  the  Lord,  he  shall  be  holy,  and 
shall  let  the  locks  of  the  hair  of  his  head 
grow.  All  the  days  that  he  separateth 
himself  unto  the  Lord  he  shall  come  at 
no  dead  body."  In  the  case  of  a  Nazarite 
separated  for  life  the  prohibition  of  all 
intoxicants  extended  to  the  mother  dur- 


ing the  period  of  pregnancy  as  well  as  to 
the  child  after  birth.  Thus  in  Judg.  13 :  7, 
the  command  to  the  mother  of  Samson 
was :  "'  Behold,  thou  shalt  conceive,  and 
bear  a  son ;  and  now  drink  no  wine  nor 
strong  drink,  neither  eat  any  unclean 
thing,  for  the  child  shall  be  a  Nazarite  to 
God  from  the  womb  to  the  day  of  his 
death ; "  while  the  precaution  was  taken 
of  repeating  these  instructions  to  Ma- 
noah,  the  woman's  husband  (verses  13 
and  14) :  "  Of  all  that  I  said  unto  the 
woman  let  her  beware.  She  may  not  eat 
of  anything  that  cometh  of  the  vine, 
neither  let  her  drink  wine  or  strong 
drink,  nor  eat  any  unclean  thing;  all  that 
I  commanded  her  let  her  observe."  So 
also  Hannah,  the  mother  of  Samuel,  after 
her  prayer  in  the  temple  that  a  child 
might  be  given  her  whom  she  should 
consecrate  to  the  Lord,  being  charged 
with  drunkenness  by  Eli  the  priest,  re- 
plied (I  Sam.  1:5):  "'  No,  my  lord,  I  am 
a  woman  of  a  sorrowful  spirit :  I  have 
drunk  neither  Avine  nor  strong  drink,  but 
have  poured  out  my  soul  before  the 
Lord."  The  importance  of  total  absti- 
nence in  tlie  service  of  a  Nazarite  is  clearly 
shown  in  God's  reproach  to  Israel,through 
the  prophet  Amos  (2 :  10-12) :  "  I  brought 
you  up  from  the  laiul  of  Egypt,  and  led 
you  40  years  through  the  wilderness,  to 
possess  the  land  of  the  Amorites.  And  I 
raised  up  of  your  sons  for  prophets,  and 
of  your  young  men  for  Nazarites.  Is  it 
not  even  thus,  0  ye  children  of  Israel  ? 
saith  the  Lord.  But  ye  gave  the  Naza- 
rites wine  to  drink;  and  commanded  the 
jjrophets,  saying.  Prophesy  not."  Jeremi- 
ah (Lam.  4:7)  describes  Israel's  Nazarites 
as  they  Avere  in  the  sight  of  God  before 
the  time  of  her  idolatrous  abominations: 
"Her  Nazarites  Avere  purer  than  snow, 
they  were  whiter  than  milk,  they  Avere 
more  ruddy  in  body  than  rubies,  their 
polishing  was  of  sapphire." 

The  Avord  "Nazarite"  should  not  be 
confounded  Avith  "  Nazarene."  The  lat- 
ter had  no  special  significance  in  the 
early  history  of  the  Jcavs,  and  in  Christ's 
time  and  for  many  years  after  Avas  used 
simply  as  a  name  for  a  person  born  in 
Nazareth. 

Nebraska  Campaign. — Since  tbe 
article  on  Constitutioxal  Prohibition' 
was  finished  the  Prohibitory  Amend- 
ment campaign  in  the  State  of  Nebraska 


Nebraska  Campaign.] 


444 


[Nebraska  Campaign. 


has  been  fought,  resulting  in  the  defeat 
of  the  measure  by  a  considerable  major- 
ity. This  contest  overshadowed  in  im- 
portance all  that  had  preceded  it:  even 
in  the  Massachusetts  and  Pennsylvania 
campaigns  of  1889  there  was  not  so 
much  at  stake.  Nebraska  was  the  first 
►State  to  adopt  the  $1,000  license  system, 
and  a  repudiation  of  that  policy  by  pop- 
ular vote  after  a  nine  years'  trial  would 
have  gone  far  toward  putting  an  end  to 
the  High  License  compromise.  Success 
there  would  liave  established  State  Pro- 
hibition throughout  a  wide  strip  of  ter- 
ritory from  the  Canadian  border  to 
Texas.  This  w^ould  have  been  of  im- 
mense advantage  to  the  movement  for 
permanent  and  comprehensive  rather 
than  experimental  and  local  Prohibition, 
and  for  rigid  enforcement  over  a  great 
area  of  the  countrv;  since  the  auti- 
liquor  interests  of  the  five  States  of 
North  Dakota,  South  Dakota,  Iowa, 
Nebraska  and  Kansas,  and  the  Indian 
and  Oklahoma  Territories,  would  have 
become  identical,  and  the  possibility  of 
repeal  would  have  been  practically  re- 
moved in  each  of  tliem  by  the  moral  and 
political  effect  of  so  significant  a 
victory.  This  was  also  the  most  in- 
structive of  Prohibition  campaigns, 
showing,  more  convincingly  than  had 
ever  been  done,  the  artfulness  and  cow^- 
ardice  of  the  liquor  traffic,  the  decep- 
tions and  unscrupulousness  of  its  de- 
fenders and  their  absolute  inability  to 
contend  with  tlie  Prohibitionists  by  legit- 
imate methods;  the  corruption  of  the 
press,  the  servility  of  politicians  and  the 
comparative  feebleness  of  a  righteous 
cause  when  resisted  determinedly  by 
well-organized  combinations  of  desper- 
ate, selfish  and  shrewd  men. 

The  circumstances  leading  to  the 
enactment  of  Nebraska's  liquor  law,  and 
much  evidence  of  its  entire  failure  as  a 
temperance  measure,  are  presented  in 
IIujH  LiOENSK.  Dissatisfaction  with  the 
act  began  to  develop  after  two  or  three 
years,  and  increased  steadily.  The  de- 
mand for  submission  of  a  Prohibitoiy 
Amendment,  first  urged  in  1881,  was 
renewed  in  1883,  and  was  made  a  lead- 
ing feature  of  political  agitation  in  each 
subsequent  year.  The  defeat  of  the  sub- 
mission resolution  in  the  Republican 
Legislature  of  188;>  led  to  tlie  organiza- 
tion of  the  Prohibition  party  in  1884  and 


the  polling  of  2,899  votes  for  St.  John. 
In  1885  the  Prohibition  vote  rose  to 
4,445.  By  188G  the  movement  had  be- 
come so  stroiig  that  the  rural  element 
compelled  the  Republican  State  Conven- 
tion, despite  the  opposition  of  the  most 
prominent  party  leaders,  to  pledge  sub- 
mission. This  action  did  not  check  the 
Prohibition  party,  which  increased  its 
vote  to  8,175.  In  the  Legislature  of 
188?  the  pledge  was  repudiated  and  sub- 
mission was  again  voted  down.  The 
question  was  excitedly  debated  in  the 
Republican  Convention  of  1887,  and  the 
anti-Prohibition  managers  of  that  body 
persuaded  the  temperance  people  to  omit 
the  pledge  from  the  platform  and  refer 
the  subject  for  final  decision  to  the  Re- 
pulilican  primaries  of  1888.  The  Prohi- 
bition party  once  more  showed  respect- 
able strength,  polling  7,359  votes  at  the 
State  election  of  1887.  In  1888  great 
efforts  were  made  by  the  liquor  element 
of  the  Republican  party  to  secure  a 
majority  of  the  delegates  to  the  State 
Convention,  and  the  pro-liquor  leaders 
carefully  organized  the  Committee  on 
Resolutions  so  as  to  defeat  the  Submis- 
sionists.  This  Committee  accordingly 
brought  in  a  report  in  which  submission 
was  ig]iored.  But  the  sentiment  for 
Prohibition  prevailed  against  all  the  arts 
of  the  "  bosses ;"  an  appeal  was  taken  to 
the  Convention,  and  after  an  all-night 
debate  the  pledge  of  1886  was  re-adopted 
by  a  vote  of  310  to  290.  At  the  Presi- 
dential election  the  Prohibition  party 
had  a  larger  following  than  ever  before, 
and  cast  9,429  votes  for  Fisk.  The 
Legislature  of  1889  was  so  cunningly 
manipulated  by  the  saloon  politicians 
that  submission  barely  escaped  a  fifth 
defeat;  although  the  Republicans  had  7G 
votes  in  the  liouse  in  a  total  of  100,  and 
27  of  the  33  Senators,  the  Submission 
resolution  carried  in  the  House  by  a 
majority  of  only  one  vote  (given  by  a 
Democrat),  and  even  then  the  Submis- 
sionistswere  compelled  to  agree  toan  alter- 
native Amendment  ])rovidingfor  license. 
It  cannot  be  doubted  that  the  popu- 
lar feeling  in  Nebraska  was  overwhelm- 
ingly in  favor  of  Prohibition  up  to  the 
time  of  submission  in  1889.  The  growth 
of  the  Proliibition  party  and  the  uncom- 
promising utterances  of  the  religious  de- 
iu:)minations  (see  pp.  214-15)  were  most 
sio-nificant.     The  bitterness  with  which 


Nebraska  Campaign.] 


445 


[Nebraska  Campaign. 


the  liquor  men  and  their  political  sup- 
porters fought  the  demand  for  a  vote  on 
the  question  was  a  tacit  acknowledge- 
ment that  submission  and  Prohibition 
were  equivalent  terms.  And  when  the 
character  of  this  opposition  is  considered, 
it  is  hard  to  resist  the  conclusion  that 
the  submission  majorities  in  the  Repub- 
lican Conventions  of  188G  and  1888  were 
given  on  the  merits  of  the  Prohibition 
question  itself  as  understood  by  a  ma- 
jority of  the  people.  The  Republican 
party  had  for  years  been  dominated  by  a 
number  of  very  able  and  aggressive  anti- 
Prohibitionists,  like  John  M.  Thurston, 
Governor  Thayer  and  Edward  Rosewater 
(editor  of  the  Omaha  Bee) ;  Peter  E.  Her, 
the  noted  Omaha  distiller,  was  also  one 
of  the  recognized  Republican  leaders. 
These  men,  with  others  equally  hostile 
to  Prohibition,  were  accustomed  to  shape 
the  party's  policy.  From  the  first  they 
fought  submission  not  so  much  because 
they  denied  the  right  of  the  people  to 
vote  on  the  subject  as  because  they  rec- 
ognized that  Prohibition  would  probably 
carry  if  a  vote  were  taken.  Throughout 
Nebraska  it  was  understood  that  this 
reason  animated  the  anti-Submissionists; 
and  certainly  no  one  really  opjjosed  to 
Prohibition  could  have  afforded  to  ignore 
the  opinions  of  these  experienced  poli- 
ticians or  to  regard  the  submission  plan 
with  approval  or  indifference.  To  stifle 
the  submission  sentiment  very  disrepu- 
table work  was  done.  It  was  testified  by 
Mr.  Iler,  in  a  legislative  bribery  investi- 
gation in  1889,  that  in  order  to  prejudice 
the  minds  of  Nebraska  voters  he  induced 
the  proprietor  of  the  Omaha  Bee  to  print 
a  number  of  letters  from  Iowa  discredit- 
ing the  effects  of  Prohibition  (these  let- 
ters having  been  prepared  with  the 
greatest  unfairness),  and  sent  many 
copies  of  the  Bee  containing  them  to  the 
constituents  of  legislators,  expending 
14,000  for  this  purpose:  that  in  the 
legislative  campaigns  of  1888  he  spent 
from  $4,000  to  $5, .500  to  elect  men 
pledged  against  submission,  and  that  at 
the  legislative  session  of  1889,  when  the 
Submission  bill  was  up  for  final  passage, 
he  secretly  went  to  Lincoln  (the  State 
capital)  and  gave  to  a  professional 
lobbyist  the  sum  of  $3,500,  to  be  used 
(without  limitations  or  conditions)  for 
strengthening  the  anti-submission  fol- 
lowing  in   the   Legislature. 


The  proposed  Prohibitory  Amendment 
was  as  follows:' 

"The  manufacture,  sale  and  keeping  for  sale 
of  intoxicaiiuic  liquors  as  a  beverage  are  for- 
ever prohibited  in  this  State,  and  the  Legisla- 
ture shall  provide  by  law  for  the  enforcement  of 
this  provision." 

Concurrently  with  this  there  was  submit- 
ted another  Amendment  jDroviding  that 

"  The  manufacture,  sale  and  keeping  for  sale 
of  intoxicating  liquors  as  a  beverage  shall  be 
licensed  and  regulated  by  law." 

The  two  Amendments  were  to  be  voted 
on  separately,  the  4th  day  of  November, 
1890.  For  the  adoption  of  either  prop- 
osition it  was  necessary  to  poll  a  ma- 
jority of  all  the  votes  cast  for  State 
officers  the  same  day. 

Preparations  for  the  campaign  began 
soon  after  the  fall  elections  of  1889.  To 
insure  harmony  a  union  of  the  Pro- 
hibition party.  Good  Templars  and 
Woman's  Christian  Temperance  Union 
was  effected.  Early  in  1890  an  Inter- 
State  League  of  friends  of  Prohibition 
in  Iowa,  Kansas,  the  Dakotas  and  Ne- 
braska was  formed  to  assist  the  Ne- 
braska agitation.  The  chief  work  of  the 
campaign  was  done  by  the  Prohibition 
party,  under  the  direction  of  A.  G.  Wol- 
fenbarger,  A.  Roberts,  H.  C.  Bitten- 
bender  and  others,  with  the  co-operation 
of  the  W.  C.  T.  U.'  and  Good  Templars. 
The  Inter-State  League  held  important 
meetings,  addressed  by  eminent  public 
men  from  Kansas  and  Iowa,  and  the 
testimony  that  they  bore  to  the  sviccess 
of  Prohibition  in  practice  was  very  help- 
ful to  the  cause.  The  League  also  cir- 
culated considerable  literature.  A  non- 
partisan State  organization  performed 
some  good  service,  but  the  results  of  its 
labors  were  disappointing  to  those  who 
looked  to  it  to  take  the  lead.  The  New 
York  Voice,  by  appeals  to  the  temper- 
ance people  of  the  country,  raised  about 
134,000  for  the  campaign,  of  which  a  part 
was  used  for  sending  that  newspaper  to  a 
selected  list  of  names  and  the  remainder 
was  paid  over  to  the  Nebraska  organiza- 
tions. The  State  was  thoroughly  can- 
vassed by  the  best  Prohibition  speakers 
and  earnest  support  was  given  by  the 
clergy  and  other  classes  of  conscientious 
and  intelligent  citizens. 

From  the  beginning  there  were   sig- 


'  See  the  "  Nebraslca  Ilonse  Journal  for  1889,"  pp.  1,339- 
70;  also  the  Voice,  March  13,  1690. 


Nebraska  Campaign.] 


446 


[Nebraska  Cajnpaign. 


nificant  indications  of  the  determination 
of  the  liquor  leaders  to  hazard  any 
amount  of  money  and  resort  to  any  prac- 
tices necessary  for  winning  the  election 
in  Nebraska.  The  national  organs  of  the 
traffic,  as  early  as  January,  1890,  showed 
full  appreciation  of  the  importance  of  the 
contest,  the  Brewers'  Jour  mil  declaring 
that  it  was  to  be  "a  fight  for  life  and  death 
of  Prohibition."  The  United  Stat&s 
Brewers'  Association,  at  its  annual  Con- 
vention in  1890,  amended  its  constitu- 
tion so  as  to  double  the  rates  of 
assessment  upon  members  and  thus  pro- 
duce a  doubled  income  (see  foot-note, 
p.  381) ;  and  there  can  hardly  be  a  doubt 
that  this  action  was  taken  with  a  view 
to  making  a  great  contribution  to  the 
anti-Prohibition  fund  in  Nebraska,  since 
there  was  no  other  important  emergency 
then  before  the  "  trade." 

In  the  winter  months  of  1890  a  letter 
was  sent  from  Lincoln,  Neb.,  to  repre- 
sentative distillers,  brewers  and  liquor- 
sellers  in  various  States,  defining  the 
issues  at  stake  and  asking  for  opinions 
and  suggestions.  The  writer  was  a  Pro- 
hibitionist, and  his  object  was  to  test  the 
views  of  the  "  trade  "  at  large  as  to  the 
situation  and  as  to  the  methods  that 
ought  to  be  used  by  the  foes  of  Prohibi- 
tion. Many  answers  were  received,  all 
exhibiting  lively  interest ;  and  the  plain- 
est intimations  were  given  that  it  would 
be  unwise  to  make  the  contest  in  a 
straightforward  way,  to  engage  in  a  dis- 
cussion of  the  question  on  its  merits  or 
to  permit  the  rumsellers  to  take  any 
prominent  part  publicly  in  the  agitation, 
that  strenuous  appeals  should  be  made  to 
the  selfishness  of  voters  by  dwelling  upon 
the  revenue  aspects  of  High  License, 
that  no  pains  should  be  spared  to  bribe 
the  newspapers  of  the  State  and  the 
politicians  of  both  the  leading  parties, 
and  that,  in  general,  the  hopes  of  the 
traffic  depended  entirely  upon  suppressing 
fair  argument  and  employing  large  sums 
of  money  shrewdly  and  unscrupulously. 
The  success  attending  such  tactics  in 
former  Amendment  struggles  was  frankly 
described  and  much  secret  information 
was  imparted.  (Quotations  from  the  let- 
ters are  made  in  various  articles  in  this 
work.  See  especially  pp.  119,  125-6 
and  319-20.  For  the  letters  in  detail 
see  the  Voice  for  April  3  and  17,  and 
May  8,  1890.     The  Crowell-Cheves  rev- 


elations  [see    pp.    120-2]   were    among 
the  results  of  this  correspondence.) 

Another  interesting  exposure  was  made 
in  April.  Nebraska  is  an  agricultural 
State,  and  it  was  necessary  for  the  liquor 
advocates  to  propagandize  among  the 
farmers.  Before  the  campaign  had  fairly 
opened  thousands  of  Nebraska  farmers 
received  in  their  mails  copies  of  a  pre- 
tended agricultural  newspaper,  the  Farm 
Herald.  This  journal  was  filled  with 
anti-Prohibition  pleas.  To  the  ordinary 
reader,  however,  it  appeared  to  be  issued 
by  disinterested  men,  for  there  was  noth- 
ing to  show  that  it  emanated  from 
liquor  sources;  the  name  of  "  The  Amer- 
ican Printing  Company,  Louisville, 
Ky.,"  was  given  as  that  of  the  responsi- 
ble publisher.  Investigation  proved  that 
this  company  had  no  separate  identity, 
but  was  a  mere  disguise  for  the  great 
whiskey  organization  known  as  the  Na- 
tional Protective  Association,  while  the 
Farm  Herald  had  no  list  of  bona  fide 
subscribers  and  was  edited  in  a  whiskey 
establishment  in  Louisville.  (See  the 
Voice,  April  17,  1890.) 

The  ardor  and  intolerance  with  which 
the  drunkard-makers'  cause  was  cham- 
pioned by  the  leading  newspapers  of 
Nebraska  excited  suspicions ;  and  to  as- 
certain the  motives  of  their  attitude  a 
letter  was  mailed  from  Louisville  in  May 
to  Nebraska  editors,  asking  them  to  name 
the  rates  for  which  they  would  print  in 
their  editorial  and  news  columns  such 
anti-Prohibition  matter  as  should  be  fur- 
nished them  by  the  negotiator.  Accom- 
panying the  letter  was  a  printed  slip  con- 
taining glaringly  unfair  and  dishonest 
anti-Prohibition  statistics:  this  Avas  sub- 
mitted as  a  specimen  of  the  articles  that 
would  be  provided.  About  60  newspaper 
proprietors  responded,^  eagerly  oifering 


•  This  revelation  gave  rise  to  one  of  the  popular  songs 
of  the  campaign: 

"Dear  Sir:  I'll  print  your  whiskey  views  for  40  cents  a 

line; 
I'll  print  them.  too.  dear  sir,  as  news,  for  40  cents  a  line. 
I'll  sell  out  home,  and  country,  too,  for  40  cents  a  line, — 
Yes,  everything  for  revenue,— just  40  cents  a  line. 

"  For  editorial  I  must  have  50  cents  a  line; 
This  husiness  may  my  paper  bust,  this  40  cents  a  line. 
The  .louriinl  I  will  sell  to  you  at  4(>  cents  a  line,— 
To  tight  the  rummies'  battle  thro',  for  40  cents  a  line. 

"  And  hearts  may  bleed,  and  mothers  sigh,  yet  40  cents  a 

line 
Will  close  my  ear  to  every  cry,  just  40  cents  a  line. 
All   hail   the  man  who  can't  be  bought,  for  40  cents  a 

line — 
W'hom  Turner  letters  never  caught,  for  40  cents  a  line  I" 


Nebraska  Campaign.] 


4V, 


[Nebraska  Campaign. 


to  sell  their  columns  to  the  liquor  men, 
without  regard  to  the  character  of   the 
"  matter."     Among  the  journals   repre- 
sented were  the  most  influential  dailies  of 
the  State,  including  the    Lincoln  t^fafe 
Jounial  and  the  Omaha  Bee  and  Repub- 
lican.    (See  the  Voice,  May  29,  June   5 
and  12,  1890.)     The  liquor  leaders  took 
advantage   of    the   greed   of    the  press. 
Several  prominent  Journals  that  favored 
Prohibition  at  the  start  found  it  impossi- 
ble to   resist   the  tempting  bribes  that 
.came  to  them  from  saloon  headquarters. 
Most  of  the    representative   newspapers 
ranked  with  the  dramshops  themselves 
as   partisan   promoters  of  the  cause  of 
rum;  no  quarter  or  courtesy  was  shown 
to  the  Prohibitionists ;  the  most  impres- 
sive  evidence   ever   presented   touching 
the  practical  benefits  of  a  scheme  of  pub- 
lic policy  was  ignored,  and  false  and  dis- 
torted figures,  reports  and  claims  were 
deliberately  paraded.     Against  this  news- 
paper  opposition   the   advocates  of  the 
Amendment  were  all  but  powerless.   The 
printed  exposures,  while  circulated  exten- 
sively  by  such  papers  as  the  Voice,  the 
Chicago  Lever, t\\Q;  Lincoln  New  EepuMic 
and  the  Lincoln  Biiili/  Call  (the  only  im- 
portant daily  that  favored  Prohibition), 
either  did  not  reach  the  masses  of  the 
people  or  were  regarded  by  the  average 
reader  as  less  authoritative  than  the  de- 
clarations  of   organs  whose   statements 
and  opinions  had  always  been  respected. 
In  the  conduct  of  the  camjoaign  the 
example  set  by  tlie  Eastern  liquor  organi- 
zations was  carefully  copied.  The  liquor- 
dealers,  as  such,  did  not  engage  openly 
in  the  fight.    They  effected  preparations, 
however,  early  in  the  spring,  and  com- 
initted  the  work  to  a  so-called  "  Business 
Glen's  and  Bankers'  Association."     This 
name  was  chosen  to  mislead  the  public 
and  to  secure  the  co-operation  of  respect- 
able citizens.     It  was  afterward    shown 
that  G3  per  cent,  of  the  Nebraska  bank- 
ers were   for   the  Amendment   (see  the 
Voice,    Oct.   3,    1890),  while  more  than 
2,700  business  men  (including  many  in 
Oniaha  and    other    important    centers) 
signed  either  the  following  statement  or 
a  similar  one : 

"  Wliereas,  The  defenders  and  apologists  of 
the  hcensed  Hquor  traffic  in  Nebraska  and  the 
nation  have  organized  a  so-called  '  Business 
Men's  and  Bankers'  Association '  to  serve  the 
interests  of  the  brewers,  distillers  and  saloon- 


keepers in  a  desperate  effort  to  defeat  Consti- 
tutional Prohibition  in  this  State;  and 

"  Whereas,  The   various    branches   of  legiti- 
mate business  are  associated  in  the  declarations  of  ' 
this  society  with  the  opposition  to  Constitutional  [ 
Prohibition,  therefore 

"We,  the  undersigned  business  men  and 
bankers  of  the  State  of  Nebraska,  do  hereby 
protest  against  the  unwaiTanted  assertion  of  the 
friends  of  the  licensed  liquor  traffic  that  '  Pro- 
hibition is  inimical  to  the  material  welfare  of 
the  State,'  and  assert  as  our  deliberate  judgment 
and  belief: 

"1.  That  Constitutional  Prohibition,  in  out- 
lawing and  abolishing  the  saloon,  will  greatly 
stimulate  and  benefit  all  lines  of  legitimate  busi- 
ness. 

"2.  That  the  vast  amount  of  money,  amount- 
ing to  many  millions  of  dollars  annually,  now 
being  squandered  for  drink  in  the  saloons  of 
Nebraska,  will  by  the  adoption  of  the  pend- 
ing Prohibitory  Amendment  be  turned  into  the 
proper  channels  of  trade,  resulting  in  untold 
benefits  to  the  business  man  and  banker,  as  well 
as  to  the  toiling  thousands  on  whom  the  finan- 
cial prosperity  of  this  country  depends. 

"We  therefore  advise  all  who  would  con- 
serve the  material,  educational  and  moral  wel- 
fare of  Nebraska,  and  who  would  invite  to  our 
State  the  most  desirable  classes  of  in~.migrants, 
to  woik  and  vote  for  Constitutional  Prohibition 
Nov.  4,  1890."' 

The  arrogance  with  which  it  was 
claimed  that  the  material  interests  of 
Nebraska  would  be  promoted  and  her 
moral  and  religious  interests  would  not 
be  injured  by  the  rejection  of  the  Amend- 
ment induced  the  Prohibitionists  to 
seek  opinions  from  highly  represent- 
ative leaders  of  special  classes,  like  the 
workingmen,  farmers,  clergy  and  teach- 
ers. The  following  appeal  to  wage- 
workers  was  issued,  signed  by  42  of  the 
foremost  leaders  of  organized  labor :" 

"  To  the  Workingmen  of  Nebraska: 
"  We  believe  that  the  saloon  system  is  no 
help  to  organized  labor  in  its  endeavors  to  secure 
the  just  demands  of  the  workingmen;  that  the 
abolition  of  the  cornq^ting  intluences  of  the 
saloon  in  politics  would  help  in  the  endeavor  to 
elect  honest  men  to  office  who  will  act  as  the 
representatives  of  the  whole  people  and  not  as 
the  tools  of  individuals  or  a  particular  class. 
"  We  believe  that  the  prosperity  of  a  people 

1  See  the   Voice,  Oct.  2,  1890. 

2  Anion?  others,  by  the  Grand  Chief  Conductor  of  the 
Brotherhood  of  Kailway  Conductors,  the  General  Secre- 
tary of  the  Hatmakers'  National  Association,  the  Presi- 
dent, Secretary  and  Treasurer  of  the  United  Mine-Work- 
ers of  America,  the  General  Secretary  of  the  Boot  and 
Shoemakers'  International  Union,  the  President  of  the 
Tackmakers'  Protective  Union,  the  President  of  the 
Journeymen  Barbers'  Independent  National  Union  of 
America,  the  General  Secretary  of  the  Amalsamated 
Carpenters'  National  Union,  the  General  Secretary  of  the 
United  Brotherhood  of  Printers  and  Decorators  of  America, 
the  General  Secretary  of  the  Horse  Collarmakers'  Na- 
tional Union,  a  (ieneral  Organizer  of  the  American  Federa- 
tion of  Labor  and  30  iiitluential  Knights  of  Labor.  (See 
the  Voice,  Oct.  23,  1890.) 


Nebraska  Campaign.] 


448 


[Nebraska  Campaign. 


does  not  depend  npon  retaining  an  institution 
which  tends  to  corrupt  and  weaken  its  indi- 
vidual members,  and  that  the  power  of  organized 
hibor  would  be  greater  to-day  were  it  not  for 
the  debauching  intiuence  of  saloons. 

"  Workingmen  of  Nebraska  need  not  hesitate 
to  vote  for  the  abolition  of  the  saloon  through 
fear  of  the  infringement  of  'personal  li])erty.' 
On  the  contrary,  there  is  reason  to  believe  that 
with  the  saloon  system  abolished  and  the  work- 
ingmen sober,  united  and  steadfast,  our  liberties 
will  become  more  secure  and  our  advancement 
toward  justice  more  certain." 

This  address  to  the  farmers  received 
the  signatures  of  31  leaders  of  agrictil- 
tural  organizations: ' 

"  To  the  Farmers  of  Nehrafikn: 

"We  believe  that  Prohibition  of  the  liquor 
traffic  would  benefit  the  farmer  by  removing 
one  of  the  principal  causes  of  crim.e  and  thus 
tending  to  reduce  his  taxes;  by  increasing  the 
demand  for  food  and  clothing  (the  raw  materials 
lor  which  are  produced  by  the  farmer)  among  a 
large  class  who  now  spend  their  money  in  the 
saloons,  and  by  destroying  one  of  the  main 
sources  of  corruption  in  politics — the  purchas- 
able saloon  vote. 

"  A  sober  people  can  be  more  readily  brought 
to  consider  and  right  the  wrongs  of  the  farmers 
and  other  mijustly  treated  classes  than  a  people 
a  consideral)ie  portion  of  which,  owing  to  the 
debasing  influence  of  the  saloon,  can  be  con- 
trolled tor  private  purposes  on  election  day. 

"We  have  no  faith  in  the  reports  which  have 
been  circulated  that  Prohibition  is  the  cause  of 
the  depressed  condition  of  agriculture  in  States 
that  have  outlawed  the  saloon.  The  cjiuses  of 
depressed  agriculture  are  other  and  exist  in  li- 
cense as  well  as  Prohibition  States. 

"We  believe  that  the  farmers  of  Nebraska 
can  vote  for  the  pending  Prohibitory  Amend- 
ment without  fear  of  injury  to  their  interests, 
but  rather  in  the  belief  that  good  will  result  to 
them  through  this  proposed  outlawing  of  the 
liquor  traffic. " 

Distinguislied  leaders  of  religions 
denominations  showed  their  interest 
by  issuing  the  following  (to  which  55 
names  were  signed)  •.'^ 

"  To  the  Christian  Voters  of  Nebraska : 
"  We,   the   undersigned,    Christian  ministers 
and  officers  of  various  denominations,  unite  in 
urging  the  Christian  citizens  of  Nebraska  to  ex- 

'Inciudins;  the  Secretary  of  the  American  Shorthorn 
Breeders'  Assotiation,  the  e.x-Secretary  of  the  Northwest- 
ern Dairymens'  Association,  the  Secretary  of  the  Ameri- 
can Ilortitultnral  Society,  the  Secretary  of  tiie  American 
Galloway  Breeders'  National  Association,  the  Secretary 
of  the  Ayreshire  Breeders'  National  Association,  the 
Superintendent  of  Advanced  Registry  of  the  Holstein- 
P'riesian  Association  of  America,  the  Presidents  or  Secre- 
taries of  State  Gran>;;ers  or  Farmers'  Alliances  for  the 
States  of  Nelira«ka.  Alabama.  Tennessee.  Louisiana, 
Texas,  North  Dakota.  Miclii<;an,  Illinois,  New  Jersey, 
Colorado.  Kentucky,  North  Carolina,  and  the  bidian  and 
New  Mexico  Teiritories,  as  well  as  editors  of  prominent 
aairicultural  journals.    i^See  the  Voice,  Oct.  23,  18!K1.) 

2  Includina;  ten  Bishops  of  the  IMethodist  Episcopal 
Church,  two  Bishops  of  tlie  t'nited  Brethren  Church, 
three  Presidents  of  colleges,  and  Secretaries,  Vice-Presi- 
dents, etc.,  of  very  prominent  societies  and  boards.  tSee 
the  Voice,  Oct.  30,  1«90.) 


ert  their  influence  against  the  further  legali- 
zation of  the  saloons,  and  to  vote  for  the  Pro- 
hibitory Amendment.  We  believe  that  the 
moral  and  religious  inteiests  not  only  of  Ne- 
braska but  of  the  entire  country  are  involved  in 
the  issue  of  the  ]iresent  campaign  in  Nebraska. 
The  triumph  of  the  saloons  must  ever  be  a 
calamity  to  the  church  as  well  as  to  the  State. 
Intemperance  is  something  more  than  a  politi- 
cal evil ;  it  is  a  sin  against  God,  and  the  licensed 
saloon  is  a  legalized  and  organized  temptation 
to  conimit  that  sin.  As  the  New  York  Tribune 
said  several  years  ago: 

'• '  There  is  to-day  in  the  English-spenkinij  countries  no 
such  tremendous,  far-reachine,  vital  fjiicstion  as  that  of 
dnnikenness.  In  its  implications  and  etfects  it  over- 
shadows all  else.  It  is  impossitjle  to  examine  any  sub- 
ject connected  with  the  progress,  the  civilization,  the 
physical  well-being,  the  religious  condition  of  the  masses, 
without  encountering  this  monstrous  evil.  It  lies  at  the 
center  of  all  social  and  political  mischief.  It  paralyzes  all 
benericent  energies  in  every  direction.  It  neutralizes  edu- 
cational agencies.    It  silences  the  voice  of  religion.' 

"  There  is,  therefore,  an  irrepressible  conflict 
between  the  church  and  the  liqtior  traffic. 
License,  high  or  low,  provides  for  the  continu- 
ance of  the  traffic  and  offers  no  adequate  bar- 
riers against  its  evils.  The  duty  of  the  Chris- 
tian seems  to  us  to  be  clear.  It  is  to  assist  in 
every  legitimate  way  to  put  an  end  to  a  legal- 
ized traffic  which  can  prosper  only  by  debauch- 
ing men,  wreaking  untold  misery  upon  the 
homes  of  the  community." 

Twenty-four  County  Superintendents 
of  Public  Instruction  in  ^'ebraska  joined 
in  this  appeal: 

"  To  the  Friends  of  Education  in  Nebraska: 

"  We  believe  in  the  long  rim  that  the  cause 
of  public  education  woidd  be  greatly  benefited 
by  the  abolition  of  the  saloon  sj-.stem.  Under 
Prohibition  enforced  a  large  per  cent,  of  our 
school  children  would  be  better  fed,  better 
clothed,  better  trained  at  home,  better  siqiplied 
with  books  and  consequently  belter  fitted  to  re- 
ceive and  profit  by  the  instruction  given  in  the 
schools. 

"Prohibition  would  tend  to  increase  the 
attendance  at  the  schools.  Teachers  would"  be 
more  respected,  because  thej^  would  be  able  to 
attain  better  results  with  pupils  freed  from  the 
curse  of  ruined  homes  and  drunken  parents. 

"We  have  no  sympathy  witli  the  cry  that 
the  license  money  paid  by  the  saloon  is  neces- 
sary to  sustain  an  efficient  public  school  system. 
On  the  contrary  we  believe  that  were  the  saloon 
system  utterly  abolished  it  would  residt  in  a 
greatly  increased  interest  in  the  support  and 
development  of  oiu'  schools. 

"The  iriends  of  our  jmblic  school  system 
need  not  hesitate  to  vote  for  Prohibition  at  the 
coming  election  through  any  fear  of  injuring 
the  cause  of  education." 

It  became  evident  in  the  closing  month 
of  the  canvass  that  the  liquor  managers 
Avere  engaged  in  systematically  })urchas- 
ing  the  services  of  the  political  workers. 
The  chief  l)arty  leaders,  with  few  excep- 
tions, were  already  on  their  side.  And 
now  it  was  discovered  that  throughout 
the  State   politicians  of  local  intiuence 


Nebraska  Campaign.] 


449 


[Nebraska  Campaign. 


wore  to  be  bribed  to  work  against  the 
Amendment  at  the  polls.  This  was  re- 
vealed in  statements  made  in  confiden- 
tial letters  from  Dr.  George  L.  Miller,  of 
the  Executive  Committee  of  the  Business 
Men's  and  Bankers'  Association,  to  an 
Albany,  (N.  Y.)  correspondent.  Dr.  Mil- 
ler wrote,  in  part  : 

"We  can  understand  the  importance  to  you  ' 
of  success  here  in  tlie  contest  before  us  which 
is  now  on  and  in  full  activity,  but  on  our  part 
not  noisy  activity.  .  .  .  Our  policy  has  been  to 
reserve  our  closiug-in  fire  until  the  later  days  of 
the  contest,  and  for  this  we  shall  need  every 
dollar  we  can  lay  our  hands  on.  This  is  equiv- 
alent to  saying  that  we  shall  be  glad  to  receive 
from  you  the  amount  you  suggest,  and  we  need 
not  say  how  much  we  appreciate  your  thought 
of  us.  .  .  .  Our  Treasurer,  Mr.  Coe,  recently 
retiu'ned  from  a  visit  to  Peoria  to  meet  the  mag- 
nates of  the  Whiskey  Trust,  with  a  view  to  ob- 
taining instant  aid.  ...  A  Mr.  Turner,  of  the 
Louisville  bureau,  and  Mr.  P.  E.  Her,  of  this 
town,  had  led  us  to  rely  upon  large  help  from 
that  quarter.  .  .  .  As  to  the  brewers,  within  the 
last  past  10  days  the  Omaha  brewers  have 
secured  a  conditional  subscription  of  $2o,000 
from  the  brewers  in  Omaha  and  outside  of  the 
State.  1  understand  the  condition  of  the  sub- 
scription to  have  been  that  the  Whiskey  Trust 
shall  subscribe  an  equal  amount.   .   .  . 

"  I  regret  that  my  letter  Vi-a?  defective  in  not 
being  sutticiently  explicit  as  to  our  plan  of  cam- 
paign. I  assiuue  that  when  you  were  assured 
that  the  conditions  upon  which  your  proposed 
contributions  would  be  made  would  be  care- 
fully observed,  you  could  trust  us  to  do  the 
best  that  could  be  done  in  placing  the  money 
where  it  would  do  the  most  good  in  getting  the 
greatest  number  of  anti- Amendment  votes  into 
the  ballot-boxes.  I  make  amends  by  stating 
that  our  plans  are  well  matured  to  do  with  our 
money  precisely  what  I  understand  you  would 
do  with  it  were  you  and  your  Association  on  the 
ground  in  person,  with  tlie  exception,  viz. :  Our 
plan  emi)loys  two  managing  politicians  in  each 
Congressional  District  (we  have  three  districts, 
and  our  voting  territory  covers  70,000  square 
miles),  whose  duty  it  is  to  direct  the  local  con- 
tests on  non-partisan  lines ;  these  men,  care- 
fully chosen,  aid  the  Executive  Committee  in 
choosing  men  in  the  1,800  voting  precincts  of  the 
State  whose  duty  it  will  be  to  work  at  the  polls 
to  the  last  liour  on  election  day  for  our  cause — 
one  man  from  the  Ilepublicau  party  and  one 
from  the  Democratic  party.  This  is  the  plan. 
As  you  may  justly  infer,  our  plan  is  a  wise  one. 
Our  wliole  trouble  is  to  get  enough  money  to 
carry  it   out.  .  .  . 

"As  you  will  see  by  the  printed  statement 
I  send  you  we  are  reserving  every  dollar  for 
the  closing    days  of  the  contest,  fullj^    apprc- 


'  Dr.  Miller  cherishetJ  the  impression  that  hi?  corre- 
apoiident  was  a  representati'.e  of  a  New  York  liquor  or- 
ganization which  was  considerina;  the  advisability  of 
contributing!;  S''J-*1'W  to  the  Nebraska  anti-Prohibition 
campaign  fund,  in  the  hope  that  the  defeat  of  the  Amend- 
ment in  Nebr.iska  would  check  the  Constitutional  Pro- 
hibition agitation  in  New  York, 


ciating  all  you  say  on  this  head.  We  are  net 
novices  in  politics  in  Nebraslca.   .   .   . 

"  Two  or  more  non-panisau  workers  are  to  bo 
employed  at  the  voting  places. 

"  Mr.  P.E.  Her,  our  chief  distiller,  telegraphs 
Mr.  Davis  of  our  1st  National  Bank  U)-day 
that  the  Peoria  gentlemen  (the  Whiskey  Trust) 
have  made  an  appropriation  to  (jur  cause,  but 
we  know  nothing  about  the  amount.   .  .   . 

"  Good  judgments  here  concur  in  the  belief 
that  by  reserving  our  fire  until  the  last  we  can 
beat  the  Amendment.  .  .  .  Any  who  doubt  our 
ability  can  send  prudent  men  "to  see  the  things 
done,  but  in  no  event  can  we  consent  to  any- 
thing like  an  open  association  with  the  liquor 
interests  of  the  country. "'  ^ 

The  naturally  powerful  rum  element 
in  the  cities  of  Nebraska  had  been  stead- 
ily and  materially  strengthened  by  the 
immigration  of  ex-saloon  keepers  and 
foreign-born  citizens  from  Iowa  and 
Kansas.  Omaha  had  become  the  great- 
est liquor  center  between  Kansas  CUty 
and  the  Pacific  coast.  It  v/as  generally 
expected  that  the  United  States  Census 
for  1890  (taken  in  June)  would  accredit 
to  all  the  Nebraska  cities  large  gains  in 
population;  but  few  were  prepared  for 
the  startling  figures  announced  by  the 
Census  Bureau.  The  population  of 
Omaha,  which  had  been  only  30,518  in 
1880,  was  now  placed  at  139,405;^  and 
Lincoln,  containing  only  13,003  inhab- 
itants in  1880,  was  given  55,273.  Sys- 
tematic canvasses  of  the  two  cities,  made 
by  the  Prohibitionists  in  the  fall,  re- 
sulted in  the  discovery  that  the  Census 
enumerators  had  added  many  thousands 
to  the  actual  totals.  It  Avas  charged  that 
the  officials  had  deliberately  conspired 
with  the  saloon  managers  to  so  swell  the 
returns  that  great  frauds  might  be  per- 
petrated with  impunity  at  the  Amend- 
ment election.  (See  the  Voice,  Oct.  IG 
and  23,  1890.)  The  Democratic  party 
placed  in  its  State  platform  a  declara- 
tion against  Prohibition,  and  the  Demo- 
cratic speakers  antagonized  the  policy 
Avith  great  zeal.  The  Chairman  of  the 
Eepublican    State    Committee    publicly 

'  See  the  Voice,  Oct.  2,  18!)0. 

J.  B.  Greenhut,  President  of  the  Whiskey  Trust,  in  a 
confidential  letter  printed  in  the  Voice  for  Oct.  9,  1890, 
wrote: 

■'  We  claim  that  we  have  done  more  toward  carryina; 
on  the  legitimate  expenses  of  that  [Nebraska]  campaign 
than  any  other  institution  in  the  country.  .  .  .  We 
may  not  have  contributed  as  much  as  some  i<eople  out 
there  think  we  should  have,  but  if  we  should  pay  out 
such  enormous  sums  as  are  sometimes  demanded  from  us 
we  might  as  well  go  to  the  poor-house  at  once  as  attempt 
to  meet  such  demands." 

3  Even  the  Mayor  of  Omaha  had  estimated  the  popula- 
tion in  bS89  at  only  110,000.  (See  the  '■  World  Alii::ir.at;  lor 
1889."  p.  171.) 


Negroes.] 


450 


[Negroes. 


used  his  influence  to  the  same  end.  On 
the  ballots  distributed  by  the  organiza- 
tions of  all  the  political  parties  ex- 
cept the  Prohibition  party  the  Prohibi- 
tory Amendment  proposition  was  printed 
in  the  negative  only ;  so  that  these  bal- 
lots, if  voted  just  as  they  were  received 
by  the  citizens,  were  certain  to  count 
against  Prohibition.  At  many  poll- 
ing-places on  election  day  the  Prohibi- 
tionists were  assaulted,  mobbed  and  per- 
secuted; in  Omaha  there  was  riot  and 
bloodshed  in  nearly  every  ward.  (See  the 
Voice,  Nov.  G,  13  and  27,  and  Dec.  4  and 
18, 1 890.)  No  element  of  violent  and  un- 
fair hostility  was  lacking:  even  the  post- 
office  officials  in  Omaha  refused  to  de- 
liver copies  of  the  Voice  that  came  regu- 
larly through  the  mails. 

The  returns  gave  an  aggregate  vote  of 
82,292  for  Prohibition  and  111,728 
against.  The  License  Amendment  re- 
ceived 75,4C2  votes,  and  91,084  were 
cast  against  it. 

Negroes.  —  Remembering  the  cir- 
cumstances in  which  the  Afro-American 
was  placed  by  the  dreadful  institution  of 
slavery  it  is  not  to  be  wondered  at  that 
he  now  cultivates  a  taste,  even  a  love,  for 
alcohol.  Yet  it  is  remarkable  to  note 
the  progress  toward  sobriety  that  the 
race  has  made  in  the  later  years  of  its 
emancipation.  A  colored  total  abstainer 
is  not  a  rare  person  in  any  community 
nowadays.  The  various  temperance  so- 
cieties and  nearly  all  the  other  secret 
organizations  supported  by  the  Afro- 
American  race  uniformly  require  those 
who  seek  admission  to  pledge  themselves 
to  be  sober  men  and  women,  and  in  most 
cases  to  be  total  abstainers.  The  drift 
is  more  and  more  in  this  direction,  and 
hence  soberness  in  the  race  is  constantly 
on  the  increase.  It  is  remarkable,  too, 
to  observe  the  steadfastness  and  persist- 
ency with  which  colored  teachers,  as  a 
rule,  hold  to  the  idea  that  the  race  is  to 
be  uplifted  morally,  as  well  as  materially 
and  religiously  improved,  through  total 
abstinence  as  a  chief  instrument.  It  is 
the  rare  exception,  not  the  rule,  to  find 
a  colored  teacher  who. does  not  hold  to 
this  doctrine.  The  result  is  that  many 
boys  and  girls  in  the  school-room  all  over 
the  South  and  in  other  sections  as  well 
are  being  trained  to  habits  of  temper- 
ance, and  will  in;all  probability  develop 


into  consistent  temperance  men  and 
women.  And  it  must  not  be  forgotten 
that  the  true  and  most  influential  leaders 
of  the  race,  the  ministers,  are  moulding 
and  shaping  the  opinions  of  both  old 
and  young  in  favor  of  soberness  and 
total  abstinence.  The  unanimity  with 
which  the  churches  of  all  denominations 
declare  for  the  temperance  reform  is 
most  encouraging.  It  is  a  very  rare 
thing  to  find  any  consideral;)le  proportion 
of  the  ministry  of  any  religious  denom- 
ination exerting  an  influence  in  behalf 
of  the  extension  and  perpetuation  of  the 
liquor  traffic.  The  church  as  a  factor  in 
tliis  race  development  and  elevation  is 
laboring  steadfastly  and  earnestly  for  the 
right.  It  is  the  one  force  that  checks 
and  holds  the  individuals  of  the  race 
from  following  the  evil  propensities  of 
their  own  hearts  when  every  other  force 
proves  unavailing.  In  it  is  the  chief 
hope  for  the  present  as  well  as  the  eternal 
salvation  of  the  negro.  If  the  church  is 
kept  pure  it  can  lift  up  and  give  honor 
and  perfect  freedom  to  the  freedmen. 
The  race  has  implicit  confidence  in  the 
truth  and  value  of  God's  \¥ord.  This 
confidence  must  not  be  shaken  but  must 
be  cultivated  by  the  selection  of  clergy- 
men well  qualified  by  special  training  to 
teach  wisely,  acceptably  and  properly. 
Along  witli  such  cultivation  will  inevit- 
ably go  a  determination  to  strengthen 
the  temperance  cause  more  and  more. 

I  have  watched  closely  the  men  who  are 
recognized  as  the  race  leaders  in  vari- 
ous States  and  localities.  It  is  acknow- 
ledged that  they  are  generally  shrewd, 
calculating  and  hard  to  circumvent  when 
they  attempt  political  manoeuvres.  It  is 
my  observation  that  these  leaders  are 
strictly  reliable  and  trustworthy  when 
confided  in  and — however  surprising  the 
statement  may  be  to  some — that  they  are 
generally  sober,  upright  and  honest.  I 
confess  that  in  some  localities  this  rule 
does  not  apply,  but  on  the  whole  a  more 
sober  class  of  leaders  does  not  exist  in 
any  race  than  in  the  Afro-American. 

One  of  the  evils  against  which  our 
people  have  to  contend  is  the  cross-roads 
grocery-store,  to  be  found  all  over  the 
Southland — the  bane  of  tliis  section. 
Here,  with  no  city  or  town  ordinance  to 
make  drunkenness  an  offense  and  to 
threaten  certain  punishment,  tliey  con- 
gregate and  drink  their  fill,  carouse,  en- 


Negroes.] 


451 


[Non-Partisanship. 


gage  in  free  fights  and  do  other  hurtful 
and  equally  unlawful  things,  while  no 
one  dares  molest  or  make  afraid,  and  the 
grocery-keeper,  finding  his  trade  bene- 
fited, encourages  the  debauchery.  This 
evil  instead  of  becoming  less  increases. 
The  business  of  many  prosperous  towns 
and  villages  is  being  injured  seriously  by 
the  competition  at  the  cross-roads  and 
the  resulting  vice,  violence  and  impover- 
ishment. The  records  of  the  Courts 
would  show  that  crime  among  our  people 
is  traceable  in  a  large  majority  of  cases 
to  a  too  free  exercise  of  the  liquor  habit. 
Of  the  men  belonging  to  the  race  who 
are  hanged,  I  think  it  entirely  reasonable 
to  say  that  at  least  four-fifths  committed 
their  offenses  while  under  the  influence 
of  liquor.  But  speaking  of  the  race 
broadly,  and  duly  considering  all  the  un- 
usual circumstances  that  ought  to  be 
taken  into  consideration,  I  think  it  can- 
not fairly  be  charged  with  anything  like 
gross  intemperance.  It  is  something  out 
of  the  usual  order  to  come  upon  a  case  of 
delirium  tremens  among  the  negroes. 
Comparatively  few  of  them  drink  any- 
thing of  consequence  during  the  week, 
but  excessive  imbibition  is  mostly  in- 
dulged in  on  Saturdays.  With  their 
vigorous  physical  constitutions  they  are 
able,  in  six  days  of  comparative  temper- 
ance, to  resist  the  undermining  effects  of 
the  seventh  day's  spree.  Therefore  this 
is  not  a  race  of  drunkards,  and  there  is 
abundant  reason  for  believing  that  with 
proper  education  and  training  it  may  be 
made  a  race  of  sober  people  and  ab- 
stainers. 

In  all  the  Prohibition  and  Local 
Option  contests  in  the  South  numbers 
of  colored  men  have  been  on  the 
side  of  temperance  and  fought  valiantly 
for  its  success.  Many  others  Avould 
have  thrown  their  influence  the  same 
way  had  they  not  been  duped  by  mis- 
guided leaders  who  raised  false  cries 
of  alarm,  declaring  that  Prohibition  was 
a  device  to  take  away  the  dearly-bought 
liberty.  It  is  customary  to  blame  the 
negroes  for  the  defeats  of  Prohibition  in 
Texas,  in  the  second  Atlanta  contest, 
etc. ;  but  it  must  be  remembered  that 
without  a  large  share  of  the  negro  vote 
Prohibition  could  not  have  carried  in 
Atlanta  at  the  first  trial  and  would 
have  been  lost  in  hundreds  of  other 
fights. 


In  order  to  strengthen  the  cause  of 
temperance  in  the  South  nothing  is  more 
important  than  to  treat  the  negro  fairly, 
to  keep  faith  with  him,  to  permit  no 
pledge  to  be  broken.  Once  won,  the 
colored  man  is  the  most  faithful  and 
reliable  of  allies.  It  is  of  course  needless 
to  add  that  the  supply  of  temperance 
literature  should  be  kept  up  and  in- 
creased. Especially  valuable  is  the  work 
of  arousing  total  abstinence  enthusiasm 
among  the  students  in  the  various  edu- 
cational institutions — young  men  (and 
women,  too)  upon  whom  the  future  of 
the  race  and  its  influence  for  good  or  evil 
so  largely  depends.  The  tracts  and  other 
publications  of  the  National  Temperance 
Society  have  had  and  are  having  a  most 
helpful  effect  ;  and  the  literature  ema- 
nating from  the  publishers  of  the  Voice, 
from  the  Woman's  Christian  Temperance 
Union  and  from  other  societies  and 
organizations  bears  good  fruit. 

I  am  indeed  hopeful  for  the  future  of 
the  Afro-American  race,  and  particu- 
larly hopeful  that  it  will  become  a  posi- 
tive and  influential  contributor  to  the 
triumph  of  the  temperance  reform. 

J.  C.  Price. 

(President     National     Afro-American 

League.) 

[The  editor  is  also  indebted  to  W.  H.  Crog- 
man,  Clark  University,  and  to  Frances  E.  W. 
Harper.  For  statutory  prohibitions  of  the  sale  of 
liqnor  to  negroes  in  the  slavery  days,  see  the 
digests  of  Southern  State  laws  in  Legislation.] 

Nevada. — See  Index. 
Ne\w  Hampshire. — See  Index. 
Nevr  Jersey. — See  Index. 
New  Mexico. — See  Index. 
New  York. — See  Index. 

Non-Partisanship. — The  opinion  is 
held  by  many  that  sentiment,  legislation 
and  the  enforcement  of  law  against 
drink  and  the  drink  traffic  will  be  most 
judiciously  and  successfully  promoted  by 
carefully  cultivating  the  favor  of  all 
political  organizations,  refraining  from  a 
general  policy  of  partisan  exclusiveness, 
patiently  watching  for  local  as  well  as 
wider  opportunities  to  control  the  action 
of  the  powerful  political  parties,  and 
seeking  to  encourage  and  reward  indi- 
vidual friends  and  punish  and  defeat  in- 
dividual foes  in  a  discriminating  way 
rather  to  urge  an  uncompromising  de- 


Won-Partisanship.] 


452 


[ITon-Partisanship. 


rnand  for  complete  and  uniform  acqui- 
escence. At  present  the  adherents  of 
the  "non-partisan"  view  outnumber  by 
far  its  opponents.  A  fair  comparison 
may  be  obtained  from  the  election  sta- 
tistics of  Pennsylvania:  in  June,  1889, 
296,617  Pennsylvanians  voted  for  the 
principle  of  Prohibition,  but  five  months 
later  only  31,308  votes  were  cast  for 
the  State  ticket  of  the  Prohibition 
party.  Thus  of  the  avowed  friends  of 
the  cause  in  that  State,  275,000  as  against 
•31,000  seemed  to  disapprove  uncom- 
promising partisan  advocacy  of  it. 

It  is  claimed,  however,  by  the  repre- 
sentative "  non-partisans,"  that  their  in- 
terest in  the  political  advancement  of 
Prohibition  is  no  less  earnest  than  that 
of  the  party  Prohibitionists.  They  rec- 
ognize with  equal  Aviilingness  that  Pro- 
hibitory measures  can  be  won  and  en- 
forced only  through  the  employment  of 
political  agencies.  But  they  believe  that 
it  is  inexpedient  in  the  existing  condi- 
tion of  American  politics  to  set  up  a  dis- 
tinctive Prohibition  party,  especially 
since  such  a  party  has  hitherto  been  un- 
able to  elect  its  candidates  in  any  State 
or  Congress  District. 

On  the  other  hand  it  is  pointed  out 
that  every  important  policy,  to  win  its 
way  to  success,  must  have  responsible 
and  faithful  championship;  that  such 
championship  has  not  been  accorded  to 
Prohibition  by  either  of  the  great  politi- 
cal parties;  that  local  popular  victories 
for  the  principle,  however  significant, 
will  be  more  or  less  unavailing  so  long 
as  the  dominant  party  is  not  bound  to 
the  principle  unmistakably;  that  even 
hearty  local  support  of  Prohibition  by 
the  party  that  is  locally  dominant  is  not 
satisfactory  so  long  as  the  same  party  in 
adjoining  localities  and  in  the  country 
at  large  manifests  hostility  or  indiffer- 
ence; that  tlie  anti-saloon  issue  can  be 
best  kept  before  the  attention  of  the 
people  by  the  consistent  insistence  of 
those  who  understand  the  fruitlessness 
of  half-way  measures  in  dealing  with  such 
an  institution  as  the  liquor  traffic,  and 
who  are  frank  enough  to  avow  their  en- 
tire programme  and  demand  conformity 
to  it  rather  than  mild  concessions,  and 
that  the  existence  of  an  aggressive  Pro- 
hibition 2oarty,howeverfeeble,being  acon- 
stant  menace  to  the  more  powerful  par- 
ties, Avill  discipline  them  more  effectually 


than  unorganized  individuals  can  possi- 
bly do,  impel  them  to  grant  more  pro- 
gressive   legislation    than    they    would 
otherwise   enact    and    ultimately    divide 
party  lines  on  the  Prohibition  question. 
Experience  has  not  justified  the  "non- 
partisan" idea,  or  at  least  has  not  done 
so   on   broad  grounds.     Results   bear   a 
close   resemblance  to   those   that    came 
from  the  "  non-partisan  "  method  during 
the  Anti-Slavery  agitation.  Opposition  to 
slavery  was  uiidoubtedly  cherished,  ab- 
stractly, by  a  majority  of  the  followers  of 
both  the  leading  parties  at  the  North  long 
before  the  war ;  but  these  followers,  esteem- 
ing supposed  prudence  above  radicalism, 
did  not  favor  a  partisan  effort  in  behalf  of 
Abolition ;  and,  striving  to  cope  with  the 
slave    power    by   artful    devices,   found 
themselves  totally  unable  to  do  so,  until 
the   Fugitive    Slave   law   and  the   Dred 
Scott  decision  were  given  them  for  their 
pains.     The  sentiment  against  the  drink 
traffic  is  probably  as  strong  as  Avas  the 
feeling  for  Abolition  before  the  crisis  of 
1860,    but    not    being     identified    with 
general  party  policy  it  has  enjoyed  only 
local    and    partial     success,    while    the 
national  political  strength  of  the  "  rum 
power "     has     increased.       Among    the 
characteristic    "  non-jiartisan  "    methods 
are  the  petitioning  of  Legislatures,  the 
influencing   of   primaries,    caucuses  and 
conventions,    efforts     to    elect    friendly 
Republican  and  Democratic   legislators, 
and  struggles  for  the   triumph  of  Pro- 
hibition  in   Local   Option  and  Amend- 
ment    camjjaigns.       Petitions,     though 
signed   by  tens  and  hundreds  of  thou- 
sands of  names,  have  almost  invariably 
been   disregarded   by   legislative    bodies 
unless  reinforced  by  strong  Prohibition 
party    votes:    in    1883     50,000   persons 
petitioned  the  Massachusetts  Legislature 
to  submit  a  Constitutional  Amendment 
to  the   people,  and  in  1884  there  were 
106,000  signatures  to   the  petitions,  yet 
the     request    was    refused     each    time. 
Similarly,   deputations     to    Legislatures 
and      Congress,     however     respectable, 
have  accomplished  nothing.  As  manijDU- 
lators   of  primaries,   caucuses  and  con- 
ventions  the    temperance    people    have 
seldom  been  able  to  match  the  rumsellers, 
and  when  critical  decisions  have  depended 
on   the    outcome    of  „such    preliminary 
manipulation  their  enemies  have  nearly 
always  outgeneraled  them.     Attempts  to 


Non-Part  is  anship .  ] 


453 


[Non-Partisanship. 


secure  majorities  in  Legislatures  by  con- 
centrating the  temperance  vote  in  each 
district  in  favor  of  the  candidate  (wliether 
Kepublican  or  Democratic)  whose  at- 
titude on  the  Prohibition  question  is 
most  satisfactory,  seem  to  be  at  first 
glance  both  reasonable  and  hopeful.  But 
such  attempts  have  been  inglorious 
failures.  In  Ohio,  in  1883,  a  State  or- 
ganization was  founded  whose  objects 
and  fate  have  been  described  as  follows 
by  its  President,  Mills  Gardner : 

"  The  Voters'  Union  in  Ohio  was  formed  for 
the  purpose  of  uniting  the  voters  of  Ohio 
friendly  to  temperance  and  Sabbath  laws  in  a 
non-partisan  manner  to  compel  all  political  par- 
ties to  respect,  by  throwing  their  vote  solid  for 
any  parties  pledged  to  their  support,  and  also  in 
favor  of  the  Prohibitory  Amendment.  This 
Union  only  continued  two  years.  We  found  it 
impossible  to  unite  the  voters.  Political  ties 
and  party  bias  were  too  strong,  and  the  thing 
of  course  failed."  ' 

In  Pennsylvania,  in  1889,  the  Union 
Prohibitory  League  was  established,  on  a 
similar  basis.  Its  friends  made  fervid 
pleas  on  the  ground  of  its  "practica- 
bility," but  no  success  attended  its  work. 
Like  failures  were  encountered  by  the 
Citizens'  Union  of  Michigan  (1887), 
which  declared,  in  behalf  of  its  members, 
"  That  we  will  use  our  utmost  influence 
by  jDcrsonal  attendance  to  reform  the 
political  caucus  and  convention,  and 
pledge  oiirselves  to  support  as  candidates 
for  the  Legislature  those  men  only  who 
are  in  favor  of  Prohibition ; "  and  by  the 
State  organization  formed  in  Texas  after 
the  defeat  of  Constitutional  Prohibition, 
whose  creed  was  expressed  in  these 
words :  "  The  non-partisan  plan  of  oppo- 
sition to  the  traffic  is  in  our  judgment 
the  wisest  and  best;  we  have  seen  no 
reason  to  distrust  this  method  of  work." 

The  lamentable  weakness  of  the  "  non- 
partisan'' plan  is  most  instructively 
demonstrated  by  the  results  of  recent 
Amendment  campaigns.  Before  syste- 
matic opposition  to  the  Prohibitory 
movement  was  aroused  it  was  j)ossible 
to  secure  large  State  majorities  for  the 
principle  of  Prohibition.  This  was 
chiefly  because  the  great  political  parties 
were  then  comparatively  neutral.  But 
when  issues  became  better  defined  and 
determined  battle  was  offered  by  the 
"  rum  power,"  this  neutrality  was  natur- 
ally  at  an   end.     The  favor  of  politcal 

>  The  Voice,  Aug.  29,  1889. 


leaders  and  the  influence  of  political 
"machines"  was  then  zealously  sought 
by  both  the  temperance  and  the  liquor 
elements  of  each  party.  The  masses  of 
the  temperance  people  had  held  aloof 
from  the  "third"  party,  and  they  could 
consistently  appeal  to  the  Eepublican 
and  Democratic  managers  for  friendly  or 
fair  action.  But  it  was  speedily  found 
that  their  pleas  were  without  weight : 
the  "non-partisan"  Amendments  were 
subjected  to  the  concentrated  antagonism 
of  the  very  men  who  were  responsible  for 
their  submission  and  were  ignominiously 
beaten  in  State  after  State.  The  earlier 
victories  were  not  "non-partisan"  but 
popular  victories,  due  to  the  absence  of 
political  interest ;  the  later  defeats  Avere 
brought  about  by  nothing  more  than  by 
the  machinations  of  cold-blooded  and 
unscrupulous  politicians,  who  were  able 
to  count  upon  the  continued  timidity  of 
the  conservative  temperance  advocates 
but  not  upon  the  submissiveness  of  the 
liquor-dealers. 

"  Non-partisanship  "  should  properly 
imj)ly  lofty,  conscientious  and  j)ersever- 
ing  independence  of  and  indifference  to 
party.  But,  as  will  be  conjectured  from 
what  ])recedes,  the  term,  as  understood  in 
the  Prohibitory  agitation,  has  no  such 
meaning.  It  signifies,  in  some  excep- 
tional instances,  independence  of  and 
indifference  to  all  political  organizations; 
but  more  frequently  an  intensely  partisan 
opposition  to  the  Prohibition  (or  "third") 
party  and  loyalty  to  the  Eepublican  or 
Democratic  party  are  suggested.  Gen- 
erally speaking,  then,  the  "non -parti- 
sans "  are  those  who  object  to  the  par- 
ticular organization  known  in  American 
politics  as  the  Prohibition  party,  and 
who,  far  from  being  without  distinct  pref- 
erences for  other  organizations,  are  often 
heated  supporters  of  them.  The  claim 
made  by  them,  that  the  Prohibition 
party  is  an  impediment  to  the  cause  of 
temperance,  is  examined  in  another  arti- 
cle. (See  Prohibition  Party — Results.) 
Although  among  the  people  at  large  a 
majority  of  the  friends  of  temperance 
are  "non-partisans"  in  the  sense  just  de- 
fined, there  is  relatively  little  sympathy 
for  this  species  of  "non-partisanship" 
among  the  recognized  leaders  and  the 
active  agitators.  Efforts  to  organize  the 
opponents  of  the  Prohibition  party,  as 
such,  into  effective  working  forces,  have 


North  Carolina.] 


uniformly  been  unsuccessful.  After  the 
Presidential  election  of  1884  many  emi- 
nent individuals,  headed  by  Daniel  Dor- 
chester, D.D,,  and  Mrs.  J.  Ellen  Foster, 
joined  in  setting  on  foot  a  society  that 
became  known  as  the  "  National  Non- 
partisan League."  Though  started  under 
the  most  encouraging  auspices  it  achieved 
nothing  for  the  temperance  reform,  and 
after  issuing  a  few  pamphlets  attacking 
the  "  third  "  party  it  collapsed.  A  more 
energetic  and  longer-lived  movement  was 
that  inaugurated  by  the  Anti-Saloon  Re- 
publicans in  1885,  distinguished  from 
the  other  so-called  "  non-partisan  "  en- 
terprises, however,  by  the  frankness  with 
which  its  promoters  avowed  a  strictly 
partisan  design.  After  a  stubborn  con- 
test its  supporters  were  forced  to  dis- 
band. (See  Anti-Salooist  Republicans.) 
The  latest  organization  is  the  Non-Par- 
tisan  Woman's  Christian  Temperance 
Union,  instituted  in  1889  and  regarded 
with  warm  approval  by  certain  sympa- 
thizers, but  not  yet  a  very  potent  factor 
in  the  anti-liquor  cause.  (See  Woman's 
Christian  Temperance  Union.) 

There  exist  numero-us  temperance  and 
Prohibition  orders  and  societies,  like  the 
Good  Templars,  Sons  of  Temperance, 
National  Temperance  Society  and  State 
and  local  organizations,  that  have  a 
purely  educational  duty  to  perform,  en- 
gage in  no  partisan  recriminations  and 
are  absolutely  neutral  in  politics.  To 
these  also  the  name  "  non-partisan  "  is 
given,  and  their  work  and  objects  are  not 
criticised  or  deprecated  in  any  quarter; 
their  success  is  steady  and  gratifying  and 
there  is  no  desire  that  they  shall  relin- 
quish the  genuine  non-i3artisanship  that 
characterizes  them. 

North  Carolina. — See  Index. 

North  Dakota. — See  Index. 

Norway. — This  country  was  sepa- 
rated from  Denmark  and  united  with 
Sweden  in  1814.  Under  the  Danish  do- 
minion distillation  had  been  prohibited 
in  Norway,  and  only  those  distilleries 
that  were  in  existence  at  the  time  of  the 
decree  were  permitted  to  operate.  Con- 
sequently in  1814  there  was  scarcely  a 
distillery  in  the  land.  The  Government 
had  also  prohibited  the  importation  into 
Norway  of  all  distilled  liquors  except 
those    shi]iped    from     Denmark.      The 


454  [Norway. 

consumption  of  spirits  in  1814  was 
about  ^  gallon  per  capita.  The  restric- 
tions on  distilling  were  speedily  swept 
away  b}'  the  new  home  Government  and 
in  1816  a  policy  of  free  trade  in  liquor  was 
inaugurated,  although  the  law  prohibit- 
ing importations  of  spirits  from  foreign 
countries  was  retained  and  made  to  ap- 
ply to  Denmark.  In  accordance  with 
the  prevailing  ideas  of  political  economy 
the  object  of  these  measures  was  to  help 
the  agricultural  people  of  Norway. 
Within  a  few  years  stills  were  found 
everywhere,  and  the  rural  districts  were 
overrun  with  them.  In  1833  there  were 
9,727  distilleries,  and  the  annual  con- 
sumption of  liquors  was  estimated  at 
nearly  4  gallons  per  capita. 

Both  the  people  and  the  Government 
began  to  realize  the  appalling  effects  of 
intemperance.  As  a  consequence  the 
liquor  question  was  discussed  in  the 
Storthing  (National  Parliament)  in  1833, 
and  laws  Avere  enacted  regulating  and 
restricting  the  traffic.  Public  conscience 
was  awakened  and  the  agitation  continu- 
ed. In  1842  the  Storthing  passed  an  act 
prohibiting  the  manufacture,  importa- 
tion and  sale  of  distilled  liquors.  The 
leader  in  this  Prohibition  movement  in 
the  Storthing  was  Prof.  Schweigaard  of 
the  University  of  Norway.  But  the  king 
vetoed  the  bill  in  compliance  with  the 
wishes  of  a  small  majority  of  his  cabinet. 
A  heavy  tax  was  then  imposed  on  distil- 
leries, greatly  reducing  the  number  of 
the  smaller  ones. 

The  law  of  1845  with  the  amenda- 
tory statutes  of  1848  was  the  foundation 
for  all  the  subsequent  liquor  legislation 
of  Norway.  It  was  practically  a  license 
act,  vesting  the  right  to  sell  spirits  in  a 
limited  number  of  individuals  and  pro- 
viding certain  restrictions.  It  did  not 
touch  malt  liquors.  But  about  1840  Ger- 
man beer  began  to  gain  favor  in  Norway, 
and  its  consumption  increased  alarmingly. 
Accordingly  the  acts  amendatory  of 
the  law  of  1845  have  gradually  been 
extended  to  beer  and  wine,  and  the 
sentiment  of  the  Norwegian  public 
has  kept  well  ahead  of  the  tendency 
of  the  statutes.  The  most  notable 
additional  acts  are  those  of  1857, 
186G,  1877  and  1884;  and  taking  advan- 
tage of  the  privileges  conferred  by  them, 
nearly  all  the  rural  communities  of  the 
kingdom  have  adopted  local  Prohibition 


Norway.] 


455 


[Norway. 


of  tlie  sale  of  all  intoxicating  beverages. 
Now  (1890)  only  29  places  ontside  the 
cities  license  the  traffic,  and  these  are 
mostly  small  fishing  and  tourist  stations. 

Tlie  general  effect  of  license  and  Local 
Option  in  Norway  is  very  similar  to  that 
witnessed  in  the  United  States,  The 
traffic  is  entrenched  in  the  cities,  from 
v/hich,  apparently,  it  cannot  be  dislodged 
without  making  a  much  harder  battle 
than  any  yet  waged.  At  present  only 
one  city,  Haugesund  (population,  5,000), 
absolutely  ^irohibits  all  intoxicants.  The 
arts  of  politicians  have  been  spent  upon 
these  compromise  measures  not  so  much 
with  a  view  to  destroying  the  liquor  traffic 
as  for  the  purpose  of  checking  the 
radical  temperance  agitators.  And  a 
peculiar  system  adopted  in  1871  (amend- 
ed in  1884),  the  so-called  Bolag  or 
Samlag  system  (copied  from  the  Gothen- 
burg plan  of  Sweden),  seems  to  increase 
the  difficulties  under  which  the  Prohibi- 
tionists labor.  Tlie  fundamental  object 
of  its  projectors  was  to  eliminate  from 
the  saloon  traffic  all  incentives  to  per- 
sonal gain.  In  any  city  a  "  Bolag  "  {i.e., 
stock  company)  may  be  organized  by  the 
leading  business  men,  and  obtain  from 
the  City  Council  exclusive  riglit  to  sell 
distilled  liquors  for  a  specified  number  of 
years  in  a  specified  number  of  saloons. 
The  Bolag  drink-shops  are  kept  by  sala- 
ried officers  of  the  company,  who  have  no 
interest  in  the  profits  arising  from  sales. 
Neither  have  tlie  managers  of  the  Bolag 
any  such  interest,  directly,  for  the  law 
requires  them  to  pay  into  the  city  Treas- 
ury all  their  net  profits ;  and  the  city  in 
turn  distributes  the  receipts  for  chari- 
table and  like  purposes.  At  the  be- 
ginning of  1890  there  were  17  Bolag 
whiskey-saloons  in  the  city  of  Christiania, 
besides  11  branch  establishments,  con- 
trolled by  the  Bolag,  in  hotels  and  res- 
taurants. But  the  right  to  sell  beer  and 
wine  is  not  subject  to  these  restrictions. 
A  beer  and  wine-shop  may  be  opened  in 
any  place  not  prohibiting  the  traffic  upon 
payment  of  a  license  fee,  generally  not  in 
excess  of  $10.  In  1890  there  were  340 
such  shops  in  Christiania.^  The  gross 
receipts  of  the  Bolag  companies  of  Nor- 
way for  the  year  ending  June,  1889,  were 
3,814,113  kroner,  or  about  1760,000. 

The  Bolag  system  has  been  in  force 

»  See  the  Voice,  Feb.  13,  1890. 


long  enough  to  afford  an  indication  as  to 
its  value  as  a  temperance  measure.  The 
statistics  of  the  leading  cities  of  Norway 
show  that  the  drink  revenues  have 
steadily  increased  under  it.  And  the 
police  returns  are  not  encouraging. 
Here,  for  instance,  are  the  figures  of 
arrests  for  drunkenness  and  disorderly 
conduct  in  Christiania  for  seven  years :  ^ 


1  Drunken- 
Years.                    1       NESS. 

DiSORDERI.y 

Conduct. 

Totals. 

1883 6,138 

1883 6.327 

1884 5,782 

1885 7,453 

1886 5,;«1 

1887 5,877 

1888 1     5,616 

1.869 
1.900 
1,918 
1,823 
1,603 
1,877 
1,689 

8,007 
8.227 
7,700 
9  275 
6.953 
7,773 
7,305 

As  already  indicated,  many  of  the  present 
restrictions  were  added  to  the  law  of 
1871  by  the  act  of  1884.  Omitting  the 
year  1885  from  the  above  table,  the 
arrests  for  drunkenness  and  disorderly 
conduct  do  not  exhibit  any  striking 
changes  since  the  adoption  of  the  Bolag 
scheme.  And  the  ratio  of  such  arrests 
to  the  total  population  (about  130,000) 
continues  very  large — in  fact,  above  the 
ratio  found  in  most  American  cities. 

But  the  general  temperance  outlook 
appears  to  be  far  more  cheering  in  Norway 
than  in  any  other  European  country. 
All  comparative  estimates  of  the  con- 
sumption of  intoxicants  that  the  writer 
has  seen  show  that  Norway  consumes 
less  drink  per  capita  than  any  other 
nation  of  Europe.  Nearly  all  the  officers 
and  influential  leaders  in  the  temperance 
organizations  —  now  containing  more 
than  100,000  members  —  are  strong 
advocates  of  National  Prohibition  of  all 
intoxicants.  In  1885  petitions  for  a 
thorough  Prohibition  law,  circulated 
mainly  in  only  two  of  Norway's  six 
dioceses,  received  the  signatures  of  C5,- 
G04  persons  over  31  years  of  age. 

For  10  or  15  years  after  the  first  dis- 
cussion in  the  Storthing  in  1833,  there 
was  considerable  interest  shown  in  the 
anti-spirits  crusade,  and  various  tem- 
perance societies  (discriminating  in  favor 
of  beer  and  wine)  were  begun  in  that 
period.  In  1840  Robert  Baird,  the 
American  propagandist,  visited  Norway, 
and  his  work  against  distilled  liquors 
received   some    recognition.      The    first 

2  Ibid. 


Norway.] 


456 


[Nott,  Eliphalet. 


total  abstinence  society  was  founded 
Dec.  29,  1859,  in  Stavanger,  by  Asbjorn 
Kloster.  It  began  with  30  members  and 
two  years  later  had  500,  It  became  the 
nucleus  of  the  pi'esent  influential  Total 
Abstinence  Association  of  Norway,  whose 
organ,  Menneskeveiinen  (the  Pliilan- 
tliropist),  now  in  its  twenty-ninth  year, 
was  also  established  by  Mr.  Kloster. 
The  various  local  societies  held  their  first 
general  Convention  in  Bergen  in  1862 
and  organized  the  Norwegian  Total 
Abstinence  Association,  with  headquar- 
ters at  Stavanger  (removed  to  Christiania 
in  1879).  Its  first  President  Avas  Mr. 
Kloster,  who  held  the  office  until  his 
death  in  1870,  when  the  total  member- 
ship was  about  8,000.  Kloster  eminently 
deserves  the  name  of  the  Father  Mathew 
of  Norway,  her  first  apostle  of  temper- 
ance— earnest,  patient,  generous,  self- 
sacrificing,  the  founder  of  the  present 
Prohibition  work.  He  labored  10  long 
years  before  the  society  in  Stavanger  had 
birth  ;  he  travelled,  lectured,  distributed 
tracts  and  organized  societies  from 
Lindesnes  to  North  Cape,  and  also  visited 
Iceland,  the  Faroe  Islands,  England  and 
Denmark.  Since  Kloster's  death  the 
Norwegian  Total  Abstinence  Association 
has  enjoyed  phenomenal  growth,  especi- 
ally during  the  last  10  years,  under  the 
leadership  of  Dr.  Oscar  Nissen  and  Sven 
Aarrestacl.  This  development  is  in  no 
small  measure  due  to  the  national  recog- 
nition given  its  work,  the  Storthing  hav- 
ing voted  an  annuity  of  6,000  kroner 
(increased  to  8,000  kroner)  to  be  used  in 
the  temperance  cause.  (One  krone= 
about  27  cents.)  At  present  the  Asso- 
ciation embraces  more  than  700  local 
societies  with  a  membership  of  from 
75,000  to  80,000. 

The  Good  Templars,  organized  nation- 
ally in  1878,  have  nearly  15,000  mem- 
bers in  Norway.  Their  chief  is  Torjus 
Hansen.  The  Blue  Ribbon  Band  was 
started  in  1882  by  S.  Urdahl,  who  is  still 
its  President  ;  estimated  membership, 
about  5,000.  During  the  last  few  years 
Prohibition  societies  have  sprung  into 
existence  everywhere.  They  are  mainly 
political  clubs  working  to  secure  National 
Prohibition.  On  Feb.  19,  1889,  these 
clubs  efFected  a  national  organization  in 
Horten,  with  Dr.  Oscar  Nissen  as  Presi- 
dent. Men  prominent  in  church  and 
state  have  enlisted  in  the  ranks  of  the 


active  workers.     In  1887  23  members  of 
the  Storthing  were  total  abstainers. 

T.  S.  Eeimestad. 

The  liquor  revenue  is  not  so  formid- 
able a  feature  of  Government  income  in 
Norway  as  in  the  English-speaking  coun- 
tries. For  the  year  ending  June  30, 1889, 
the  revenue  from  all  sources  was  43,132,- 
205  kroner  (about  811,645,000),  of  which 
2,800,000  kroner  (about  .$756,000)  came 
from  the  excise  on  spirits  and  1,800,000 
kroner  (about  1480,000)  from  the  malt 
duty — total  from  liquors,  about  -11,242,- 
000,  Apparently  the  liquor  revenue  is 
decreasing:  in  1881  it  was  about  $1,560,- 
000  (1945,000  from  spirits  and  1615,800 
from  beer).  The  Government  tax  on  dis- 
tilled liquors  is  high — from  70  to  85 
cents  per  gallon  according  to  strength. 
The  imports  of  liquors,  relatively,  are  in- 
considerable :  in  1889  the  spirits  im- 
ported were  valued  at  only  al)out  $700,- 
000.  The  sanguine  hopes  of  the  Norwe- 
gian Prohibitionists  are  encouraged  by 
the  fact  that  the  rural  population  of  the 
kingdom  is  four  times  as  great  as  the 
town  population.  Statistics  show'  an 
unusually  small  percentage  of  crime,  as 
might  be  expected  for  a  country  so  gen- 
erally under  Prohibitory  law  :  in  1885 
(in  a  total  population  of  about  2,000,000) 
only  3,126  persons  were  accused  of  crime, 
and  2,803  were  convicted.  There  were 
150,208  paujiers  in  1885. 

The  late  well-known  Dr.  Broch  esti- 
mated that  the  annual  expenditure  for 
drink  in  Norway  is  about  $11,000,000, 
and  that  each  year  7,000  homes  are 
broken  up  by  drink,  while  the  number  of 
drunkards  is  15,000,  and  of  those  who 
occasionally  become  drunk  100,000.  Ac- 
cording to  official  reports  from  the  prison 
directors  in  Sweden  and  Norway,  70  to 
75  per  cent,  of  the  criminals  attribute 
their  downfall  to  drink. 

Nott,  Eliphalet. — Born  in  Ash- 
ford,  Conn.,  June  25,  1773;  died  in 
Schenectady,  N.  Y.,  Jan.  29,  1866.  Left 
an  orphan  at  an  early  age,  he  was  reared 
in  the  family  of  a  brother.  He  taught 
school  to  obtain  the  means  to  support 
himself  at  college.  He  graduated  from 
Brown  University  in  1795,  studied  the- 
ology and  was  licensed  to  itreach  by  the 
New  London  Congregational  Association 
and  by  it  sent  as  a  missionary  into  cen- 
tral New  York.     Soon  afterward  he  ac- 


Nott,  Eliphalet.] 


457 


[Nott,  Eliphalet. 


cepted  a  call  to  the  Presbyterian  Cliurch 
in  Cherry  Valley,  N.  Y.,  where  in  addi- 
tion to  his  ministerial  work  he  estab- 
lished an  academy  and  became  its  prin- 
cipal. From  1798  to  1804  he  had  charge 
of  the  1st  Presbyterian  Church  in  Al- 
bany, preaching,  in  the  last  year  of  his 
pastorate,  the  funeral  sermon  of  Alexan- 
der Hamilton  which  was  pu1)lished  in 
several  editions,  widely  circulated  and 
attracted  considerable  notice  for  its  elo- 
quence. During  the  same  year  (1804) 
he  was  chosen  President  of  Union  Col- 
lege at  Schenectady,  and  he  held  this 
position  until  his  death  in  1866,  making 
an  uninterrujjted  term  of  6;2  years.  In 
this  period  3,700  to  4,000  young  men 
were  graduated  from  the  college.  Dr. 
Nott's  investigations  in  physical  science 
and  especially  concerning  the  nature  of 
heat  were  of  a  practical  nature  and  re- 
sulted in  many  inventions,  for  about  30 
of  which  he  obtained  patents.  The  first 
stove  devised  for  burning  anthracite  coal 
was  his  invention  and  bore  his  name. 

As  early  as  1811  he  made  speeches 
against  slavery,  and  in  1836-7  he  deliv- 
ered a  series  of  ten  lectures  on  temperance 
before  the  students  of  Union  College. 
In  these  lectures  (])ublislied  in  1846  in 
No.  4  of  Mr.  E.  C.  Delavan's  journal,  the 
Enquirer,  of  which  an  edition  of  20,000 
copies  was  issued).  Dr.  Nott  was  the 
first  to  assert  in  a  serious  way  the  claim 
that  the  Bible  recognized  both  a  fer- 
mented and  an  unfermented  wine,  sanc- 
tioning the  use  of  the  latter  only;  and 
from  his  advocacy  of  this  opinion  dates 
the  Bible  Wine  controversy.  Republished 
in  book  form  the  lectures  passed  through 
repeated  editions  both  in  this  country 
and  Great  Britain.  The  following  is  a 
specimen  of  Dr.  Nott's  pleas  to  Chris- 
tians to  give  up  "moderate"  drinking: 

"The  ragged,  squalid,  brutal  rum-drunkard, 
who  raves  in  the  barroom,  consorts  with  swine 
in  the  gutter  or  fills  with  clamor  and  dismay  the 
cold  and  comfortless  abode  to  which  in  the 
spirit  of  a  demon  he  returns  at  night,  much  as 
he  injures  himself,  deeply  wretched  as  he  ren- 
ders liis  family,  exerts  but  little  influence  in  be- 
guiling others  into  an  imitation  of  his  revolting 
conduct.  On  the  contrary,  as  far  as  his  exam- 
ple goes,  it  tends  to  deter  from  rather  than  al- 
lure to  criminal  indulgence.  .  .  .  But  rep- 
utable, moderate,  Christian  wine-drinkers, — 
that  is,  the  drinkers  of  brandy  or  whiskey  in 
admixture  with  wine  or  other  preparations 
falsely  called  wine,  the  product  not  of  the  vine- 
yard but  of  the  still  or  the  brew-house, — these 
are  the  men  who  send   forth  from  the  high 


places  of  society,  and  sometimes  even  from  the 
hill  of  Zion  and  the  portals  of  the  sanctuary,  an 
unsuspected,  luuebuked  but  i)owerful  influence, 
which  is  secretly  and  silently  doing  on  every 
side,  among  the  young,  among  the  aged, 
among  even  females,  its  work  of  death.  It  is 
this  reputable,  authorized,  moderate  drinking 
of  these  disguised  poisons  under  the  cover  of  an 
othodox  Christian  name,  falsely  assumed,  which 
encourages  youth  in  their  occasional  excesses, 
reconciles  the  public  mind  to  holiday  revelries, 
shelters  from  deserved  reproach  the  barroom 
tippler  and  furnishes  a  salvo  even  for  the  occa- 
sional inquietude  of  the  brutal  drunkard's  con- 
science." ' 

In  comparing  the  efforts  that  had 
been  made  in  the  past  to  check  intem- 
j)erance  by  moderation  in  the  use  of  in- 
toxicants with  the  efforts  then  being  put 
forth  to  enforce  total  abstinence,  Dr. 
Nott  said : 

"During  the  ages  gone  by  the  ruinous,  loath- 
some and  brutalizing  effects  of  intemperance 
were  extensively  experienced  and  deplored  and 
counteracted.  Governments  legislated,  moral- 
ists reasoned.  Christians  remonstrated,  but  to 
no  purpose.  In  the  face  of  this  array  of  influ- 
ence intemperance  not  only  maintained  its 
groimd  but  constantly  advanced,  and  advanced 
with  constantly  increasing  rapidity.  Death  in- 
deed came  in  aid  of  the  cause  of  temperance 
and  swept  away,  especially  during  the  preval- 
ence of  the  cholera,  crowds  of  inebriates  with 
a  distinctive  and  exemplary  vengeance.  Sud- 
denly the  vacancies  thus  occasioned  were  filled 
up;  and  as  if  the  course  of  life  whence  these 
supplies  were  furnished  was  exhaustless,  all  the 
avenues  of  death  were  not  only  reocciu^ied  but 
crowded  with  augmented  numbers  of  fresh  re- 
cruits. The  hope  even  of  reclaiming  the  world 
by  any  instrumentalities  then  in  being  departed, 
and  fear  lest  Christendom  should  be  utterly 
despoiled  by  so  detestable  a  practice  took  pos- 
session of  many  a  reflecting  mind.  In  that 
dark  hour  the  great  discovery  that  drunkenness 
is  caused  by  di'inking — moderate,  temperate, 
continuous  drinking, — and  that  entire  sobriety 
can  be  restored  and  maintained  by  abstinence, 
in  that  dark  hour  this  great  discovery  was 
made  and  promulgated  to  the  world;  a  discovery 
which,  simple  and  obvious  as  it  seems  to  be, 
had  remained  hid  for  ages,  during  which  no 
one  dreamed  that  mere  drinking,  regular,  rep- 
utable, temperate  drinking,  injiu'ed  anyone, 
much  less  that  it  produced,  and  by  a  necessity  of 
nature  produced,  that  utter  shameless  drunken- 
ness which  debased  so  many  individuals,  beggar- 
ed so  many  families  and  brought  such  indelible 
disgrace  on  the  community  itself.  This  dis- 
covery, though  not  even  yet  generally  known 
throughout  the  community,  has  relieved  more 
misery,  conduced  to  more  happiness,  prompted 
to  more  virtue  and  reclaimed  fnjm  more  guilt, 
— in  one  word  it  has  already  shed  more  bless- 
ings on  the  past  and  lit  up  more  hope  for  the 
future  than  anj'  other  discovery,  whether  phj's- 
ical,   political  or  moral,  with  which  the  land 

■  Ten  Lectures  on  Temperance  (New  York,  1857).  pp. 
204-5. 


Nuisance.] 


458 


[Opium. 


and  the  age  in  which  we  live  have  been  signal- 
ized. By  this  gre;>t  discovery  it  has  been  made 
apparent  tliat  it  is  not  drunkards  but  moderate 
drinkers  with  whom  the  temperance  reforma- 
tion is  chiefly  concerned;  for  it  is  not  on  a 
change  of  habit  in  the  former,  but  the  latter,  on 
which  the  destiny  of  the  State  and  the  nation 
hangs  suspended.  Drinking,  and  the  manufac- 
ture and  sale  of  that  which  makes  drunkards, 
operate  reciprocally  as  cause  and  effect  on  all 
the  jjarties  concerned.  The  manufacturer  and 
vendor  furnish  the  temptation  to  the  drinker, 
and  the  drinker  in  return  gives  countenance  and 
support  both  to  the  manufacturer  and  the  vendor. 
All  these  classes  must  be  reformed  before  the 
triumph  of  the  temperance  cause  will  be  com- 
plete; and  the  reformation  of  either  contributes 
to  the  reformation  of  all.  Every  dramshop 
that  is  closed  narrows  the  sphere  of  temptation, 
and  every  teetotaler  that  is  gained  contributes 
to  the  shutting  up  of  a  dramshop,  and  they 
must  all  be  shut  up — the  rum  and  the  wine  and 
the  beer-selling  grocery, — and  temperate  drink- 
ing relinquished,  or  drunkenness  can  never  be 
prevented,  society  purified  from  crime,  relieved 
from  pauperism,  freed  from  disease,  and  human 
life  extended  to  its  allowed  limits."  ' 

The  followino;  declaration  for  the  legal 
Prohibition  of  the  liquor  traffic  was  made 
in  an  address  at  the  annual  meeting  of 
the  New  York  State  Temperance  Society, 
in  Albany,  Jan.  18,  1856: 

"It  is  in  the.se  public  and  long-established 
rendezvous  of  vice  [saloons]  that  the  occasion  is 
furnished  and  the  temptation  presented.  Here 
the  elements  of  death  are  collected,  here  are 
mingled,  and  here  the  fatal  chalice  that  contains 
them  is  presented  to  unsuspecting  and  confiding 
guests,  as  containing  an  innocent,  cheering  and 
even  healthful  beverage;  and,  by  being  so  pre- 
sented in  the  midst  of  boon  companions,  an  ap- 
peal is  made,  guilefully  made,  to  the  kindly 
in.stincts  and  generous  impulses  of  man's  social 
nature, — an  aj^peal  which  few  long  subject  to 
its  seductive  influences  are  able  to  withstand. 
Merely  to  shut  up  these  moral  Golgothas,  these 
shambles  of  the  soul,  would  be  a  noble  triumph. 
But  how  are  these  progressive  triumphs  to  be 
accomplished,  this  final  victory  achieved  ?  How  ? 
By  the  force  of  public  opinion — settled,  decided 
public  opinion — and  such  opinion  embodied  and 
expressed  in  the  form  of  authoritative  public 
law, — and  thus  embodied  and  expressed  as  fast 
and  as  far  as  it  is  formed." 

Nuisajice. — See  Injunction  Law. 

Nutrition.— See  Food. 

Ohio. — See  Index. 

Oklahoma. — See  Index. 

Ontario. — See  Canada. 

Opium. — The  chief  of  the  narcotic 
drugs,  manufactured  from  the  juice  of 
the  poppy,  which  is  cultivated  on  a  large 
scale  in  most  of  the  Oriental  countries — 

I  Ibid,  pp.  240-3. 


notably  India  and  China — but  not  in 
Europe  or  America.  It  is  a  powerful  and 
speedily  fatal  poison.  From  opium 
morphia  is  obtained ;  the  liquid  laudanum 
is  another  preparation.  The  principal 
medicinal  uses  are  to  relieve  pain  and  to 
cause  sleep.  The  habitual  employment 
of  opium,  even  for  innocent  objects,  is 
almost  certain  to  enslave  the  user  and  to 
create  an  intemperate  and  insatiable 
ajipetite,  leading  to  physical,  intellectual 
and  moral  ruin.  Such  are  the  terrible 
fascinations  of  the  drug  that  its  victims, 
when  asked  why  they  do  not  relinquish  it 
as  others  relinquish  liquor  and  tobacco, 
declare :  "  Yes,  whiskey  and  tobacco  may 
be  given  up;  but  opium,  never."  Coler- 
idge, De  Quincy  and  other  famous  men 
have  confessed  its  powers  and  its  evils. 
The  vices  of  oj)ium-eating  and  opium- 
smoking  afflict  many  millions  of  the 
human  race,  and  the  resj^onsibility  for 
their  .vast  development  during  the  pres- 
ent century  is  to  be  charged  in  no  small 
measure  to  England,  which  has  steadily 
sanctioned,  fostered  and  protected  opium 
production  and  the  opium  traffic  in  the 
East  for  revenue  purposes,  and  by  two 
bloody  Avars  has  compelled  China  to 
abandon  her  policy  of  opium  prohibition. 
(See  China  and  India.) 

In  some  parts  of  the  United  States  the 
opium  habit  is  reaching  considerable  pro- 
portions, and  there  is  reason  for  believing 
that  it  is  generally  on  the  increase  in 
this  country.  This  seems  to  be  due  most 
of  all  to  Chinese  immigration.  Many 
Chinamen  bring  the  opium  habit  with 
them  and  introduce  it  here  by  the  force 
of  example  and  for  gain.  In  the  Chinese 
quarters  of  San  Francisco,  New  York  and 
other  cities  opium  dens  or  "  joints  "  are 
operated  and  receive  patronage  from  the 
inebriate,  depraved,  unfortunate  and 
weak-minded  classes  of  all  ranks  of  so- 
ciety, all  nationalities  and  both  sexes. 
Perhaps  no  other  element  of  the  peop/fe 
constitute  so  large  a  proportion  of  the 
habitues  of  these  places  as  the  prostitutes. 
In  the  opium  dens  the  article  is  consumed 
by  smoking;  a  peculiarly  made  pipe  is 
used,  which  is  the  possession  of  the  pro- 
prietor; the  smoker  reclines  on  a  couch 
and  after  manipulating  the  opium  so  that 
it  will  burn  satisfactorily  lights  the  pipe 
and  whiffs  it,  taking  the  smoke  into  his 
lungs  and  exhaling  it  through  the  nose 
and  mouth;  lethargy  follows,  lasting  for 


Opium.] 


459 


[Opium. 


an  hour  or  a  number  of  hours.  By  the 
term  "  opium-eating  "  is  meant  the  direct 
consumption  of  opium  or  its  preparations 
by  swallowing;  to  gratify  the  appetite  by 
this  means  it  is  not  necessary  to  frequent 
a  ••  Joint,"  provided  the  victim  is  able  to 
secure  the  opium,  morphia  or  laudanum 
at  a  drug-store  and  to  retire  to  a  place  of 
his  own  where  he  may  sleep  off  the 
effects. 

The  opium  habit  is  looked  upon  with 
horror  l)y  all  thinking  Americans  and 
Europeans.  Yet  it  may  well  be  doubted 
whether  its  consequences  to  the  individ- 
ual and  society,  however  shocking,  are  in 
all  resj^ects  so  disastrous  as  those  result- 
ing from  alcoholic  liquors.  A  man  under 
the  influence  of  opium  is  not  violent, 
destructive  or  disorderly ;  life  and  prop- 
erty are  not  put  in  constant  danger  from 
the  unforeseen  caprices  of  opium  narco- 
maniacs. The  rei^ugnance  with  which 
the  opium  habit  is  viewed  by  the  alcohol- 
drinking  Christian  nations  may  probably 
be  ascribed  to  the  supposedly  greater 
tyranny  that  it  exercises  and  enervation 
that  it  causes,  as  well  as  to  the  fact  that 
it  is  a  peculiarly  Oriental  vice.  Yet  this 
habit,  the  same  as  the  alcohol  habit,  has 
been  acquired  by  many  good  people; 
they  desire  the  drug,  and  must  and  will 
have  it  under  any  circumstances.  In 
view  of  such  conditions  the  logic  of  those 
who  oppose  Prohibition  of  the  liquor 
traffic  may  be  cited  with  equal  or  per- 
haps (considering  the  superior  pleasure 
said  to  be  conferred  by  opium  and  the 
relatively  smaller  injury  that  it  inflicts 
from  certain  points  of  view)  with  even 
greater  justification  in  behalf  of  legaliz- 
ing the  sale  of  opium.  If  it  may  reason- 
ably be  argued  that  recourse  to  Prohibi- 
tion 'of  alcoholic  drink  is  likely  to  be  in- 
expedient or  ineffectual,  why  may  we  not 
expect  to  find  this  argument  sustained 
by  the  practical  results  of  Prohibition  of 
opium,  an  article  confessedly  no  less  pas- 
sionately loved  than  alcohol  ?  And  why 
may  not  the  claim  that  Prohibition  of 
liquor  would  fail  to  diminish  the  evils  of 
the  liquor  traffic  be  tested  with  some 
degree  of  fairness  by  the  fruits  of  exper- 
iments in  opium  prohibition? 

Despite  the  increase  of  the  habit  in 
certain  American  cities,  it  is  undoubted 
that  the  opium  vice,  as  compared  with 
other  vices  (and  giving  due  consideration 
to  the  extraordinary  temptations  offered 


by  this  drug)  plays,  on  the  whole,  but  an 
insignificant  part  in  the  United  States. 
No  reputable  person  will  sell  opium  for 
any  but  medicinal  jaurposes;  there  is  no 
native  production  of  it;  no  individual 
who  has  a  character  to  maintain  will 
admit  that  he  indulges  in  it;  when  the 
discovery  is  made  that  an  estimable  man 
or  woman  is  addicted  to  the  practice,  in- 
ex]Dressible  surprise,  grief  or  condemna- 
tion is  occasioned ;  the  opium  resort  is  a 
veritable  hell,  which  no  resi^ectable  per- 
son can  afford  to  patronize;  no  jaublic 
temptations  of  any  magnitude  are  held 
out  to  the  young  or  innocent  by  the 
opium-dealers;  the  crime,  pauperism, 
etc.,  of  the  community  are  not  traceable 
to  opium  to  any  appreciable  extent ;  the 
prevailing  political  evils,  misfortunes  to 
families,  and  the  like,  are  attributed  to 
the  opium  traffic  only  in  exceptional  in- 
stances and  within  narrow  limits.  The 
possibility  that  this  traffic  may  allure 
and  enslave  the  American  public  at  large 
is  remote  in  proportion  to  the  hideous- 
ness  of  the  pestilent  places  in  which  it  is 
conducted  and  to  the  emphasis  and 
unanimity  with  which  opium  itself  is  con- 
demned by  all  intelligent  oj^inion  and  all 
statute  definitions — condemned  without 
any  disposition  whatever  to  admit  that  it 
is  "one  of  the  good  things  of  God"  if  used 
in  ''  moderation."  Advocacy  of  a  license 
system  for  the  retail  opium  business,  as 
a  means  of  diminishing  present  evils 
and  deriving  a  revenue  from  a  vice  that 
manifestly  cannot  be  entirely  suppressed, 
would  excite  mingled  wonder,  derision 
and  indignation.  It  is  true  that  the 
British  Government  licenses  opium-shops 
in  India;  but  this  course  is  in  keeping 
with  the  heartless  indifference  to  the  moral 
welfare  of  her  heathen  subjects  that  Eng- 
land has  too  frequently  displayed :  a  prop- 
osition to  license  opium-vending  at 
home  would  never  be  tolerated  by  Eng- 
lishmen. 

By  the  existing  treaty  of  the  United 
States  with  China  it  is  agreed  that  no 
citizen  or  subject  of  either  country  shall 
be  permitted  to  import  opium  into  the 
other  country;  and  this  absolute  pro- 
hibition extends  to  vessels  owned  and 
foreign  vessels  employed  by  both  Ameri- 
can citizens  and  Chinese  subjects.  (See 
p.  79.)  But  the  principle  of  opiuiii  jDro- 
hibition  is  not  embodied  in  the  general 
statutes    of    the    United    States.     The 


Opium.] 


460 


[Opium. 


Tariff  laws  permit  the  importation  of 
opium  in  its  various  forms,  altliougli  a 
heavy  duty  is  laid  upon  "opium  pre- 
pared for  smoking."  The  present  Me- 
Kinley  Tariff  act  (in  force  October,  18i:^0) 
makes  the  following  provisions : 

"Opium,  aqueous  extract  of,  for  medicinal 
uses,  and  tincture  of,  as  laudanum,  and  all 
other  liquid  preparations  of  opium,  not  specially 
provided  for  in  this  act,  40  per  centum  ad  va- 
lorem." (The  same  duty  was  charged  under  the 
former  tariff.) 

"  Opium  containing  less  than  9  per  centum  of 
morphia,  and  opium  prejDared  for  smoking, 
$12  per  pound  ;  but  opium  prepared  for  smok- 
ing and  other  preparations  of  opium  deposited 
in  bonded  warehouses  shall  not  be  removed 
therefrom  without  payment  of  duties,  and  such 
duties  shall  not  be  refunded."  (The  former 
duty  was  |10  per  pound.) 

"  Opium,  crude  or  manufactured,  and  not 
adulterated,  containing  9  per  centum  and  over 
of  morphia,  free."  (Under  the  former  tariflf 
opium  of  this  variety  was  taxed  $1  per  pound.) 

In  the  year  ending  June  30,  1889,  no 
aqueous  opium  was  imported  into  the 
United  States.  Of  opium  prepared  for 
smoking,  96,678  lbs.  were  imjiorted, 
valued  at  1644,204 — all  from  China,  and 
all  brought  by  American  vessels  or  ves- 
sels not  owned  or  02)erated  by  Chinese. 
The  quantity  of  crude  opium  imported 
in  the  same  year  was  391,563  lbs.,  valued 
at  1809,893;  of  this  amount  218,637  lbs. 
(valued  at  $370,006)  came  from  Turkey 
in  Asia,  99,006  lbs,  (valued  at  $268,355) 
from  England,  35,981  lbs.  (valued  at 
$75,857)  from  Turkey  in  Europe,  17,951 
lbs.  (valued  at  152,949)  from  China,  17,- 
448  lbs.  (valued  at  $3(),808)  from  Canada, 
and  the  remainder  from  France,  Ger- 
many and  Turkey  in  Africa.  Thus  the 
annual  supply  of  "  opium  prepared  for 
smoking,"  at  present  available,  is  less 
than  100,000  lbs.;  and  reckoning  that 
2  lbs.  per  year  is  used  by  each  smoker — cer- 
tainly a  very  low  average  if  the  estimates 
of  per  capita  consumption  of  opium  in 
China  given  on  p.  77  are  within  bounds, — 
it  appears  that  the  number  of  persons 
in  the  United  States  using  the  smoking 
opium  imported  from  China  cannot  be 
in  excess  of  50,000.  But  it  is  certain 
that  a  considerable  part  of  the  nearly 
400,000  lbs.  of  '•'  crude  opium "  that  we 
import  annitally  is  employed  purely  to 
gratify  the  opium  habit.  However, 
making  the  most  liberal  allowances,  it 
seems  highly  improbable  that  tiie  num- 
ber of  habitual  opium-users  is  above 
250,000. 


The  Penal  Code  of  New  York  has  the 
following  provision  (§  388,  as  amended 
by  Laws  of  1889,  c.  8,  §  1) : 

"  A  person  who  (1)  lets  or  permits  to  be  used 
a  building  or  portion  of  a  building,  knowing 
that  it  is  intended  to  be  used  for  committing  a 
public  nuisance,  or  (2)  opens  or  maintains  a 
l)lace  where  opium  or  any  of  its  preparations  is 
smoked  by  other  persons,  or  (3)  at  such  place 
sells  or  gives  away  any  opium  or  its  said  pre- 
parations, to  be  there  smoked  or  otherwise 
used,  or  (4)  visits  or  resorts  to  any  such  place  for 
the  purpose  of  smoking  opium  or  any  of  its  said 
preparations,  is  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor."     ^ — 

The  California  Penal  C'ode  declares 
(§307): 

"Every  person  who  opens  or  maintains,  to  be 
resorted  to  by  other  persons,  any  place  where 
opium  or  any  of  its  preparations  is  sold  or  given 
away,  to  be  smoked  at  such  place;  and  any  per- 
son who  at  such  jilace  sells  or  gives  away  any 
opium  or  its  said  preparations,  to  be  there 
smoked  or  otherwise  used ;  and  every  person  who 
visits  or  resorts  to  any  such  place  for  the  pur- 
pose of  smoking  opium  or  its  said  preparations 
is  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  upon  conviction 
thereof  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  not  exceeding 
$500  or  by  imprisonment  in  the  County  .Jail  not 
exceeding  six  mouths,  or  by  both  such  tine  and 
imprisonment."  — 

In  Oregon  selling  or  giving  away 
opium,  except  to  or  by  druggists,  is  pro- 
hibited, and  selling  it  to  l)e  smoked  on 
the  premises  is  also  prohibited.  Any 
building  where  opium  is  smoked  is  an 
opium  den.  Frequenting  opium  dens  is 
prohibited.  Violations  of  these  prohibi- 
tions are  punished  by  imprisonment  not 
less  than  six  months  or  more  than  two 
years  in  the  Penitentiary,  by  imprison- 
ment in  the  County  Jail  not  less  than 
one  month  or  more  than  six  months,  or 
by  fine  of  not  less  than  $50  or  more  than 
$500.  (Oregon  Gen.  Laws,  1887,  §§  1919- 
23.)  The  law  of  Nevada  is  similar  to  that 
of  Oregon,  and  is  worded  in  very  strong 
language ;  it  prescribes  a  ]oenalty  of  a  fine 
not  exceeding  $1,000,  or  imprisonment 
not  exceeding  two  years,  or  both  fine  and 
imprisonment.  Other  State  acts  pro- 
hibit the  traffic  in  the  same  unqualified 
terms. 

There  is  an  intimate  connection  be- 
tween the  opium  and  drink  habits.  It 
is  true  opium  entraps  many  who  are  es- 
teemed temperate  in  the  use  of  alcoholic 
liquors — nervous  and  suffering  persons 
who  resort  to  the  drug  thoughtlessly  or 
for  temporary  relief,  witliout  any  in- 
tention of  acquiring  the  habit.  But 
probably  the  great  majority  of  those  wlio 
frequent  the  opium  dens  are  individuals 


Opium.] 


461 


[Palestine. 


whose  lives  have  already  been  blasted  by 
alcohol.  A  more  potent  poison  is  craved. 
Indeed,  in  an  enlightened  country, 
where  opium  has  no  defenders,  a  resort 
to  it  necessarily  implies  a  singular  per- 
sonal recklessness — such  a  recklessness  as 
is  characteristic  of  the  drunkard. 

It  is  claimed  by  some  designing  or 
misinformed  persons  that  Prohibition  of 
liquor  in  this  country  would  stimulate 
the  opium  habit  ;  and  it  is  even  unscrupu- 
lously asserted  that  the  use  of  opium  is 
most  prevalent  where  the  liquor  traffic 
is  most  strictly  repressed.  In  truth,  this 
is  one  of  the  favorite  arguments  of  the 
rumsellers  who  seek  full  liberty  to  pur- 
sue their  murderous  business.  It  may 
be  granted  that  if  the  present  intemper- 
ate users  of  drink  w-ere  unable  to  obtain 
liquor  some  of  them  who  are  not  now 
victims  of  oj^ium  would  seek  this  drug  ; 
and  among  a  certain  class,  therefore — a 
class  of  unfortunates  already  slaves  to 
appetite  and  practically  irreclaimable  so 
long  as  it  is  possible  for  them  to  procure 
poison, — the  opium  habit  might  increase. 
But  even  making  this  trifling  and  imma- 
terial admission  it  is  yet  to  be  shown 
that  such  a  substitution  of  opium  for 
alcohol  would  in  any  way  aggravate  ex- 
isting evils;  while  it  is  certain  that  a 
public  sentiment  so  far  aroused  as  to  ban- 
ish beverages  hitherto  regarded  as  useful, 
would  stiffen  rather  than  relax  the  strin- 
gent prohibitions  against  an  article 
always  pronounced  unqualifiedly  injuri- 
ous. And  all  experience  shows  that  the 
prediction  made  by  anti-Prohibitionist 
alarmists  is  Avithout  foundation.  The 
cities  in  which  the  illicit  opium  traffic  is 
most  threatening  are  those  whose  liquor 
policy  is  especially  liberal,  like  New 
York  and  San  Francisco;  while  in  the 
cities  where  saloons  are  prohibited  and 
the  law  is  enforced  there  is  absolutely  no 
public  development  of  the  opium  curse. 
The  Philadel])liia  Press  recently  address- 
ed a  number  of  questions  to  the  Chiefs  of 
Police  of  leading  American  cities,  includ- 
ing an  inquiry  as  to  the  extent  of  the 
opium  habit.  The  reports  from  Prohib- 
ition cities  showed  that  in  them  the 
opium  traffic  was  so  insignificant  as  to 
be  practically  unknown  to  the  police. 
"I'he  opium  habit  is  not  on  the  in- 
crease," wrote  the  Chief  of  Police  of 
Augusta,  Me.;  "The  opium  or  chloral 
habit  is  not  known  in  our  city,"  was  the 


report  from  Topeka,  Kan. ;  the  Cedar 
Rapids  (la.)  Chief  declared  that  "The 
opium  habit  is  not  a  feature  here,"  and 
from  Leavenworth,  Kan.,  the  information 
was  given  that  "  The  opium  habit  does 
not  prevail."  ^ 

Oregon. — See  Index. 

Original  Packages. — See  United 
States  Government  and  the  Liquor 
Traffic. 

Palestine. — The  Turkish  Govern- 
ment takes  no  notice  of  the  sale  of  liquor 
in  Palestine  from  any  question  of  right 
or  wrong  involved.  A  revenue  can  be 
derived  from  its  manufacture  and  sale, 
and  hence  a  tax  is  levied  upon  all  who 
engage  in  the  traffic  in  any  way„  In  fact 
the  question  as  to  the  moral  right  to 
make  or  sell  this  article  is  quite  foreign 
both  to  the  minds  of  private  individuals 
and  to  public  sentiment.  Every  seller 
of  any  and  every  description  of  liquor 
must  obtain  a  license,  and  curiously 
enough  he  must  obtain  this  from  the 
custom-house  authorities.  Moreover  the 
revenue  thus  derived  is  not  accounted 
for  to  the  local  Government,  either  mu- 
nicipal or  provincial,  but  is  sent  by  the 
custom-house  officei's  direct  to  Constanti- 
nople. The  sum  which  the  applicant  for  a 
license  pays  for  his  shop  as  rent  is  ascer- 
tained, aiid  an  amount  equal  to  one- 
fourth  of  this  is  charged  for  the  license. 
This  rule  holds  good  even  among  the 
Jews  where  many  such  shops  are  kept  by 
Jewish  Avomen,  and  the  shop  is  a  part  of 
the  house  where  the  woman  lives. 

In  the  year  1886  there  were  in  Jeru- 
salem alone  130  places  where  liquor  Avas 
sold.  There  are  no  purely  wholesale 
stores,  for  the  largest  liquor  merchant 
sells  also  by  the  glass  or  bottle.  Liquor- 
shops  are  not  open  in  the  evening.  The 
rule  for  them,  as  for  all  other  stores,  is 
to  close  at  sunset,  and  none  remain  open 
after  8  o'clock.  While  liquor  is  sold 
openly  it  should  be  said  that  a  public 
"barroom,"  as  that  term  is  understood 
in  America,  does  not  exist  in  Palestine. 
This  will  be  partly  explained  Avhen  it  is 
stated  that  the  general  custom  of  the 
country  is  for  people  to  purchase  liquor, 
take  it  home  and  use  it  there.  On  this 
account  fewer  drunken  persons  are  seen 

J  Philadelphia  Press,  Feb.  24,  1889.  (See  also  the  Voice 
for  March  21,  1889.) 


Palestine.] 


4G2 


[Passover  Wine. 


on  the  streets  than  in  our  own  towns  and 
cities. 

Among  the  non-Moslem  part  of  the 
population  those  who  take  to  liquor-sell- 
ing most  readily  are  Jews  and  Greeks. 
In  Jatfa  Italians  should  be  added  to  the 
list.  All  about  the  eastern  end  of  the 
Mediterranean  the  common  Levantine  is 
a  low  type  of  character  morally  speak- 
ing, and  when  persons  of  that  class  think 
of  employment  a  drinking-shop  or  a 
gambling-house  is  the  first  thing  that 
occurs  to  them  in  the  way  of  business. 

Palestine  is  a  land  of  grapes  and  the 
drink  of  the  country  is  wine.  The 
only  liquor  which  can  be  mentioned 
as  a  rival  of  wine  is  arak  (called  also 
rakee),  a  distilled  article  of  which  there 
are  several  grades.  It  is  manufactured 
largely  by  Jews  from  the  pomace  of 
grapes  after  the  Juice  has  been  extracted 
for  wine,  and  of  refuse  figs.  The  ordinary 
qualities  are  very  injurious  even  when 
taken  in  moderation.  In  188G  it  was 
officially  estimated  that  1,G00  bottles  of 
wine  were  consumed  daily  in  Jerusalem, 
and  a  like  number  of  bottles  of  arak. 
Common  arak  costs  7  cents  a  bottle, 
while  the  better  grades  cost  15  or  20 
cents:  Ten  per  cent,  of  the  amount  of 
arak  consumed  in  Jerusalem  is  manu- 
factured there;  the  rest  is  brought  from 
Cyprus  and  the  Greek  islands.  Of  the 
wine  used  70  per  cent,  is  made  there  or 
in  Bethlehem,  and  the  rest  is  imported 
chiefly  from  Cyprus.  The  wine  of  the 
country  is  as  a  rule  pure  and  very  cheap, 
5  to  10  cents  a  bottle  being  a  fair  price. 
This  applies  of  course  only  to  native 
wines  and  not  to  the  choicer  kinds  that 
are  imported.  In  addition  to  wine  and 
arak  there  were  in  the  year  referred  to 
as  many  as  10,000  bottles  of  beer  sold  in 
Jerusalem,  besides  the  amount  made  at 
a  German  brewery  near  the  city  and  the 
product  of  two  breweries  managed  by 
Italians  at  Jaffa.  This  imported  beer 
comes  from  Odessa  and  Germany  in  small 
quantities,  but  by  far  the  largest  part 
comes  from  Austria.  The  amount  of 
beer  that  is  imported  is  increasing  every 
year,  although  the  German  colonists  and 
the  natives  who  have  fallen  into  the 
habit  of  beer-drinking  find  that  in  the 
very  hot  climate  of  Palestine  they  can- 
not use  it  with  impunity. 

Probably  15  per  cent,  of  the  Moslem 
population  of  Jerusalem  drink   habitu- 


ally. The  Jews  universally  use  liquor, 
and  the  practice  is  indulged  in  by  a  large 
majority  of  the  Christian  population. 
Indeed,  it  is  rare  to  find  a  person  who 
does  not  use  wine  or  other  liquors  to  a 
certain  extent.  Cases  of  excess  and  intox- 
ication are  far  more  frequent  than  is 
supposed,  and  among  those  of  Avhom 
such  a  charge  would  be  true  are  many 
of  the  Turkish  officers  who  are  from 
time  to  time  stationed  at  Jerusalem  with 
its  garrison.  Details  which  have  been 
mentioned  as  true  of  Jerusalem  are 
equally  true  of  Jaffa,  althoiigh  similar 
statistics  for  that  city  cannot  here  be 
given.  In  towns  where  the  population 
is  exclusively  Mohammedan  drinking  is 
not  common.  AVhatever  may  have  been 
true  of  this  class  in  former  times  it  is  a 
lamentable  fact  at  present  that  the  use 
of  liquor  among  them  is  on  the  increase. 
In  England  and  America  it  is  frequently 
alleged  that  the  people  of  Palestine  are 
comparatively  free  from  intemperance 
and  drunkenness.  Statements  are  made 
even  that  the  wine  of  the  country,  being 
so  pure,  will  not  readily  intoxicate.  Such 
statements  are  pure  fictions. 

As  to  efforts  in  Palestine  to  check  the 
use  of  liquor,  to  show  people  the  evils  of 
the  drink  habit  or  to  reform  those  who 
have  come  under  its  curse,  none  are 
made.  The  Mohammedans,  who  are  all 
fatalists,  have  no  inclination  to  engage 
in  such  work,  nor  (but  for  other  reasons) 
have  the  Jews.  Among  the  handful  of 
Protestants  in  that  country  a  missionary 
here  and  there  uses  his  influence  for  the 
correction  of  the  vice,  but  he  reaches 
only  a  few  isolated  individuals.  In  the 
Holy  Land  as  in  other  countries  drink  is 
a  curse,  and  neither  Government  officials 
nor  people  have  as  yet  been  aroused  to 
remove  it.  Selah  Mekrill. 

Passover  Wine.— A  full  and  connect- 
ed examination  of  the  truth  as  to  Passover 
wine  demands  careful  observation  of  the 
following  order  of  consideration:  (1)  of 
feasts  anticipatory,  in  connection  with 
which  wine  is  not  mentioned ;  (2)  of  the 
early  observances  without  wine;  (3)  of 
the  successive  statutes  and  observances 
where  wine  is  mentioned ;  (4)  of  the  two 
other  Hebrew  feasts,  namely,  the  Feast  of 
Weeks  or  Pentecost,  at  which  the  use  of 
wine  is  implied,  and  the  Feast  of  Taber- 
nacles, where  it  is  described,  and  (5)  of 


Passover  Wine.]                                  463  [Passover  Wine. 

the  corruption  of   ancient  Hebrew  ens-  patory  provisions  is  noteworthy :  the  first 

toms  among  non-conforming  Jews  and  immediately  upon  the  original  appoint- 

their    preservation    among    conforming  ment.  the  second  made  by  the  statute  a 

Jews  since  the  final  destruction  of  Jeru-  part  of  the  brief  civil  code  to  rule  Israel 

salem  and  of  the  Jewish  State,  in   the   camp-life   of   40  years,  and  the 

It  is  noteworthy  that  feasts  of  families  third  written  during  the  year  preceding 

and  tribes  are  mentioned  as  having  been  the  second  Passover  (Lev.  :1'7:  :)4).     The 

general  customs  in  the  earliest  ages,  as  first  allusion  to  wine  (Ex.  2'2 :  29)  in  the 

those    of   Job's   sons    (Job    1:4,13),  at  Hebrew  term  "demagh"'  (in  the  Greek 

which  the  use  of  wine  is  mentioned;  of  ^'ajDarchas  lenou"),  only  once  found,  is 

Lot    where    it   is   implied    (Gen.    19:3,  specially  noteworthy;  the  word  "demagh" 

32);   of     Abraham,    Isaac     and    Laban  (as  the  Greek  translation  made  by  He- 

(Gen.  18 :  G  ;  21 :  8 ;    26 :  30 ;    29 :  22),   at  brews,  the  English  translation  "  liquors," 

which    the    use  of   wine    is    not    men-  and  the  statement  of  Fuerst,  the  ablest 

tioned,  and  of  Pharoah,  where  the  use  of  Hebrew  archaeologist,  all  indicate)  alludes 

wine   is    mentioned      (Gen.   40:11,   20,  to  the  juice  that  bursts  the  grape-skins  and 

21).     Prior,  moreover,  to   any   appoint-  trickles  in  tear-drops — the  Greek  "pro- 

ment  of  a  Hebrew  feast  Moses  mentions  tropos"  or  "dakraon,"  the  Roman  "pro- 

tlie  religious  banquet  as  a  custom  appa-  tropum"  or  "lachrymaB"  and  the  "'lach- 

rently   then  existing  (Ex.  5:   1;  10:9).  rymge  Christi"  or  tears  of  Christ  of  the 

The  absence   of  mention  of  the  use  of  Middle  Ages, — which  was  the  purest  of 

wine  at  most  of  these  feasts  must  be  ob-  unfermented  wine. 

served  in  order  to  impartially  study  the  In  the  record  of  the  second  Passover, 

early  history  of  the  Passover  where  no  observed  at  Mt.  Sinai  at  the  close  of  their 

Vi^ine  is  mentioned,  and  also  to  judge  in-  year  spent  there  (Num.  9:  5),  four  im- 

telligently  of  the  cliaracter  of  the  wine  portant  connected  facts   are   presented, 

used  at  feasts  before  and  after  Moses's  In   Num.  6:    1-2L    the    law   of   "Naza- 

appointment.     (See   the  second  part  of  rites"   is   given   as  an   already  existing 

Bible  Wines.)  order,  bound  in  all  future  history  to  ab- 

The   early   history   of    the    Pdssover,  stain   from   fermented   wine  (Judg.  13: 

from  the  Exodus  to  its  first  observance  4,7';    1    Sam.    1:11,  15;     Jer.   35:6-8; 

in  -the  land  of  promise,  makes  no  men-  Luke  1 :  15) ;  while  also  at  seasons  of  spe- 

tion  of  wine,  the  emphasis  always  being  cial  care,  lest  as  in  the  case  of  Noah  an 

on  the  provision  that  there  shall  be  no  intoxicant  might  be  taken,  abstinence  for 

"leaven."     The  first  appointment  fixes  a  season  from  all  products  of  the  grape 

the  day  as  the  "  beginning  "  of  the  civil  was  a  part  of  their  vow,  from  which  they 

year,  corresponding  to  that  noted  in  all  might  be  released  at  festivals  (Num.  6 : 

American    proclamations;    it     indicates  2-4,   13,    15,   17;   Judg.   13:    14).     It   is 

that  the  three  provisions,  roast  lamb,  bit-  manifest  that  this  class  could  not  be  ex- 

ter   herbs   or   uncooked  salads,  and  un-  eluded  from  the  Passover,  whose  observ- 

leavened  bread,  were  provisions  of  haste,  ance  immediately  followed,  while,  too,  the 

as   in   camps ;  and   it  provides  that  all  wine  provision  alluded  to  in  Ex.  22 :  29 

refugees  who  had  by  circumcision  united  is  not  excluded  by  the  Nazarite  vow.    In 

with  the  Jewish  people,  and  none  others,  the   observance   immediately   following, 

should  partake  of  the  feast  (Ex.  12:  8,  though  strict  care  as  to  unleavened  bread, 

11,  15,  38,  41).     This   original   appoint-  fresh  salad  and  lamb  fresh  and  not  left 

ment  makes  the  special  emphasis  to  rest  until  morning  (Num.  9: 11,  12)  is  to  be 

on  the  exclusion  of  everything  "  leaven-  observed,  no  mention  of  wine  is  made. 

ed  "  from  the   house  (v.  19),  while  later  Only  a  few  days  after  this  observance 

history  teaches   that  the  first  jjerversion  a  third  illustration  of  provision  for  the 

of    the    feast    brought    down    a  social  Passover  occurs.     The  spies  entering  the 

curse    (Ex.  32:1-6).      It  is  specially  to  land  of  promise  bring  back  a  grape-clus- 

be  observed  that  the  use  of  wine  seems  ter  so  large  and  rich  that  two  men  are 

to  have  been  directly  deferred  until  they  needed   to   carry   it   on  a  pole  between 

came  into  the  "land  flowing  with  milk  them   (Num.   13:20-23),  the  "season  of 

and  honey"  or   grape-syrup  (Ex.  13:5;  the  first   grapes"   being  manifestly  de- 

22:29   and    23:  14-19;    Lev.  23:5,     6,  signed  to  enforce  the  law  as  to  wine  at 

10,  13).     The  tifne  of  these  three  antici-  the  Passover,  not  to  be  observed  again 


Passover  Wine.] 


4G4 


[Passover  Wine. 


until  they  reached  the  land  where  this 
provision  would  be  permanent.  Immedi- 
ately upon  this  hinted  supply  follows  the 
fourth  fact,  the  statute  requiring  that  all 
offerings  to  the  j^riest  and  at  festivals  of 
vine-products  be  "  fresh,  unfermented 
wine"  (Num.  18:12).  (See  Unfer- 
mented Wine.)  It  is  this  cumulative 
testimony  ,  all  to  one  point,  that  forbids 
any  idea  that  other  than  unfermented 
wine  was  divinely  appointed  as  Passover 
wine.  The  next  observance  of  the  Pass- 
over, 39  years  later,  and  when  they  had 
in  the  early  spring  just  entered  Canaan 
(Josh.  5:10,  11),  makes  no  mention  of 
any  other  tlian  "  unleavened  bread  "  as 
the  provision  made.  In  the  renewed 
statutes  of  Moses  (Deut.  IG :  2-G)  and  in 
successive  allusions  to  the  observance 
(II  Kings,  23 :  22,  23 ;  II  Chron.  30 :  15 ; 
35:1,  11,  18;  Ezek.  45:21  and  Ezra 
G:19,  20),  no  mention  of  wine  seems 
necessary ;  while  its  designation  down  to 
Christ's  day  is  simply  as  the  "feast  of 
unleavened  bread  "  (Ex.  12 :  7 ;  23:15; 
34 :  18 ;  Lev.  23 :  G ;  Deut.  IG :  IG ;  II  Chron. 
8:13;  30 :  13,21 ;  35 :  17 ;  Ezra,  G :  22 ;  Ezek. 
45;  Matt.  27:17;  Mark,  14 : 1  and  Luke 
32:1). 

The  emphasis  with  which  "  unleav- 
ened bread  "  was  required,  with  scarcely 
an  allusion  to  the  wine,  and  the  fact  that 
both  statutes  mentioning  the  wine  to  be 
used  declare  it  to  be  the  "  fresh,  unfer- 
mented juice  of  the  grape,"  both  justify 
and  compel  the  decision  that  the  wine  of 
the  Passover,  by  divine  appointment, 
must  be  free  from  ferment. 

The  provisions  for  the  later  feasts  add 
confirraatio]!  to  this  manifest  appoint- 
ment. The  Passover  came  in  the  spring 
before  the  grapes  which  furnished  fresh 
wine  ripened,  but  the  methods  of  preserv- 
ing "unfermented  wines"  in  Egypt  were 
of  Egyptian  origin,  and  were  practiced  at 
least  three  or  four  centuries  before  Moses 
lived  and  became  master  of  "  the  wisdom 
of  Egypt." 

The  second,  or  "Feast  of  Weeks"  (Ex. 
34 : 2 :  Deut.  IG :  10 ;  II  Chron.  8 :  13),  called 
in  the  (Ireek  Apocryjjhal  books  written 
after  Alexander's  day  the  "  Pentecost "  or 
Fiftieth  Day  Feast,  occurring  seven 
weeks  or  49  days  after  the  Passover,  was 
at  the  season  of  early  vintage,  for  it  was 
at  this  feast,  three  times  mentioned  in 
the  New  Testament  (Acts,  2:  1;  20:  IG;  I 
Cor.  16 :  8),  that  Peter  and  his  brother 


Apostles  were  charged  with  being  full  of 
"new  wine"  (Creek  "gleukos"). 

The  Feast  of  Tabernacles  came  in  the 
autumn,  at  the  "in-gathering"  of  the 
later  vintage  (Lev.  23:  3,  4,  43;  Deut. 
IG :  16 ;  Neh.  8 : 4-18) ;  the  only  mention  of 
the  wine  used  being  (Neh.  8 :  10)  in  the 
Hebrew  word  "mamthagim"  (Greek 
"glukasmon"),  or  the  rich,  "sweet" 
juice  of  the  grape-clusters  pressed  out 
when  the  skins  begin  to  shrivel  from  the 
evaporation  of  the  water,  which  makes 
the  juice  syrup-like.  Thus  every  allu- 
sion to  the  wine  of  the  three  Hebrew 
feasts  indicates  that  it  is  unfermented. 
The  final  confirmation  is  found  in  the 
fact  that  Jesus,  speaking  of  the  Passover 
cup  (Luke  22:18)  which  preceded  the 
breaiving  of  the  bread  and  became  the  cup 
of  his  new  ordinance  (vs.  19-20)  says: 
"  apo  ton  genematos  tes  ampelou  " — "  of 
the  fruit  of  the  vine." 

The  Talmud  has  often  been  quoted  as 
indicating  that  intoxicating  wine  was 
used  at  the  Passover  by  the  Hebrews 
after  the  final  fall  of  their  city  and  State ; 
but  these  facts  and  principles  are 
noteworthy:  (1)  The  divine  ordinances, 
as  all  of  the  Prophets  and  as  Jesus  and 
Paul  declare,  were  grossly  violated  in  the 
days  both  of  prosperity  and  adversity, 
and  the  question  is  not  what  some  He- 
brews did,  but  whether  the  law  of  the  Old 
Testament,  just  considered,  justified  such 
actions — whether  when  drunkenness  is 
declared  a  sin,  intoxicating  wines — and 
these  drunk  to  intoxication — were  God's 
appointment  for  his  solemn  feast;  (2) 
While  the  Talmud  would  never  be  quoted 
as  authority  by  any  Christian  teacher 
who  realizes  his  responsibility,  the  fact 
should  be  stated  that  in  the  very  age  of 
the  Talmud  and  in  every  generation 
since,  its  authority  with  "  orthodox " 
Rabbis  has  not  been  decisive;  and  (3) 
Though  studious  efforts  have  been  made 
to  draw  from  non-conforming  Rabbis 
statements  that  the  wines  of  their  Pass- 
over are  now  and  have  ever  been  intoxi- 
cating, the  following  statement  of  Judge 
Joachimsen  (so  long  and  highly  es- 
teemed in  New  York  and  lately  de- 
ceased) has  not  only  not  been  contravened 
but  has  been  confirmed  by  even  the  most 
liberal  Rabbis.  In  response  to  a  request 
for  a  written  statement  of  a  former  ver- 
bal declaration  the  following  note  was 
received  by  the  writer  of  this  article  : 


Pauperism.] 


465 


[Pauperism. 


"  336  East  69tii  Street,  IS'ew  York.  Feb. 
15,  1881. — Rev.  and  Dear  Sir:  lu  answer  to 
_Vour  favor  of  yesterday's  date,  I  repeat  that  the 
"great  majority  of  conforming  Jews  in  this  city 
use  wine  made  from  raisins  at  the  Passover 
Feast.  Of  course  the  raisins  are  fres/i.  Such 
raisin- wine  is  used  in  all  conforming  synagogues 
for  the  sanctitication  of  the  Sabbath  and  holy 
days,  i.e.,  for  Riddush  and  also  for  services  at 
circumcisions  and  weddings.  Some,  but  not 
many,  people  use  imported  wine — Italian,  Hun- 
garian or  German, — which  is  certified  as  'Perach' 
or  '  Kosher  wine.' — I  am  most  truly  yours, 

"P.  J.  JOACHIMSEN." 

It  thus  appears  that  the  wines  used  by 
all  conforming  Jews  are  free  from  fer- 
ment, and  Judge  Joachimsen  in  a  subse- 
quent note  refers  to  synagogues  of  New 
York  City  Jews  from  "Tangiers,  Morocco, 
Tunis  "  on  the  African  coast ;  from  "  Gib- 
raltar, Spain  and  Portugal ;"  also  "French, 
Hollandish,  English,  German,  Kussian 
and  Bohemian,  Polish  and  Lithuanian," 
— all  conforming  synagogues. 

Among  the  very  few  non-conforming 
Rabbis  who  replied  to  Dr.  Howard 
Crosby's  circular  in  the  summer  of  18S8, 
Kabbi  Gottheil  writes  as  follows,  on  be- 
half of  his  "  liberal "  as  distinguished 
from  his  "  orthodox  "  fellow-Rabbis : 

' '  It  is  proper  to  u.se  fermented  wine.  .  ,  . 
Unfermented  wine  is  permitted,  in  case  the 
former  (or  Kosher  wine)  cannot  be  obtained,  or 
is  forbidden  for  sanitary  rea.sons.  So  is  it  with 
mead,  raisin-wine  and  spiced  wine." 

It  is  again  to  be  recalled  that  in  every 
Old  Testament  mention  that  is  specific, 
unfermented  wine  is  that  required  at 
Hebrew  feasts,  and  it  is  to  be  noted  that 
Rabbi  Gottheil  admits  the  e.risfence  and 
proper  use  of  both  unfermented  and 
raisin-wine.  The  latter  (we  may  confi- 
dently allege)  has  been  universally  used 
Ijy  Jews  who  adhere  to  the  letter  of  their 
law.  No  one  questions  that  Jesus  was  a 
'•  conforming  Jew,"  and  he  characterized 
the  wine  of  the  Passover  as  "  the  fruit 
of  the  vine."  G.  W.  Samson. 

Pauperism. — The  responsibility  of 
drink  for  extreme  poverty  is  one  of 
the  chief  grounds  for  assailing  the  traf- 
fic in  liquors  and  seeking  its  extinction. 
It  is  impossible  to  allude  to  the  evils 
caused  by  alcohol  without  placing  pau- 
perism well  at  the  front:  indeed,  in 
enumerating  these  evils  it  is  customarv 
to  mention  crime  first  and  pauperism 
second. 

The  statistics  of  pauperism  given  by 
the   United  States  Census  for  1880  are 


defective  and  practically  valueless.  The 
total  number  of  paupers  in  the  country 
during  that  year  is  placed  at  only  88,6(i5, 
of  whom  GT,0G7  were  inmates  of  institu- 
tions, and  21,598  were  ''out-door  pau- 
pers." As  an  example  of  the  unreliability 
of  these  returns,  the  aggregate  for 
Massachusetts  is  only  5,423;  but  the 
Massachusetts  State  Census  for  1885  re- 
ports 8,394  adult  paupers  and  5,33:i 
homeless  children — a  total  of  13,726.  It 
is  impossible,  therefore,  to  determine^ 
even  with  reasonable  approximation,  how 
many  paupers  there  are  in  the  United 
States.  The  stated  number  of  inmates  of 
almshouses  in  1880(67,007)  may  probably 
be  accepted  as  sufficiently  accurate;  but 
there  is  no  doubt  that  this  is  greatly  ex- 
ceeded by  the  number  of  persons  not 
lodged  in  public  institutions  (including 
tramps  and  vagrants)  who  depend  more 
or  less  upon  charity  and  are  to  be  re- 
garded as  practically  in  a  state  of  pauper- 
ism. Neither  do  the  Government  returns 
show  the  causes  of  pauperism.  To  ar- 
rive at  an  .intelligent  understanding  of 
these  causes,  and  especially  of  the  part 
played  by  drink,  it  is  necessary  to  con- 
sult expert  testimony;  and  fortunately 
this  is  to  be  had  in  alDundance. 

While  there  are  no  satisfactory  figures 
for  tlie  United  States  at  large,  some 
valuable  investigations  have  been  made 
in  separate  States  and  localities.  For 
years  the  social  statistics  of  Massachusetts 
have  had  a  very  high  reputation  for 
trustworthiness.  This  is  one  of  the 
richest  and  most  intelligent  States  of  the 
Union,  where  the  percentage  of  pauper- 
ism chargeable  to  drink  is  probably  not 
uncommonly  high.  The  results  of  official 
inquiries  in  Massachusetts  are  thus  sum- 
marized by  a  writer  occupying  one  of 
the  most  prominent  judicial  positions  in: 
the  Commonwealth  •)■ 

' '  The  pauper  returns,  made  annually  for  a 
long  time  to  the  Secretary  of  State,  show  an 
average  of  about  80  per  cent,  as  due  to  this 
cause  in  the  county  of  Suffolk  (mainly  the  city 
of  Boston).  Thus,  in  1863,  the  whole  number 
relievetl  is  stated  at  12,248.  Of  these  the  num- 
ber made  dependent  by  their  own  intemperance 
is  given  as  6,048,  and  the  number  so  made  by 
the  intemperance  of  parents  and  guardians  at 
3,837,  making  an  aggregate  of  9,885.  The  3d 
report  of  the  Board  of  State  Charities,  p.  203 
(January,  1867),  declares  intemperance  to  be 
'  the  chief  occasion  of  pauperism,'  and  the  5th 


1  Kobcrt,  C.  Pitman,  in  "Alcohol  and  the  State"  (New 
York,  ISStj),  pp.  3(>-:d3. 


Pauperism.] 


4G6 


[Pauperism. 


report  says :  '  Overseers  of  the  Poor  variously 
estimate  the  proportion  of  crime  and .  paiiperism 
attributable  to  the  vice  of  intemperance  from 
one-third  in  some  localities  up  to  nine-tenths  in 
others.  This  seems  large,  but  is,  doubtless, 
correct  in  regard  to  some  localities,  and  partic- 
ularly among  the  class  of  persons  receiving 
temporary  relief,  the  greater  proportion  of 
whom  are  of  foreign  birth  or  descent.'  In  the 
6th  annual  report  of  the  Board  of  Health  (Jan- 
uary, 1875),  p.  45,  under  the  head  '  Intemper- 
ance as  a  Cause  of  Pauperism,'  the  Chairman, 
Dr.  Bowditch,  gives  the  result  of  answers  re- 
ceived from  282  of  the  towns  and  cities  to  the 
two  following  questions:  '1.  What  proportion 
■of  the  inmates  of  your  almshouses  are  there  in 
■consequence  of  the  deleterious  use  of  intoxi- 
cating liquors  ?  2.  What  proportion  of  the 
■  children  in  the  house  are  there  in  consequence  of 
the  drunkenness  of  parents  '? '  While  it  appears 
that  in  the  country  towns  the  proportion  is  quite 
variable  and  less  than  the  general  current  of 
statistics  would  lead  one  to  expect,  which  is 
fairly  attributable  in  part,  at  least,  to  the  extent 
to  which  both  law  and  public  opinion  has  re- 
stricted the  use  and  traffic  in  liquors,  yet  we 
have  from  the  city  of  Boston,  the  headquarters 
of  the  trallic,  this  emphatic  testimony  from  the 
Superintendent  of  the  Deer  Island  Almshouse 
and  Hospital  :  '  I  would  answer  the  above  by 
saying,  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  and  belief, 
90  per  cent,  to  both  questions.  Our  register 
shows  that  full  one-third  of  the  inmates  received 
for  the  last  two  years  are  here  through  the 
direct  cause  of  drunkenness.  Very  few  inmates 
(there  are  exceptions)  in  this  house  but  what 
rum  brought  them  there.  Setting  aside  the 
sentenced  boys  (sent  here  for  truancy,  petty 
theft,  etc.),  nine-tenths  of  the  remainder  are 
here  through  the  inliuence  of  the  use  of  intoxi- 
cating liquors  by  the  parents.  The  great  and 
.  almost  the  only  cause  for  so  much  poverty  and 
•distress  in  the  city  can  be  traced  to  the  use  of 
intoxicating  drink  either  by  the  husband  or 
wife,  or  both.''  A  startling  testimony  as  to  the 
effect  of  this  cause  in  producing  the  allied  evil 
and  even  nuisance  of  vagrancy  is  given  in  the 
answer  from  the  city  of  Springfield  :  '  In  addi- 
tion to  circular  I  would  say  that  we  have  lodged 
and  fed  8,052  persons  that  we  call  "  tramps, "  and 
I  can  seldom  find  a  man  among  them  who  was 
not  reduced  to  that  condition  by  intemperance. 
It  is  safe  to  say  nine-tenths  are  drunkards, 
though  we  have  not  the  exact  records.'  " 

.  The  report  of  the  Secretary  of  State 
■of  New  York  for  1863  says  that  during 
the  year  "  The  whole  number  of  paupers 
relieved  was  261,252 ;  during  the  preced- 
ing year,  257,534.  These  numbers 
would  be  in  the  ratio  of  one  pauper  an- 
nually to  every  15   inhabitants  through- 

'  The  "  Apgooiated  Charities  of  Boston,"  an  organi- 
zation composed  of  51  charitable  societies  and  29  similar 
church  institutions  of  the  city,  say  in  Iheir  second  annual 
report :  •'  In  the  following  reports  from  the  Ward  Con- 
ferences there  is  universal  testimony  that  drunkenness  is 
the  cause  of  nine-tenths  of  the  pauperism  in  Boston. 
How  to  counteract  this  evil  is  the  first  subject  presented 
to  this  body  for  consideration."— ^fco/ioi  in  Society, 
p.  111. 


out  the  State.  In  an  examination  made 
into  the  history  of  those  paupers  by  a 
competent  committee,  seven-eighths  of 
them  were  reduced  to  this  low  and  de- 
graded condition,  directly  or  indirectly, 
through  intemperance."  And  the  Com- 
missioners of  Charity  and  Correction  for 
New  York  City  said  in  their  report  for 
1880: 

"The  causes  of  pauperism  and  consequent 
disease  and  crime  have  received  careful  and 
thorough  investigation  by  those  long  enjoying 
favorable  advantages  of  observation.  Many 
reasons  for  this  painful  and  rapidly  increasing 
pauperism  among  the  people  have  been  as- 
signed, but  that  which  takes  precedence  above 
and  beyond  all  others  is  the  curse  of  intemper- 
ance. It  is  this  which  robs  the  pockets  of  the 
poor  man;  it  is  this  which  benumbs  his  brain 
and  destroys  his  faculties,  and  this  which  pre- 
disposes himself  and  his  children  to  fatal 
disease.  It  is  this  which  breeds  sensuality 
in  all  its  protean  and  disgusting  forms,  this 
which  induces  shiftlessness  and  irresponsibility 
among  the  masses,  and  it  is  this  which  saps  the 
life  from  those  who  would  otherwise  be  healthy 
and  vigorous.  The  statistics  of  almshouses, 
workhouses,  penitentiaries,  asylums  and  hospi- 
tals all  attest  this  dark  and  gloomy  fact.  .  .  . 
If  the  malignant  character  of  this  eneiuy  of  the 
people's  health,  and  its  far-reaching  tendencies 
toward  disease  and  death,  were  more  thoroughly 
understood,  a  revolution  in  sentiment  on  the 
question  might  the  more  speedily  be  inaugu- 
rated." 

Howard  Crosby,  D.  D.,  one  of  the  men 
least  disposed  to  indulge  in  exaggerated 
statements,  has  made  this  declaration: 
"  I  have  been  watching  for  35  years  and 
in  all  my  investigations  among  the  poor 
I  never  yet  found  a  family  borne  down 
by  poverty  that  did  not  owe  its  fall  to 
rum."  ^  And  Horace  Greeley,  in  a  Tri- 
bnne  editorial,  said:  "Most  of  our 
paupers  have  become  such  through 
the  use  of  alcoholic  liqitors — often  by 
themselves,  sometimes  by  their  parents 
or  other  guardians.  We  estimate  that 
nine-tenths  of  the  paupers  in  our  country 
were  made  so  directly  by  strong  drink."  * 

The  Voice,  in  1886,  sent  letters  to  a 
large  number  of  Superintendents  of 
Almshouses  and  Poor  Directors  con- 
cerning the  relations  existing  between 
destitution  and  drink.  William  Murrav, 
Superintendent  for  19  years  of  the 
Kings  County  Almshouse  (Brooklyn, 
N.  Y.),  said:  "My  opinion  is  that  liquor 
is  the  principal  cause  of  pauper- 
ism.    If  there  had  been  no  liquor  drank, 

»  The  Voice,  I)cc.  9,  1886. 
3  Alcoliol  in  Society,  p.  108. 


Pauperism,] 


467 


[Penalties. 


say  for  the  past  100  years,  there  would 
be  ahnost  no  pauperism  and  there  woukl 
be  no  poor-houses."  Among  the  esti- 
mates given  from  various  cities  and 
towns  of  the  percentage  of  pauperism 
occasioned  by  drink  were  the  following: 

Worcester,  Mass. :  Among  the  males,  90  per 
cent. ;  females,  70  per  cent. 

Albany,  N.  Y. :  About  nine-tenths. 

Meadville,  Pa. :  Nine-tenths.     (Estimated  by 
O.   H.   Hollister,   who  had  been  Clerk  of  the 
Directors  of  the  Poor  of  Crawford  County  for 
15  years. ) 
.    Lanesborough,  Mass.:  Nine-tenths. 

North  Brookfield,  Mass. :  Fully  two-thirds. 

Lima,  Pa. :  Not  less  than  75  per  cent. 

St.  Charles,  Mo. :  From  75  to  85  per  cent. 

Shelly,  N.  C. :  At  least  two-thirds. 

Bowling  Green,  O. :  Nine-tenths. 

Minneapolis,  Minn. :  At  least  80  per  cent. 

Hamilton,  O. :  Three-fourths.  ' 

Strong  light  has  been  thrown  upon 
this  subject  in  England.  Sir  Wilfrid 
Lawson  is  authority  for  the  statement 
that  in  Glasgow  the  Lord  Provost,  during 
a  certain  number  of  weeks  in  wbich  he 
had  administered  relief  to  the  distressed, 
"  had  asked  every  applicant  if  he  was  a 
teetotaler,  and  found  he  had  not  one 
teetotaler  come  before  him  for  relief."'  ^ 
In  18G4  a  careful  inquiry  was  made  into 
the  circumstances  of  611  paupers  in  the 
Edinburgh  City  Poor-house,  these  611 
being  all  the  persons  contained  in  that 
institution  at  the  time,  "  and  it  was 
found  that  among  them  all  there  was  not 
a  single  abstainer  and  that  407  of  them 
had  been  '  reduced  to  their  impoverished 
condition  through  drink.' "  ^  The  fol- 
lowing extract  is  made  from  a  report  of 
a  Convocation  of  Canterbury:  "It  can 
be  shown  that  an  enormous  proportion  of 
the  pauperism,  which  is  felt  to  be  such  a 
burden  and  discouragement  by  the  in- 
dustrious and  sober  members  of  the  com- 
munity, and  has  such  a  degrading  and 
demoralizing  effect  upon  most  recipients 
of  parochial  relief,  is  the  direct  and  com- 
mon product  of  intemperance.  It  ap- 
pears, indeed,  that  at  least  75  per  cent,  of 
the  occupants  of  our  workhouses  and  a 
large  proportion  of  those  receiving  out- 
door pay  have  become  pensioners  on  the 
public  directly  or  indirectly  through 
drunkenness  and  the  improvidence  and 
absence  of  self-respect  which  this  pesti- 


'  The  Voice,  Nov.  25,  Dec. 
Jau.  6.  1887. 


9  and  Dec.  16,  1886,  and 


^  Foundation  of  Death,  p.  242. 
8  Alcohol  in  Society,  pp.  113-13. 


lent  vice  is  known  to  engender  and  per- 
petuate." ^  Gen.  Booth  of  the  Salvation 
Army,  in  his  book,  *'  In  Darkest  Eng- 
land" (1890),  gives  the  following  esti- 
mates of  the  numbers  of  paupers,  desti- 
tute and  nearly  destitute  persons  in  the 
city  of  London:  Paupers,  51,000;  home- 
less, 33,000;  starving,  300,000;  the  very 
poor,  609,000  —  total,  993,000.  Gen. 
Booth  lays  stress  upon  drink  as  one  of  the 
great  causes  of  all  this  poverty. 

Penalties. — The  penalties  against  the 
unlawful  sale  of  intoxicating  drink  im- 
posed in  the  different  States  have  to  a 
great  extent  been  copied  from  the  statutes 
of  New  York,  and  it  is  remarkable  that 
the  New  York  penalties  have  not  been 
essentially  changed  in  50  years.  While 
public  sentiment  has  been  altered  mater- 
ially and  the  habits  of  the  people  have 
undergone  a  still  more  striking  alteration 
the  penalties  imposed  for  violating  the 
liquor  laws  are  to-day  substantially  the 
same  as  they  were  when  it  would  have 
been  considered  an  affront  or  an  act  of 
inhospitality  not  to  offer  the  social  glass. 
The  merchant  in  the  olden  time  peddled 
out  his  rum  with  his  groceries  and  dry- 
goods.  The  clergyman  and  the  flock 
were  social  drinkers,  and  not  infrequently 
the  distillery  was  side  by  side  with  the 
flour-mill  and  close  by  the  house  of  wor- 
ship. It  was  not  a  sin  to  drink,  or  a  crime 
to  become  intoxicated,  in  any  person's 
estimation.  Yet  to  sell  drink  v/ithout 
first  obtaining  a  license,  under  these  easy 
conditions,  notwithstanding  the  poverty 
of  our  ancestors,  was  severely  punished 
by  a  fine  of  |50.  Now  all  is  changed — 
except  the  penalty.  In  those  days  the 
public  inn  barely  supported  the  family  of 
the  host.  Now  a  public  bar  can  be  run 
almost  anywhere  and  its  owner  pay  a  $50 
fine  once  a  month,  if  necessary,  and  reap 
besides  a  large  profit.  Fortunes  were 
not  made  in  a  day,  and  |50  was  a  large 
amount  to  be  taken  from  the  income. 
Now  a  "  fast  "  man  will  spend  much  more 
than  this  in  a  night's  carouse.  Then 
crime,  poverty,  insanity  and  pauperism 
had  not  been  laid  with  statistical  accu- 
racy at  the  door  of  the  traffic.  Saloons 
were  unknown.  The  politics  of  the 
country  was  not  ruled  by  an  oligarchy  of 
brewers  and  distillers.  It  is  not  wonder- 
ful that  under  such  circumstances  a  fine 

*  Ibid. 


Penalties.] 


468 


[Penalties. 


of  $50  for  an  unlicensed  sale,  and  one  of 
$10  for  selling  to  a  minor,  were  deemed 
sufficient  penalties.  But  it  seems  inex- 
plicable that  in  these  closing  years  of  the 
19th  Century,  with  the  inicjuity  of  so 
devilish  a  traffic  standing  out  in  a  blazing 
light,  the  penalties  even  against  the  un- 
lawful sale  of  intoxicants  remain  practi- 
cally as  they  were  50  years  ago.  And  the 
belief  that  no  Prohibitory  legislation  can 
be  enforced  is  entertained  by  intelligent 
persons,  forgetting  the  undeniable  fact 
that  for  offenses  against  the  public  weal 
no  penalties  are  so  weak,  no  charges  so. 
difficult  to  prove  and  finally  no  prosecu- 
tions so  expensive  to  the  complainants  as 
in  cases  of  violations  of  Excise  laws. 

The  law  in  a  certain  locality  forbids 
the  sale  of  intoxicating  drink.  But  what 
is  intoxicating  drink  ?  Are  cider,  small 
beer,  cordials,  etc.,  etc.,  intoxicating? 
Suppose  we  admit  that  they  are  in- 
toxicating. How  can  you  prove  that  the 
glass  of  cider  sold  was  not  vinegar — both 
being  of  the  same  color  ?  From  the 
nature  of  the  case  a  witness  cannot 
swear  positively  unless  he  drinks  from 
the  same  glass.  Of  course  with  a  tem- 
perance jury  mere  quibbles  would  not 
avail,  but  that  it  is  almost  impossible  to 
obtain  a  conviction  for  illicit  sale  in 
many  places  is  notorious.  The  pigeon- 
holes of  District  Attorneys  are  packed 
with  untried  indictments,  often  untried 
for  want  of  evidence.  There  is  one 
witness,  however,  seldom  called  by  the 
prosecution,  for  obvious  reasons,  who 
does  know  the  character  of  the  drink 
he  sells.  He  can  tell,  if  cold  tea  has  the 
color  of  brandy,  whether  he  sold  brandy 
or  tea.  He  may  say  that  he  cannot  tell 
whether  small  beer  or  cordial  is  in- 
toxicating, but  the  law  can  meet  such 
instances  of  ignorance.  The  difficulty 
is  a  very  serious  one  where  only  an  ex- 
cuse is  wanted  in  the  mind  of  one  juror 
to  acquit.  But  matters  would  have  a 
different  aspect  if  such  an  addendum  as  the 
following,  for  example,  were  attached  to 
the  statute :  "  Provided  that  if  the  sub- 
stance sold  or  given  away  shall  have  the 
appearance  of  brandy,  cider,  etc.,  etc., 
such  appearance  shall  be  deemed  prima 
facie  evidence  that  such  substance  was 
brandy,  cider,  etc.,  etc.,  and  intoxicating 
under  this  statute."  The  burden  of 
proof  would  then  be  shifted.  The  dealer 
would  have  to  prove  that  the  substance 


sold  or  given  away  was  unintoxicating,  or 
suffer  conviction.  Trials  would  be 
simplified  wonderfully.  There  are 
abundant  precedents  for  asking  for  a 
provision  of  this  nature.  For  instance, 
the  finding  of  game  out  of  season  in  the 
possession  of  a  person  is  p7-iina  facie 
evidence  of  unlawful  killing.  On  trial 
he  may  prove  that  the  alleged  partridge 
or  grouse  was  only  a  tame  chicken.  Tlie 
liquor-dealer  may  prove  that  the  alleged 
brandy  was  only  tea.  No  wrong  is  done 
in  either  case,  and  no  one  can  justly 
complain. 

The  experience  gained  under  the 
United  States  Revenue  laws  removes  all 
doubt  as  to  the  character  of  the  penalties 
that  should  be  embraced  in  Prohibitory 
laws.  This  experience  proves  that  Pro- 
hibition can  be  enforced.  The  minimum 
penalty  should  be  1200  for  the  first 
offense  ;  for  the  second,  after  one  con- 
viction, double,  with  three  months'  im- 
prisonment, and  a  corresponding  increase 
for  each  new  offense.  No  indictment 
should  be  necessary,  but  a  civil  action 
should  lie  in  any  Court  of  competent 
jurisdiction. 

There  are  certain  offenses  that  shock 
or  endanger  the  public  and  are  punished, 
but  it  is  a  lamentable  fact  that  we  are  a 
nation  of  law-breakers.  Murder,  arson 
and  the  like  are  followed  by  arrest  and 
punishment.  But  the  statute-books  are 
full  of  laws  that  are  obsolete  or  habitu- 
ally disregarded,  and  none  so  conspicu- 
ously as  Excise  laws.  The  reason  for  the 
disregard  of  the  latter  grows  out  of  the 
difficulty  already  hinted  at,  of  proof  and 
conviction,  but  this  is  not  the  main  diffi- 
culty. The  liquor  business  is  entrenched 
behind  ample  capital.  Its  profits  enable 
it,  in  case  of  complaint,  to  procure  the 
best  legal  talent  in  defense.  The  prose- 
cution generally  begins  by  way  of  indict- 
ment, and  if  a  bill  is  found  a  year  or 
more  may  elapse  before  the  trial,  which, 
if  favorable  to  the  complainant,  is  usually 
appealed  from,  and  another  year  may  be 
consumed.  Meanwhile  the  dealer's  profits 
enable  him  to  pay  the  cost  of  the  law's 
delay.  And  so  long  as  rum  rules  poli- 
tics there  Avill  be  no  haste  to  convict,  even 
in  instances  of  undoubted  guilt — in  short, 
the  dice  are  loaded  and  the  law  is  defied. 
During  all  tliis  time  the  good  citizen  who 
complained,  moved  by  a  laudable  desire 
to  protect  society  ancl  see  that  law  is  re- 


Penalties.] 


469 


[Persia. 


spected  and  obeyed,  is  subject  to  perse- 
cution and  insult  and  must  out  of  his 
own  pocket  defray  numerous  expenses, 
with  no  reimbursement,  even  if  he  gains 
a  conviction.  Is  it  any  wonder  that  Pro- 
hibition sometimes  does  not  prohibit 
under  such  circumstances  ?  Tlie  late  Mr. 
Bergh,  who  did  so  much  to  secure  laws 
to  protect  animals  from  cruelty,  told  the 
writer  that  no  matter  what  laws  he  pro- 
cured, for  years  he  was  obliged  to  hire 
attorneys,  get  witnesses  and  pay  other 
expenses  from  his  own  purse  before  he 
could  complete  the  work  of  justice,  and 
that  his  difficulties  continued  until  the 
law  was  amended  so  as  to  provide  for 
moieties.  The  fact  is,  the  expense  of 
conviction  is  the  one  immovable  barrier 
to  the  complete  triumph  of  Prohibition 
wherever  enacted.  The  experience  of  the 
United  States,  based  upon  the  experience 
of  the  Old  World,  demonstrates  that  it  is 
absolutely  necessary  for  the  Government 
to  make  special  inducements  for  the  en- 
couragement of  those  interested  in  the 
prosecution  of  evil-doers.  One  plan  is  to 
hire  detectives  by  the  year  or  month  and 
compensate  them  from  the  public  funds, 
but  this  method  is  not  wholly  satisfactory. 
Another  is  to  give  the  informer  or  pros- 
ecutor one-half  the  fine  recovered. 
There  is  also  great  propriety  in  the  policy 
of  making  the  guilty  offender — enriched 
by  his  illicit  traffic — pay  the  cost  incurred 
in  convicting  him.  Let  the  citizen 
understand  that  his  necessary  expenses 
will  be  reimbursed  if  a  conviction  is  had, 
and  he  will  be  better  able  to  cope  with 
the  habitual  law-breaker.  Leave  him 
without  such  an  assurance  and  he  is 
handicapped  from  the  start — weak  where 
his  opponent  is  strong.  These  sugges- 
tions are  not  new.  Provisions  for  giving 
half  the  fine  to  the  informer  and  for 
assessing  the  costs  of  prosecution  against 
the  convicted  rumseller  have  been  em- 
bodied in  not  a  few  liquor  laws.  But 
there  has  been  a  strange  tendency  toward 
eliminating  them — not  so  strange,  either, 
when  it  is  remembered  that  the  liquor 
element  has  always  been  keenly  alive  to 
the  importance  of  escaping  severe  penal- 
ties and  that  the  temperance  people  have 
frequently  been  content  with  mere  nomi- 
nal Prohibitions. 

The  drugstore  sales  of  liquor  are 
among  the  most  difficult  to  deal  with. 
So  long  as  people  take  whiskey  for  medi- 


cine and  drugstores  are  permitted  to 
vend  without  effective  restraints,  so  long 
will  anti-liquor  acts  fail.  The  rigid  pro- 
visions of  the  Kansas  Pharmacy  law 
should  be  applied  to  the  drugstore  traffic 
everywhere — that  is,  no  druggist  should 
have  the  right  to  sell,  give  away  or  sup- 
ply any  intoxicating  beverage  except 
upon  written  prescription  of  a  practicing 
physician,  and  each  prescription  should 
be  pasted  in  a  book  kept  for  the  pur- 
pose, the  book  to  be  always  open  to  pub- 
lic inspection;  while  the  penalty  im- 
posed for  illicit  selling  should  be  pro- 
vided and  the  moiety  clause  should  be 
added. 

A  wholesome  effect  would  also  be  pro- 
duced if  the  Kansas  plan  of  requiring 
Sheriffs,  Prosecuting  Attorneys,  Judges 
and  all  officials  connected  with  the  ad- 
ministration of  law  to  promptly  arrest 
and  try  liquor  offenders  and  perform 
their  whole  duty  as  defined  by  the  stat- 
utes, on  pain  of  heavy  fine  and  loss  of 
office.  Civil  Damage  acts  also  should  be 
strengthened.  Indeed,  there  is  probably 
no  graver  need  indicated  by  present  con- 
ditions than  that  of  the  stiffening  of  pen- 
alties all  along  the  line.  Prohibitory 
laws  are  not,  but  penalties  are,  lamenta- 
ble failures.  Cure  the  latter  and  the 
former  will  take  care  of  themselves. 

John  O'Donnell. 

[The  editor  is  also  indebted  to  Edwin  C. 
Pierce.  For  penalties  prescribed  in  present  and 
former  liquor  laws,  see  Legislation,  South 
Dakota  and  United  States  Government 
AND  THE  Liquor  Traffic] 

Pennsylvania. — See  Index. 


Permissive 

Local  Option. 


Prohibition, 


See 


Persia. — Malcolm,  in  his  "History 
of  Persia,"  relates  (vol.  1,  p.  10)  that  wine 
was  discovered  in  that  kingdom  in  the 
reign  of  Jamsheed.  He  attempted  to 
preserve  grapes  in  a  large  vessel.  Fer- 
mentation ensued  and  the  king  believed 
that  the  juice  was  poison  and  bottled 
and  labeled  it  as  such.  A  lady  of  the 
palace,  wishing  to  commit  suicide,  drank 
from  it.  She  was  pleased  with  the  stupor 
that  followed  and  repeated  the  experi- 
ment until  the  supply  was  exhausted. 
She  imparted  the  secret  to  the  king  and 
a  new  quantity  was  made  that  sufficed 
for  all.     Hence  wine  is  called  in  Persia 


Persia.] 


470 


[Persia. 


the  zahar-i-Jcliosh,  or  "  delightful  poison." 
Wine  was  a  common  beverage  of  the  an- 
cient Persians.  Cyrus  set  a  trap  for  the 
Massagetae  by  deserting  his  camp  and  re- 
tiring into  ambush,  taking  care  to  leave 
a  plentiful  supply  of  wine.  The  intoxi- 
cated enemy  were  easily  vanquished.  The 
cup  was  freely  used  in  the  palace  of 
Xerxes.  (Esther  1: 4-10;  7:2-7.)  The 
vineyards  of  Lebanon  and  of  distant 
provinces  were  laid  under  contribution 
by  the  Persian  monarchs. 

Drunkenness  was  checked  by  the  Mo- 
hammedan conquest.  The  Koran  de- 
clares that  in  wine  "  is  great  sin,"  and 
that  it  is  an  "abomination  of  Satan's 
work."  According  to  tradition,  one  of 
the  precepts  of  Mohammed  was,  '•'  Who- 
soever drinks  wine,  let  him  suffer  cor- 
rection by  scourging."  For  1,200  years 
the  law  of  Persia  has  prescribed  penalties 
of  80  lashes  for  a  free  man  and  40  lashes 
for  a  slave;  if  the  offender  is  seized 
while  intoxicated  or  while  his  breath 
smells  of  wine,  and  two  witnesses  testify 
that  he  has  drunk  wine,  the  stripes  are  to 
be  administered.  These  provisions  have  at 
no  time  prevented  the  use  entirely.  Even 
some  of  the  Caliphs  of  Bagdad  scandal- 
ized the  faithful  by  their  intemperate 
habits.  The  poets  Hafiz,  Sa'di  and  others 
praise  the  wine-cup  and  sing  its  delights. 
Yet  during  these  centuries  total  absti- 
nence has  been  adhered  to  by  the  people 
in  general.  In  the  last  30  years  there 
has  come  a  deplorable  change  for  the 
worse.  Statistics  of  the  number  of  drink- 
ers and  the  consumjDtion  of  liquors  are 
unobtainable,  but  no  one  can  doubt  that 
the  increase  of  the  evil  has  been  marked. 
The  official,  military  and  wealthy  classes 
are  becoming  more  and  more  inclined  to 
disregard  prohibitions  and  restraints.  On 
the  other  hand,  tens  of  thousands  of  vil- 
lagers have  never  tasted  liquor  in  any 
form  and  would  rather  die  than  take  it; 
they  believe  that  alcoholic  drink  renders 
one  unclean  in  the  sight  of  Allah  and 
unfit  for  paradise.  Besides  the  hundreds 
of  towns  where  no  liquor  can  be  procured, 
there  are  several  Prohibition  cities,  no- 
tably the  sacred  cities  of  Meshed  and 
Koorn.  Arthur  Arnold  says :  "  In  Koorn 
■we  found  it  impossible  to  refill  our 
empty  wine-bottles.  Intoxicating  liquors 
appear  to  be  absolutely  unobtainable." 

In  general,  the  Persian  who  drinks 
goes  to  excess.      His   idea  is  that    the 


pleasure  consists  in  the  intoxication,  and 
that  "  there  is  as  much  sin  in  a  glass  as  a 
flagon."  He  sees  no  stopping-place  be- 
tween total  abstinence  and  intemperance. 
In  the  cities  wine  is  used  by  the  rich, 
while  the  poor  drink  arrack  (a  crude 
spirit).  In  the  villages  where  the  Chris- 
tians own  vineyards  seven  or  eight  barrels 
of  wine  are  often  set  aside  as  the  winter 
supply  of  a  family.  There  are  frequent 
carousals  in  the  long  winter  months.  The 
Armenian,  Nestorian,  Jewish  and  Chris- 
tian inhabitants,  with  few  exceptions, 
are  drinkers,  many  indulging  in  "  mod- 
eration" but  great  numbers  excessively. 
Of  one  town  on  the  Oroomish  plain  it  is 
said  that  even  the  walls  get  drunk  and 
reel.  This  rural  debauchery  is  caused  by 
wine,  not  by  distilled  liquors.  At  the 
New  Year,  Easter  and  other  festivals  it 
is  a  common  custom  to  offer  guests  in- 
toxicants, though  tea  and  coffee  are  al- 
ways at  hand. 

The  liquor-vendors  in  Persia  are  Jews 
and  Armenians,  with  some  Nestorians. 
The  professing  Christians  are  responsible 
for  much  of  the  corrupting  influence 
that  is  being  exerted.  The  scattered 
Armenian  communities,  Avhich  should  be 
centres  of  gospel  effort  and  virtues,  are 
at  the  front  in  the  drink  propaganda. 
In  many  a  city  the  Christian  quarter  is 
the  drunkard-making  quarter.  Until  re- 
cently it  has  been  all  but  impossible  to 
find  a  Mussulman  wine-seller,  and  to- 
day no  follower  of  the  Prophet  can  en- 
gage in  the  business  without  danger  of 
being  despised  and  disgraced.  But  love 
of  money  tempts  Mohammedans  to  carry 
on  the  traffic  where  no  Jews  or  Arme- 
nians live. 

"  Open  saloons  "  are  rare.  In  most  in- 
stances liquor  is  sold  in  private  houses, 
out  of  the  public  view.  Some  shops  in 
the  bazaars  sell  bottled  European  wines 
and  have  back  rooms  in  which  dram- 
drinking  is  permitted.  Most  of  the 
Mussulmans  addicted  to  the  habit  carry 
the  stuff  home  with  them  and  consume 
it  there. 

The  change  that  has  been  wrought  will 
seem  the  more  striking  when  it  is  said 
that  the  liquor  trade  is  now  practically 
licensed  by  the  Government.  The  tax  is 
4  shohis  per  bottle  of  arrack,  which  sells 
for  12  or  15  shohis  (10  cents).  The  police 
extort  backsheesh  (or  bribes)  from  each 
dealer,  aggregating,  probably,  a  larger 


Persia.] 


471 


[Personal  Liberty. 


amount  than  the  Government  collects. 
Thirty  years  ago,  when  the  evil  conse- 
quences of  the  traflfic  began  to  excite 
public  attention  on  account  of  rowdyism 
and  quarrels  in  the  streets,  a  crusade  was 
made  by  Mussulmans  in  Tabriz  against 
the  liquor-shops,  the  bottles  and  jars 
were  broken  and  the  drink  was  spilled. 
Under  cover  of  the  laudatory  object,  the 
houses  of  many  Armenians  were  looted. 
The  crusaders  continued  their  work  for 
four  or  five  years,  when  a  firman  from  the 
Shah  gave  the  business  legal  standing. 
Later  a  European  resident  of  Tabriz  im- 
ported machinery  and  built  a  distillery, 
intending  to  manufacture  on  a  large 
scale,  but  the  Government  speedily  pro- 
hibited it.  Each  seller  of  spirits,  as  a 
rule,  produces  his  own  supply.  As  in 
America,  the  "  trade  "  holds  itself  above 
ordinary  obligations :  Friday  and  Sunday, 
the  two  holy  days,  are  the  days  on  which 
the  largest  profits  are  made. 

Nearly  all  of  the  vast  vintage  of  Persia 
is  turned  into  raisins  and  grape  molasses. 
The  native  wines,  with  few  exceptions, 
are  inferior  in  quality.  They  are  manu- 
factured by  the  primitive  process,  the 
grapes  being  crushed  by  the  feet  and  the 
juice  being  put  into  large  earthen  jars  to 
ferment.  The  amount  of  wine  con- 
sumed is  relatively  small;  the  quantity 
of  distilled  arrack  used  is  undoubtedly 
many  times  larger,  in  view  of  the  fact 
that  the  freest  drinking  is  in  the  cities, 
where  practically  all  the  common  people 
who  drink  at  all  are  arrack-drinkers. 
Here  is  another  demonstration  of  the 
failure  of  wine  to  prevent  the  develop- 
ment of  an  appetite  for  the  stronger  in- 
toxicants. The  Persian  arrack  is  almost 
colorless  and  is  very  strong  in  alcohol. 

The  American  missionaries  take  a  de- 
cided stand  for  total  abstinence  and  urge 
this  virtue  upon  all  converts.  Three- 
fourths  of  the  churches  of  the  Evangeli- 
cal Syriac  Church  present  the  teetotal 
pledge  to  their  adherents.  The  influence 
of  the  evangelical  churches  with  the 
Mussulmans  is  greatly  increased  by  their 
anti-liquor  policy. 

Samuel  G.  Wilsox. 
(Tabriz,  Persia.) 

Opium  culture  is  an  important  indus- 
try in  Persia.  Comparatively  little  of 
the  drug  is  consumed  at  home,  but  large 
quantities  are  exported  to  China   and 


other  countries.  In  1872  only  870  cases 
were  exported,  but  in  1881  the  number 
had  risen  to  7,700.  Pure  Persian  opium 
is  considered  superior  to  the  Indian 
article  and  contains  a  larger  percentage 
of  morphia.  In  the  last  few  years  its 
popularity  has  suffered  because  of  the 
unscrupulous  adulterations  practiced  by 
the  producers.  Besides,  the  cultivation 
of  the  poppy  is  now  regarded  with  less 
favor  by  the  Persian  Government,  since 
it  has  given  rise  to  a  tendency  to  aban- 
don the  cultivation  of  food  crops. 

Personal  Liberty. — Objection  is 
made  to  Prohibition  on  the  ground  that 
it  is  an  unwarranted  invasion  of  personal 
rights.  The  objection  has  no  basis  in 
philosophy  or  fact.  Blackstone  thus  de- 
fines natural  liberty : 

' '  Natural  liberty  consists  properly  in  a  power 
of  acting  as  one  thinks  fit,  without  any  restraint 
or  control,  unless  by  the  laws  of  nature." — 
Blackstone' s  Com.,  vol.  1,  p.  125. 

Of  civil  liberty  he  says : 

"Political  or  civil  liberty,  which  is  that  of  a 
member  of  society,  is  no  other  than  natural  lib- 
erty so  far  restrained  by  human  laws  (and  no 
farther)  as  is  necessary  and  expedient  for  the 
general  advantages  of  the  public.  Hence  we 
may  collect  that  the  law,  which  restrains  a  man 
from  doing  mischief  to  his  fellow-citizens, though 
it  diminishes  the  natural,  increases  the  civil  lib- 
erty of  mankind." — Blackstone' s  Com.,  vol.  1, 
p.  125. 

Natural  liberty,  therefore,  is  that 
which  a  man  enjoys  in  a  state  of  nature, 
while  civil  liberty  is  that  which  is  possible 
in  society — namely,  natural  liberty  re- 
stricted just  so  far  as  the  pitblic  good  re- 
quires. To  illustrate  this  :  In  the 
exercise  of  natural  liberty  a  man  may 
throw  stones,  but  he  violates  civil  liberty 
if  he  throws  stones  at  window^s  or  travel- 
lers. His  natural  liberty  ends  where  the 
rights  of  property  and  of  persons  begin. 
In  the  exercise  of  natural  liberty  a  man 
may  walk  about  in  a  nude  condition,  but 
civil  liberty  restricts  this  privilege.  His 
natural  liberty  ends  where  the  welfare  of 
society  begins.  In  the  exercise  of 
natural  liberty  a  man  may  jump  and 
shout,  but  if  he  jump  and  shout  in  a 
public  assembly  he  disturbs  the  rights 
of  others,  and  the  civil  authorities  pro- 
vide for  his  punishment.  In  the  exercise 
of  natural  liberty  the  savage  is  without 
restraint — he  robs,  kills  and  tortures;  but 
in  an  organized  social  state  the  results 


Personal  Liberty.] 


472 


[Personal  Liberty. 


of  conduct  must  be  eousidered,  and  the 
public  good  is  the  supreme  hiw.  A  man 
cannot  do  as  he  pleases  when  he  becomes 
a  member  of  society,  but  must  give  up 
a  part  of  his  natural  liberty  to  secure  the 
advantages  of  social  intercourse. 

The  difference,  therefore,  between 
natural  and  civil  liberty  indicates  the 
difference  between  the  personal  liberty 
advocates  and  the  believers  in  Prohibi- 
tion. The  Prohibitionists  simply  ask 
that  personal  liberty  shall  be  limited  by 
public  interests.  This  is  the  fundamental 
law  of  social  existence.  In  obedience  to 
it  nuisances  are  abated.  The  personal 
liberty  to  inflict  a  nuisance  upon  the 
community  is  not  allowed.  Towns  are 
put  under  quarantine;  powder-houses 
are  removed;  lotteries  and  the  circula- 
tion of  obscene  books  are  prohibited ;  the 
construction  of  wooden  buildings  in 
populous  districts  and  the  casting  of 
refuse  into  the  street  are  forbidden. 
Personal  or  natural  liberty  cannot  be 
urged  against  these  proliibitions,  for  the 
public  good  demands  them. 

The  people  have  a  right,  and  the 
Courts  have  so  declared,  to  regulate  or 
destroy  any  business  that  threatens  the 
public  welfare.  The  liquor  business  is 
of  that  character,  and  in  the  interests  of 
civil  liberty  and  the  general  good  it 
should  be  prohibited.  The  personal  lib- 
erty to  sell  liquor,  if  it  injures  society,  is 
no  more  to  be  considered  than  the  per- 
sonal liberty  to  circulate  obscene  books 
or  to  store  gunpowder  in  the  heart  of  a 
city.  This  is  the  law  of  the  land,  as 
firmly  established  as  the  foundations  of 
our  Republic  and  as  any  other  principle 
of  our  jurisprudence.  It  rests  on  the  rec- 
ognition that  the  public  good  is  the  first 
thing  to  be  provided  for  and  protected. 
There  are  certain  rights  reserved  to  indi- 
viduals by  the  Constitution  which  can- 
not be  disturbed  by  majorities.  The 
Courts  jealously  guard  these  rights.  The 
framers  of  our  Government  made  provi- 
sion for  the  civil  liberties  of  the  people, 
and  if  a  law  is  passed  that  conflicts  with 
sucli  liberties  the  judiciary  department 
declares  it  null  and  void.  But  the  right 
to  carry  on  a  business  that  debauches 
society  is  not  guaranteed  by  anytliing  in 
our  fundamental  law,  and  when  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  was 
asked  to  determine  whether  Prohibition 
of  the  drink  traffic  could  be  esteemed  an 


undue  interference  with  the  privileges  of 
citizens  that  great  and  conservative  tri- 
bunal answered  in  the  negative — 
answered  not  once  but  repeatedly,  not  by 
a  bare  majority  but  without  any  dissent, 
not  in  view  of  a  single  aspect  of  techni- 
cal legal  questions  but  in  view  of  all  the 
general  and  broad  aspects  in  which  the 
subject  can  be  presented;  answered  by 
solemnly  calling  attention  to  the  mighty 
evils  that  result  from  this  dirty  and  dam- 
nable business,  and  by  justifying  Prohibi- 
tion on  grounds  of  public  morality,  health, 
etc. — in  short,  by  declaring  Prohibitory 
law  to  be  thoroughly  in  keeping  with  the 
paramount  purpose  of  righteous  and  wise 
government,  to  minister  to  the  public 
welfare.  And  the  sophistries  of  the  per- 
sonal liberty  advocates  were  so  lightly 
esteemed  that,  although  the  brewers  paid 
fees  aggregating  $1(),000  to  have  them 
formulated  by  the  cleverest  lawyers,  the 
Court  decreed  that  all  the  enormous 
capital  of  hundreds  of  millions  of  dollars 
invested  in  the  "  trade  "  might  be  wiped 
out  and  yet  no  dollar  of  compensation 
could  be  legitimately  claimed ;  that  this 
might  be  done  and  each  individual 
brewer  and  "poisoner-general"  be  sent 
to  jail  summarily,  without  trial  by  jury ; 
that  summary  proceedings  of  this  nature 
would  in  fact  be  "  salutary,"  and  that 
even  the  right  to  manufacture  intoxicat- 
ing drink  exclusively  for  the  maker's 
own  use  might  be  denied  without  possi- 
bility of  redress.  After  the  question 
had  been  under  review  for  more  than  40 
years  in  the  Supreme  Court  a  decision 
was  handed  down  that  surpassed  for 
radicalism  and  by  the  emphasis  and 
solemnity  of  its  phraseology  every  former 
deliverance  from  this  bench;  and  in 
order  that  it  might  have  the  greatest  pos- 
sible weight  and  significance  this  deci- 
sion was  written  by  the  member  of  the 
Court  ^  whose  views  were  supposed  to  be 
less  satisfactory  to  the  Prohibitionists 
than  those  of  any  other  of  the  older 
Justices,  and  who  was  on  record  as  liav- 


1  Justice  Stephen  J.  Field.     (See  p.  93.) 

Tlie  decision  was  rendered  in  tlie  case  of  Henry  Chris- 
tensen,  November,  1890.  Christennen  was  a  saloon-keeper, 
who  had  been  arrested  by  the  Chief  of  Police  of  San 
Francisco  for  sellina;  liquor  without  a  license.  The  United 
Slates  Circuit  Court  for  California  had  rendered  a  judg- 
ment in  favor  of  Christensen's  right  to  sell,  on  the  ground 
that  a  city  ordinance  of  San  Francisco  which  made  license 
dependent  upon  the  written  consent  of  a  certain  number 
of  property-owners  was  in  conflict  with  the  Constitution 
of  the  United  States.  This  judgment  the  Supreme  Court 
reversed. 


Personal  Liberty.] 


473 


[Personal  Liberty, 


ing  stood  alone  lu  opposition  to  certain 
conclusions  concerning  the  constitution- 
ality of  the  law  of  Kansas.  In  this 
last  and  crowning  decision  the  Supreme 
Court  said  : 

"  It  is  urged  that  as  the  liquors  are  used  as  a 
beverage,  and  the  injury  following  them,  if 
taken  in  excess,  is  voluntarily  inflicted  and  is 
confined  to  the  party  offending  their  sale  should 
be  without  restrictions,  the  contention  being  that 
what  a  man  shall  drink,  equally  with  what  he 
shall  eat,  is  not  properly  a  matter  for  legislation. 

"There  is  in  this  position  an  assumption  of 
fact  which  does  not  exist,  that  when  the  liquors 
are  taken  in  excess  the  injuries  are  confined  to 
the  party  offending.  Tlie  injury,  it  is  true, 
falls  first  upon  him  in  his  health,  which  the 
habit  undermines;  in  his  morals,  which  it 
weakens,  and  in  the  self-abasement  which  it 
creates.  But  as  it  leads  to  neglect  of  business 
and  waste  of  property  and  general  demoraliza- 
tion, it  affects  those  who  are  immediately  con- 
nected with  and  dependent  upon  him.  By  the 
general  concurrence  of  opinion  of  every  civilized 
and  Christian  community,  there  are  few  sources 
of  crime  and  misery  to  society  equal  to  the  dram- 
shop, where  intoxicating  liquors,  in  small  quan- 
tities, to  be  drunk  at  the  time,  are  sold  indis- 
criminately to  all  parties  applying.  The  statistics 
of  every  State  show  a  greater  amount  of  crime 
and  misery  attributable  to  the  use  of  ardent 
spirits  obtained  at  these  retail  liquor-saloons 
than  to  any  other  source. 

"The  sale  of  such  liquors  in  this  way  ha.s, 
therefore,  been,  at  all  times  by  the  Courts  of 
every  State,  considered  as  the  proper  subject  of 
legislative  regulation.  Not  only  may  a  license 
be  exacted  from  the  keeper  of  the  saloon  before 
a  glass  of  his  liquors  can  thus  be  disposed  of, 
but  restrictions  may  be  imposed  as  to  the  class 
of  persons  to  whom  they  may  be  sold,  and  the 
hours  of  the  day,  and  the  days  of  the  week  on 
which  the  saloons  may  be  opened.  Their  sale 
in  that  form  may  be  absolutely  prohibited.  It 
is  a  question  of  public  expediency  and  public 
morality,  and  not  of  Federal  law.  I'he  police 
power  of  the  State  is  fully  competent  to  regulate 
the  business,  to  mitigate  its  evils  or  to  suppress 
it  entirely.  There  is  no  inherent  right  in  a  cit- 
izen to  sell  intoxicating  liquors  by  retail;  it  is 
not  a  privilege  of  a  citizen  of  the  State  or  of  a  cit- 
izen of  the  United  States.  As  it  is  a  business 
attended  with  danger  to  the  community,  it  may, 
as  already  said,  be  entirely  prohibited,  or  be 
permitted  under  such  conditions  as  will  limit  to 
the  utmost  its  evils.  The  manner  and  extent  of 
regulation  rest  in  the  discretion  of  the  gov- 
erning authority.  That  avUhority  may  vest  in 
such  oflicers  as  it  may  deem  proper  the  power 
of  passing  upon  applications  for  permission 
to  carry  it  on  and  to  issue  licenses  for  that 
purpose.  It  is  a  matter  of  legislative  will  only. 
As  in  many  other  cases  the  officers  may  not 
always  exercise  the  power  conferred  upon  them 
with  wisdom  or  justice  to  the  parties  affected. 
But  that  is  a  matter  which  does  not  affect  the 
authority  of  the  State,  or  one  which  can  be 
brought  under  the  cognizance  of  the  Courts  of 
the  United  States." 


It  appears,  then,  that  the  men  who  raise 
tlie  cry  of  personal  liberty  against  Pro- 
hibition set  their  opinion  against  the 
matured  and  often-enunciated  opinion  of 
the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States 
as  well  as  against  the  necessary  limita- 
tions of  civil  liberty.  This  assurance  is 
characteristic.  The  brewers,  many  of 
whom  cannot  speak  English  intelligently, 
and  who  frequently  find  it  necessary  to 
conduct  their  proceedings  in  a  foreign 
tongue,  undertook,  in  national  conclave, 
after  the  famous  decision  in  the  Kansas 
cases,  to  argue  the  principles  of  American 
law  laid  down  in  those  cases.  The  argu- 
ment goes  on,  as  a  matter  of  course;  for 
however  it  may  be  with  barrooms,  bar- 
room argument  is  not  so  easily  put  to  an 
end  by  the  action  of  the  Courts.  "  Per- 
sonal Rights  "  and  "  Personal  Liberty  " 
Leagues  have  not  died  out.  They  propa- 
gandize with  considerable  activity  in  the 
large  cities,  particularly  when  lawless 
business  is  afoot  and  when  uncommon 
fervor  for  reform  is  manifested  by  the 
clergy,  by  the  women  and  incidentally  by 
the  police.  The  personal  liberty  for 
which  they  clamor  (although  they  may 
not  see  the  logic  of  their  course)  is  the 
liberty  of  the  barbarian,  the  thug,  the 
robber — the  liberty  of  the  anarchist;  a 
form  of  liberty  that  cannot  be  tolerated 
with  safety  to  society. 

The  opponents  of  Prohibition  misstate 
the  case  by  saying  that  the  State  has  no 
right  to  declare  what  a  man  shall  eat  or 
drink.  The  State  does  not  venture  to 
make  any  such  declaration.  A  man  may 
debauch  himself  in  private  and  the  State 
will  not  interfere,  itnless  the  debauchery 
creates  a  public  nuisance  or  disturbs  the 
peace.  Blackstone  covers  this  point  in 
the  following  words : 

"Let  a  man,  therefore,  be  ever  so  abandoned 
in  his  principles  or  vicious  in  his  practices,  pro- 
vided he  keeps  his  wickedness  to  himself  and 
does  not  olfend  against  the  rules  of  public 
decency  he  is  out  of  the  reach  of  human  laws. 
But  if  he  makes  his  vices  public,  though  they  be 
such  as  seem  principally  to  affect  himself  (as 
drunkenness,  or  the  like),  then  they  become,  by 
the  bad  example  they  set,  of  pernicious  effects 
to  society;  and  therefore  it  is  then  the  business 
of  human  laws  to  correct  them." — Blackstane's 
Com.,  vol.  1,  p.  133. 

One  of  the  pernicious  effects  to  society 
of  the  private  appetite  for  liquor  is  the 
public  drinking-place.  The  drink  habit 
depends  upon  a  public  traffic  for  supply, 


Personal  Liberty.] 


474 


[Petitions. 


and  the  public  sale  of  alcoholic  beverages 
creates  a  demand  which  produces  wide- 
spread mischief  in  the  community.  The 
public  traffic,  as  well  as  public  drunken- 
ness, comes  within  the  reach  of  human 
laAvs.  It  is  not  the  private  appetite  or 
home  customs  of  the  citizen  that  the 
State  undertakes  to  manage,  but  the 
liquor  traffic.  That  is  a  public  institu- 
tion, having  certain  relations  to  the  pub- 
lic good,  and  if  the  public  traffic  disturbs 
social  order  and  becomes  an  enemy  of 
the  State  it  can  be  dealt  with  as  such. 
This  is  the  ground  of  Prohibition.  The 
saloon  has  become  a  public  enemy,  a  pub- 
lic nuisance,  and  the  public  safety  de- 
mands its  removal.  Thus  are  defined 
the  lines  on  which  the  battle  must  be 
fought. 

If  by  abolishing  the  saloon  the  State 
makes  it  difficult  for  men  to  gratify  their 
private  appetites,  there  is  no  just  reason 
for  complaint.  Shall  the  State  legislate 
for  the  private  appetite  or  for  the  public 
good  ?  It  strikes  at  the  public  traffic  for 
the  public  good,  and  must  consider  the 
public  welfare,  not  the  private  appetite. 
It  is  difficult  to  see  what  ground  the 
State  can  have  for  prohibiting  anything 
for  the  general  good  if  its  right  and  duty 
to  prohibit  the  liquor  traffic  be  ques- 
tioned. If  the  personal  liberty  of  the 
liquor-seller  or  drinker  is  paramount  to 
the  public  good,  then  to  curtail  the  per- 
sonal liberty  of  the  thief  or  assassin  is 
tyranny. 

Those  who  oppose  Prohibition  as  an 
invasion  of  individual  rights  are  quite 
willing  that  the  traffic  shall  be  restricted. 
But  restriction  as  well  as  Prohibition  is 
an  abridgment  of  personal  liberty.  Tlie 
advocate  of  restriction  surrenders  his 
case  and  logically  commits  himself  to  the 
object  of  Prohibition ;  for  why  is  restric- 
tion urged  ?  For  the  public  good.  Pro- 
hibition is  established  for  the  same  rea- 
son, and  the  question  to  be  decided  is. 
Which  best  promotes  the  public  good? 
The  consistent  personal  liberty  advocate 
must  stand  for  a  liquor  trade  as  free  and 
untrammelled  as  the  trade  in  groceries  or 
dry-goods.  The  restrictionist,  by  de- 
manding special  legislation,  admits  the 
dangerous  and  evil  character  of  the 
liquor  traffic  and  the  need  of  protecting 
society.  He  abandons  the  doctrine  of 
personal  liberty  and  legislates  for  the 
general  good.     If  a  Prohibitory  law  gives 


more  protection  to  society  tlian  a  restrict- 
ive measure  he  cannot  consistently  with- 
hold his  support.  To  fulminate  against 
Prohibition  in  the  name  of  personal 
liberty,  and  at  the  same  time  approve  a 
burdensome  restrictive  law,  is  to  be  both 
illogical  and  amusing. 

In  Texas  in  1887  the  liquor-dealers  and 
their  friends  held  a  great  meeting  at  Fort 
Worth  to  oppose  the  Prohibitory  Amend- 
ment to  the  Constitution,  and  in  order  to 
have  a  quiet,  respectable  time,  and  make 
a  good  impression  on  the  State,  they  pro- 
hibited the  sale  of  liquor  on  the  grounds.^ 
They  unconsciously  gave  personal  liberty 
a  grievous  blow,  and  their  followers  can- 
not reasonably  take  offense  if  the  people 
generally  copy  their  example  and  like- 
wise prohibit  the  traffic  in  the  interest  of 
order  and  respectability.  In  their  ex- 
tremity the  Texas  liquor-dealers  placed 
themselves  squarely  upon  the  platform 
of  the  Prohibitionists. 

To  sum  the  matter  up  :  The  opponents 
of  Prohibition  contend  for  tlie  liberty  to 
disregard  moral  and  social  laws.  It  is 
the  liberty  that  devils  delight  in.  The 
friends  of  Prohibition  advocate  the  larg- 
est possible  freedom  for  every  citizen, 
consistently  with  the  welfare  of  all.  It 
is  the  liberty  that  comes  with  truth  and 
virtue.  Volney  B.  Gushing. 

Petitions. — Petition  is  an  application 
by  a  person  or  persons,  or  an  association 
of  persons,  for  redress  of  private  or  pub- 
lic grievances,  addressed  to  an  authority 
having  the  power  to  afford  relief.  It  also 
sometimes  takes  the  form  of  a  prayer  for 
the  establisliment  of  a  general  2)olicy  for 
the  advancement  of  tlie  health,  morals  or 
comfort  of  the  community. 

The  right  of  petition  was  recognized 
in  England  as  early  as  Magna  Charta. 
But  in  early  times  the  object  was  almost 
exclusively  to  serve  private  or  individual 
purposes,  and  petition  became  so  com- 
mon among  the  subjects  of  the  crown 
that  it  soon  encroached  upon  the  domain 
of  equity  jurisprudence.  Men  in  power 
souglit  out  excuses  for  shifting  responsi- 
bility and  referring  complainants  to 
another  quarter  for  relief.  In  those 
times  equity  or  chancery  jurisprudence 
was  in  its  formative  period,  and  seemed 
to  be  so  broad  in  scope  and  so  well  adapt- 
ed to  meet  all  such  cases  that  private 


1  See  the  Voice,  Aug.  4, 1887. 


Petitions.]                                         475  [Petitions. 

petitioners  were  naturally  sent  to  Courts  to  point  out  that  the  term  "  grievances  " 

of  Chancery;  hence  the  origin  of  peti-  applies  not  merely  to  personal  but  also 

tions  in  chancery.     Along  with  petitions  to  juiblic  grievances,  and  covers  public 

grounded   on   private    grievances    came  nuisances   and   practices   of   a   criminal 

applications  of  Lords  and   other   titled  nature;  while  the  right  to  petition  for 

functionaries   for   the   establishment    of  redress  includes   the  right   to  seek  the 

the  boundary  lines  of  their  estates,  for  establishment  of  such  a  scheme  of  policy 

determining  the  number  and  duties   of  as  will  give  redress. 

their  retainers  and  the  like;  but  as  it  Yet  the  history  of  petition  in  the 
was  necessary  that  these  petitions  should  United  States  teaches  that  in  prac- 
be  in  the  form  of  legislative  enactments  tice  the  right  is  often  substantially 
in  order  that  adequate  answers  might  be  denied  in  proportion  to  the  gravity  of 
given  to  them,  they  were  usually  worded  the  emergency.  What  the  men  in  au- 
in  the  manner  of  bills  or  acts,  thus :  thority  would  not  dare  do  directly  they 
"  We,  your  Majesty's  dutiful  subjects,  do  have  frequently  accomplished  indirectly, 
humbly  beseech  your  Majesty  that  it  may  In  the  long  and  heated  agitation  of  the 
be  enacted ;  and  therefore  be  it  enacted,"  slavery  question  the  right  of  petition  was 
etc.  While  those  documents  began  as  practically  refused  in  numerous  instances, 
petitions  they  concluded  in  the  phrase-  In  183G  Congress  adopted  a  resolution 
ology  of  legislative  acts  or  bills ;  hence  declaring  that  all  petitions  relative  to 
the  familiar  "  bills  in  chancery."  Such  the  abolition  of  slavery  in  the  District  of 
proceedings  having  been  taken  by  dis-  Columbia  be  referred  to  a  sjjecial  com- 
tinguished  citizens  of  the  kingdom,  and  mittee,  whose  duty  it  should  be  to  report 
having  been  recognized  and  acted  upon  that  Congress  had  no  power  to  interfere 
by  the  crown,  the  common  people  were  with  slavery  in  the  States  and  ought  not 
not  slow  to  assert  that  they  should  en-  to  do  so  in  the  District  of  Columbia, 
joy  similar  privileges,  and  so  persistent  This  committee  duly  performed  the  work 
were  their  claims  that  Magna  Charta  set  for  it  to  do,  and  recommended  that 
made  the  desired  concession.  But  it  was  all  such  petitions  be  laid  on  the  table 
not  until  the  year  1688  that  the  general  without  reference  or  debate.  In  1837  the 
privilege  was  definitely  secured  to  the  resolution  was  substantially  renewed  and 
people,  and  it  was  reaffirmed  in  the  Bill  a  stronger  one  was  passed  in  1839.  Great 
of  Rights  in  1689.  Since  that  time  no  excitement  was  occasioned  throughout 
one  has  had  the  temerity  to  deny  the  the  country,  and  demands  were  made 
people  the  right  to  petition  those  in  upon  Congress  to  recede  from  its  j)Osi- 
authority  in  behalf  of  private  justice  or  tion.  These  were  responded  to  by  an  ex- 
of  public  policy.  In  the  United  King-  planatory  resolution  of  the  House  of 
dom  the  state  of  public  sentiment  upon  Representatives,  declaring  that  Congress 
this  subject  for  the  last  200  years  has  had  no  power  to  abolish  slavery  in  the 
been  such  that  a  formal  denial  of  the  States  and  affirming  that  the  petitions 
right  of  petition,  whether  for  private  or  were  a  part  of  a  scheme  to  induce  Con- 
fer public  purposes,  would  inevitably  have  gress  to  do  away  with  the  traffic  in  slaves 
stirred  up  a  revolution  that  would  have  between  the  States  and  with  the  institu- 
shaken,  if  not  overturned,  the  throne  it-  tion  itself  in  the  District  and  the  Terri- 
self.  tories,  and  so  to  threaten  and  really 
Among  the  provisions  of  the  United  undermine  slavery  in  the  States,  and 
States  Constitution  is  the  following :  thus  cause  Congress  to  perform  indirectly 
"  Congress  shall  make  no  law  abridging  what  it  could  not  do  directly.  In  conse- 
.  .  .  the  right  of  the  people  ...  to  peti-  quence  of  this  declaration  and  affirma- 
tion the  Government  for  a  redress  of  tion  the  resolution  provided  that  all 
grievances."  The  Courts,  with  practical  such  petitions  should  be  tabled  witli- 
unanimity,  have  interpreted  this  clause  by  out  being  read,  printed,  referred  or  de- 
declaring  that  "  The  Constitution  having  bated.  Subsequently  Congress  went  a 
expressly  prohibited  Congress  from  mak-  step  farther  and  decreed  that  none  of 
ing  any  law  abridging  the  right  of  the  petitions  in  question  should  be  re- 
petition, it  follows  that  no  power  other  ceived  or  noticed  in  any  manner.  To  the 
than  Congress  shall  make  any  such  law."  foreign  reader  it  may  seem  astonishing 
It  would  manifestly  be  a  waste  of  words  if   not   incredible  that  such  a  decision 


Petitions.] 


476 


[Petitions. 


could  be  arrived  at  by  the  national  Legis- 
lature under  our  free  Government;  but 
it  was  indicated  and  made  inevitable  by 
the  logic  of  events. 

In  dealing  with  the  petitions  for  re- 
lief from  the  liquor  curse,  Congress  and 
most  of  the  State  Legislatures  have  ex- 
hibited scarcely  less  hostility  and  con- 
tempt. Prohibitory  legislation  of  every 
kind  has  been  petitioned  for  by  many 
thousands  of  citizens.  For  many  years 
petitions  of  no  other  class,  relating  to 
public  policy,  have  been  received  at 
Washington  in  such  numbers  and  with 
such  constancy  as  those  calling  for  the 
passage  of  temperance  bills.  The  merits 
of  these  measures  have  been  rehearsed  in- 
numerable times  in  admirable  and  force- 
ful language  by  representatives  of  the 
petitioners  before  committees  of  Con- 
gress. But  the  policy  of  both  Houses 
has  been  not  to  inquire  candidly  into  the 
subjects  presented  by  the  petitioners  or 
to  ascertain  the  desires  of  the  people  at 
large,  but  to  suppress  debate  and  prevent 
votes.  This  policy  has  had  remarkable 
development  in  the  House  of  Representa- 
tives, where  for  four  successive  years  the 
special  Alcoholic  Liquor  Traffic  Commit- 
tee was  organized  for  the  express  pur- 
pose of  destroying  every  temperance  bill 
and  shielding  the  House  from  the  possi- 
bility of  a  formal  report  upon  or  an  hon- 
est discussion  of  the  measures  advocated 
by  the  multitudes  of  earnest  petitioners. 
George  C.  Christian. 

Under  a  despotic  government  the  right 
of  petition  is  a  boon  to  be  contended  for 
perseveringly  and  to  be  prized  and  exer- 
cised freely  when  secured.  But  in  the 
United  States,  so  far  as  it  is  used  to 
achieve  political  ends,  it  is  used  too  much. 
It  is  the  weakest  of  weapons.  The  right 
of  political  organization  and  operation 
takes  its  place.  When  the  supporters  of 
a  public  measure  stand  together  in  politi- 
cal action  their  representatives  will  carry 
out  their  will  Avithout  the  spur  of  a 
petition.  The  man  who  signs  a  petition 
for  Prohibitory  law  too  often  thinks  that 
his  duty  ends  with  petitioning.  He  is 
foolish  enough  to  believe  that  his  name 
attached  to  a  petition  has  a  force  equiva- 
lent to  that  of  a  ballot  in  favor  of  the 
same  measure,  forgetting  that  one  demand 
at  the  ballot-box  is  more  powerful  and 
produces  greater  results  than  a  dozen  re- 


quests to  a  faithless  or  an  indifferent  ser- 
vant in  legislative  halls,  and  that  it  is 
much  easier  and  infinitely  more  logical  to  ' 
elect  a  friend  than  to  influence  an  enemy 
when  once  the  latter  is  secure  in  public 
place  and  owes  his  place  to  opposition 
votes. 

It  is  not  claimed,  however,  that 
petition  is  at  all  times  and  under  all 
circumstances  useless.  In  matters  of 
minor  importance,  such  as  the  laying 
out  of  a  road,  the  building  of  an  asylum, 
the  chartering  of  a  bank  or  the  promo- 
tion of  any  object  that  is  not  conspicu- 
ously or  profoundly  agitated,  petition 
may  sometimes  be  productive  of  good 
by  acquainting  a  body  like  a  County 
Board  or  even  a  State  Legislature  with 
the  subject  under  consideration  and  the 
wishes  of  the  people  concerning  it.  In- 
deed, we  may  go  far  enough  to  say  that 
in  the  beginning  of  a  great  reform,  as  a 
means  of  agitation  and  as  one  of  the 
methods  adopted  to  arrest  public  atten- 
tion and  secure  an  expression  of  in- 
dividual opinion,  the  time  spent  in  circu- 
lating petitions  and  obtaining  signatures 
is  not  entirely  lost.  A  kind  of  passive 
support  from  influential  citizens  may 
thus  be  won.  Petitions  to  licensing 
boards  against  the  granting  of  license 
to  particular  saloons  may  also  be  service- 
able and  sometimes  effective.  It  may 
be  replied  that  the  object  of  petition  can 
in  such  cases  be  advanced  more  effec- 
tually by  utilizing  the  public  press.  But 
the  press  cannot  always  be  relied  on  to 
champion  right  and  truth,  and  it  is  not 
exempt  from  the  corrupting  and  partisan 
influences  that  so  frequently  determine 
the  course  of  legislators. 

The  limitations  of  petition  in  the  gen- 
eral conflict  with  the  liquor  traffic  are 
so  many  and  so  serious  that  it  is  hardly 
too  much  to  say  that  they  neutralize,  if  in- 
deed they  do  not  more  than  neutralize,  the 
advantages.  More  than  passive  support  is 
required  to  overthrow  a  gigantic  evil,  to 
overcome  popular  indifference  and  to 
change  a  long-standing  public  policy. 
Not  by  mere  petitioning  is  a  great  pub- 
lic wrong  to  be  dealt  with — a  wrong  that 
is  intrenched  in  law,  that  is  sustained  by 
millions  of  money  in  these  days  of  "boo- 
dle" politics  and  whose  apologists  are 
able  to  paralyze  great  historic  parties  and 
prevent  them  from  enacting  remedial 
legislation.     To  substitute  the  petitions 


Phillips,  Wendell.] 


477 


[Phillips,  Wendell. 


for  the  ballot,  mere  personal  favor  for 
positive  law,  an  expression  of  individual 
sentiment  for  a  peremptory  command,  is 
to  invite  disobedience  and  conteni])t. 
When  the  evil  is  well-known  and  its 
workings  and  results  are  perfectly  under- 
stood, when  the  agitation  against  it  has 
become  general  and  the  line  of  policy 
has  been  definitely  chosen,  then  is  the 
time  for  men  to  vote  rather  than  to  pe- 
tition, to  establish  a  loyal  party  rather 
than  to  dallv  with  deceitful  ones,  and  to 
elect  friendly  officials  rather  than  to 
humbly  beseech  neutrals  or  foes. 

T.  C.  PtICHMOXD. 

Phillips,  Wendell.— The  eighth 
child  of  John  and  8ally  Walley  Phillips; 
born  in  Boston,  Nov.  29,  1811.  His 
father  was  the  first  Mayor  of  Boston,  and 
among  the  important  offices  held  by  him 
were  those  of  State  Senator  and  Judge 
of  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas.  His 
family  was  conspicuous  for  wealth,  re- 
finement and  social  position.  Wendell 
graduated  from  Harvard  College,  rank- 
ing among  the  first  in  his  class,  at  the 
age  of  20,  and  from  the  Harvard  Law 
School  in  1834,  when  he  was  admitted 
to  practice  at  the  Suffolk  County  bar. 
Rich,  highly  educated,  endowed  with 
brilliant  talents,  an  Apollo  in  face  and 
figure,  and  a  meml^er  of  one  of  the  most 
aristocratic  and  influential  families,  he 
was  the  idol  of  a  patrician  circle  and 
might  have  aspired  to  any  position  in 
the  gift  of  the  nation.  But  at  the  age 
of  24  he  became  convinced  of  the  right- 
eousness of  the  Anti-Slavery  cause  and 
cast  his  lot  with  the  Abolitionists,  led  by 
AVilliam  Lloyd  Garrison,  who  was  then 
publishing  the  Liberator.  In  November, 
1837,  he  made  his  debut  as  an  Anti- 
Slavery  advocate  in  Faneuil  Hall,  at  a 
public  meeting  called  by  Dr.  Channing 
and  others  to  consider  the  assassination 
of  Rev.  Elijah  Lovejoy  at  Alton,  HI.,  by 
the  slaveocracy  of  that  city.  Never  be- 
fore had  the  old  "  Cradle  of  Liberty " 
echoed  to  such  strains  of  eloquence,  and 
Mr.  Phillips's  first  important  public 
speech  placed  him  among  the  foremost 
and  most  popular  of  orators.  He  left 
the  hall  amid  ringing  applause,  all  oppo- 
sition to  his  sentiments  for  the  moment 
forgotten  in  the  spell  he  had  cast  over 
his  audience — and  he  left  it  with  the 
door    of    every     worldly     advancement 


closed  against  him.  The  aristocracy 
ostracized  him,  and  he  was  made  to  feel 
that  he  had  offended  public  sentiment 
past  forgiveness — for  at  that  early  day 
the  cause  of  the  slave  was  despised,  and 
Abolitionism  was  intensely  unpopular. 
In  October,  1837,  he  married  Ann  Terry 
Greene,  who,  like  himself,  was  well- 
born, well-reared  and  wealthy,  and  al- 
though Mrs.  Phillips  was  an  invalid  theirs 
was  an  ideal  union.  She  had  converted 
him  to  the  cause  of  Anti-Slavery,  and 
throughout  his  life  he  always  spoke  of 
her  as  his  counsellor,  his  guide  and  in- 
spiration. Through  obloquy  and  mis- 
representation, defamed  by  mean  men 
in  his  own  native  city,  hounded  by  the 
press,  mobbed  by  intolerant  opponents, 
denounced  by  the  pulpit  and  the  poli- 
ticians equally,  for  40  years  he  stood  un- 
flinchingly as  the  friend  of  the  black 
race  and  worked  for  its  emancipation 
till  the  war  accomplished  it. 

When  the  war  ended  and  the  army 
was  mustered  out,  Wendell  Phillips  said 
the  last  orders  were,  "  Close  the  ranks 
and  go  f orAvard  to  new  reforms ! "  He 
was  the  first  to  obey.  He  had  allied 
himself  long  before  with  organizations 
that  Avere  working  for  Woman  Suffrage, 
labor  reform  and  temperance,  and  had 
frequently  made  addresses  in  their  in- 
terest. ,  For  he  Avas  as  conscientiously 
devoted  to  these  causes  as  to  Anti- 
Slavery,  but  Anti-Slavery  had  the  field 
before  the  others.  In  September,  1870, 
he  was  nominated  for  Governor  of 
Massachusetts  by  the  Labor  Reform  and 
the  Prohibition  parties.  In  his  letter  of 
acceptance  to  the  latter  he  defined  his 
position  as  follows : 

"As  temperance  men  you  were  bound  to 
quit  the  Republican  party,  since  it  has  deceived 
3'ou  more  tlian  once.  Any  Prohibitionist  who 
adlieres  to  it  proclaims  beforehand  his  willing- 
ness to  be  cheated,  and  so  far  as  political  action 
is  concerned  betrays  his  principles.  The  Re- 
publican party  deser\'es  our  gratitude.  It  has 
achieved  great  results.  It  will  deserve  our 
support  whenever  it  grapples  with  our  present 
living  difficulties.  A  party  must  liA'e  on  present 
living  service,  not  on  laurels,  howe\'er  well 
earned.  .  .  .  The  only  bulwark  against  the 
dangers  of  intemperance  is  Prohibition.  More 
than  30  years  of  experience  have  convinced  me, 
and  as  A\'ide  an  experience  has  taught  you,  that 
this  can  only  be  secured  by  means  of  a  distinct 
political  organization." 

This  Avas  his  position,  and   he  never 
wavered  from  it.     He  attended  numer- 


PhiUips,  Wendell.] 


478 


[Phylloxera. 


oiis  temperance  conventions  and  was 
always  ready  to  deliver  addresses  in 
favor  of  Prohibition,  lecturing  to  im- 
mense Boston  audiences  on  this  subject 
in  Tremont  Temple  and  Music  Hall. 
He  argued  with  great  force  against 
license  and  for  a  complete  closing  of  the 
grogshops.  He  believed  alcoholic  liquors 
to  be  the  cause,  in  great  part,  of  the 
poverty  of  the  laboring  people  and  of 
corruption  in  high  places,  especially  in 
the  government  of  large  cities.  One  of 
his  most  powerful  speeches  against 
license  was  delivered  in  February,  1880, 
at  the  State  House  in  Boston,  before  a 
Committee  of  the  Legislature.  In  the 
spring  of  the  same  year  he  gave  an  ad- 
dress concerning  the  attitude  of  some 
of  the  Boston  ministers  on  the  temper- 
ance question,  which  was  so  caustic  that 
one  pitied  the  offending  clergymen.  And 
in  January,  1881,  Tremont  Temple  was 
filled  to  overflowing  when  Mr.  Phillips 
reviewed  Dr.  Howard  Crosby's  anti-total 
abstinence  discourse.  It  was  in  the 
orator's  best  vein,  brilliant,  scathing, 
merciless,  pitiless.  "  The  statute-books 
in  40  States,"  said  he  on  this  occasion, 
"are  filled  with  the  abortions  of  thou- 
sands of  license  laws  that  were  never 
executed,  and  most  of  them  were  never 
intended  to  be.  .  .  .  License  has  been 
tried  under  the  most  favorable  circum- 
stances and  with  the  best  backing  for 
centuries, — 10  or  12  at  least.  .  .  .  We 
have  never  been  allowed  to  try  Prohibi- 
tion except  in  one  State  and  in  some 
small  circuits.  Wherever  it  has  been 
tried  it  has  succeeded.  Friends  who 
know,  claim  this ;  enemies  who  have  been 
for  a  dozen  years  ruining  their  teeth  by 
biting  files,  confess  it  by  their  lack  of 
argument  and  lack  of  facts  except  when 
they  invent  them." 

Mr.  Phillips  died  in  Boston,  Feb.  3, 
1884,  after  a  grand  life  of  73  years.  The 
city  of  Boston,  which  had  mobbed  him 
and  defamed  his  great  name,  gave  itself 
up  to  grief  when  he  was  gone,  put  on 
mourning  for  his  death,  tolled  the  funeral 
bells,  i^assed  resolutions  in  his  honor, 
and  called  for  eulogistic  orations  from 
emment  citizens.  But  he  would  have 
accounted  himself  more  highly  honored 
by  the  wreaths  that  were  laid  on  his 
coffin  by  workingmen  and  by  the  tears 
of  the  poor  he  had  befriended.  Sobs 
broke  from  the  hearts  of  thousands  who 


came  to  look  their  last  on  the  face  of  him 
whose  life  was  a  ceaseless  protest  against 
wrong  and  injustice,  and  whose  voice  was 
a  trumpet-call  to  be  true  to  the  truth 
though  the  world  stand  in  arms  for  the 
lie.  Maky  a.  Livermore. 

Phylloxera.  —  A  genus  of  insect, 
classed  between  plant  lice  {apliiclem)  and 
bark  lice  {coccidm),  and  having  16  known 
species  in  America  and  several  in  Eu.rope ; 
also  a  name  given  to  a  disease  of  the 
grajie-vine,  caused  by  the  ravages  of  this 
insect  upon  its  roots.  The  phylloxera 
plague  first  appeared  in  1865  in  the 
French  vineyards  of  the  lower  valley  of 
the  Rhone,  and  it  increased  in  virulence 
year  by  year,  infecting  and  destroying 
hundreds  of  thousands  of  acres  of  the 
choicest  vines  in  France  and  spreading 
to  the  other  wine-producing  countries. 
In  1868  Prof.  J.  E.  Planchon  of  Mont- 
pelier,  France,  traced  the  mysterious  dis- 
ease to  its  true  source,  the  minute  insect 
named  by  him. phylloxera  vastatrix,  which 
he  found  at  the  roots  of  the  disordered 
vines,  consuming  and  rotting  them.  Con- 
cerning the  origin  of  the  pest  there  is 
some  controversy.  In  1870  Prof.  C.  V. 
Riley  of  St.  Louis,  Mo.,  announced  that 
he  had  established  the  identity  of  the 
European  root  phylloxera  with  the  in- 
sect called  by  Dr.  Fitch  pempliigus  viti- 
folicB,  which  makes  galls  upon  the  leaves 
of  American  grape-vines.  Indeed,  the 
opinion  that  the  phylloxera  was  intro- 
duced from  America  has  always  been 
generally  accepted;  and  it  seemed  to  be 
confirmed  by  the  fact  that  European 
viticulturists,  experimenting  with  Amer- 
ican vines,  found  that  the  phylloxera 
made  its  first  attacks  upon  them  or  in 
their  vicinity.  Consequently  in  the  first 
years  of  the  plague  most  of  the  European 
wine-producing  countries,  as  well  as  Aus- 
tralia, passed  laws  prohibiting  the  im- 
portation of  American  vines.  On  the 
other  hand  some  scientists  maintain  that 
there  is  no  foundation  for  the  belief  in 
the  American  origin  of  the  phylloxera. 
Miret,  a  French  writer,  thinks  it  as  likely 
that  the  origin  was  "  spontaneous "  as 
that  it  was  American ;  and  Chevalier  Ro- 
vasendo,  the  Italian,  mournfully  observes 
that  "  the  origin  of  phylloxera  is  a  ques- 
tion which  dominates  and  is  entirely  su- 
perior to  human  intelligence."  Apart 
from  the  question  whether  America  is 


Phylloxera.] 


479 


[Phylloxera, 


responsible  for  the  scourge,  it  is  certain 
that  America  has  contributed  the  most 
effectual  means  of  combating  it.  While 
some  varieties  of  American  vines  yield 
more  or  less  readily  to  the  phylloxera, 
others,  because  of  their  hardiness,  resist 
it  successfully.  Consequently  the  vine- 
growers  of  Europe  replant  their  wasted 
lands  with  American  vine-stocks,  graft- 
ing upon  them  the  European  varieties 
of  the  grape.  But  this  practice  is  not  a 
sure  preventative,  for  even  the  hardy 
American  vines  have  often  been  found  to 
succumb  to  the  phylloxera  in  the  course 
of  a  few  years,  while  conditions  of  cli- 
mate and  soil  are  sometimes  unfavorable 
to  the  vigorous  growth  of  the  trans- 
planted stocks.  Various  chemical  sub- 
stances (especially  bisulphuret  of  car- 
bon), applied  to  the  roots  of  the  diseased 
vines,  destroy  the  phylloxera:  but  treat- 
ment with  such  remedies  is  costly,  must 
be  renewed  many  times  and  often  kills 
the  plants.  The  French  Government  has 
offered  large  rewards  for  the  discovery  of 
a  thoroughly  effectual  cure  and  has  as- 
sisted the  distressed  vineyardists  in  va- 
rious ways,  especially  by  remitting  taxes 
upon  their  lands.  But  it  has  been  im- 
possible to  exterminate  the  pest.  In  some 
instances  its  destructive  work  has  been 
arrested  by  the  means  mentioned,  but  its 
devastations  are  still  widespread. 

The  amount  of  wealth  destroyed  by 
the  phylloxera  in  France  is  astounding. 
George  W.  Koosevelt,  United  States  Con- 
sul at  Bordeaux  in  1888,  in  a  carefully- 
prepared  official  communication  wrote: 

"From  official  statistics  the  surface  of  vines 
totally  destroyed  by  this  indomitable  plague  is 
placed  at  more  than  1,000,000  hectares,  with 
664,511  hectares  of  diseased  vines,  which,  estim- 
ated at  most  favorable  average,  are  calculated 
as  an  additional  200,000  hectares  of  dead  vines. 
The  acitual  area  of  destroyed  vines  is  1,200,000 
hectares,  or  about  one-half  of  the  vineyards  of 
France.     (One  hectare=3.47  acres.) 

' '  The  relative  value  of  the  property  destroyed 
is  from  a  national  point  of  view  inestimable. 
To  proprietors,  and  those  dependent  upon  the 
wine  industry  as  a  means  of  livelihood,  the 
destruction  of  the  vines  is  incalculable,  as  the 
naked  ground  has  but  a  minimum  value,  owing 
to  its  unsuitable  condition  to  grow  other  crops. 
It  is  generally  estimated  that  a  hectare  of  vines 
represents  a  money  value  equivalent  to  6,000 
francs.  Taking  this  sum  as  a  basis  I  find  that 
so  far  France  has  sustained  a  loss  of  7,200,000,- 
000  francs  (exceeding  $1,400, 000, 000)  as  a  result 
of  vines  destroyed.  To  this  may  be  added  loss 
of  private  revenue  and  wages,  which  latter  are 
dilficult  to  estimate  but  which  may  to  a  certain 


extent  be  determined  by  the  amount  of  foreign 
wines  and  dried  grapes  annually  imported  into 
France  for  the  sole  purpose  of  supplying  the 
deficit  in  the  home  yield.  Below  is  a  tabulated 
statement  of  values  of  wines  and  dried  grapes 
imported  into  France  from  1875  to  1887,  in- 
clusive: 


Years. 

Ordinary 
Wines. 

Dried  Grapes. 

1875 

1876 

Francs. 

8,351,741 

18,408.811 

22,-593,989 

50,204.145 

107,479.899 

297,917,248 

346,516,425 

295,207,947 

360,000,0(J0 

319,664,326 

361,476.779 

489,985,194 

545,000,000 

3,222,806,504 

Francs. 

5,755,614 

5,447.204 

8,649.482 

14.829.096 

40,807.043 

62,631,970 

37,364,289 

31,903.088 

39,000.(_X)0 

49.644,909 

95,.3r}0,824 

88,422.465 

98,000,(X)0 

577,805,984 

1877 

1878 

1879 

1880 

1881 

1882 

1883 

1884 

1885        

1886 

1887 

Totals 

"  It  will  be  seen  by  the  above  that  3,800,613,- 
488  francs  have  been  expended  for  foreign 
wines  and  dried  grapes,  which,  added  to  the 
7,200,000,000  francs  reckoned  as  values  of  vines 
totally  destroyed,  shows  an  approximate  loss  of 
more  than  10,000,000,000  francs  (about  $3,000,- 
000,000)  as  a  consequence  of  the  phylloxera, 
which  has  also  been  one  of  the  principal  causes 
of  the  stringency  in  agricultural,  industrial  and 
commercial  affairs  during  the  past  few  years."  ' 

Amazing  as  these  figures  are,  they  do 
not  reveal  the  full  significance  of  the 
facts.  It  is  necessary  to  examine  in  de- 
tail the  results  of  the  phylloxera's  rav- 
ages in  order  to  make  satisfactory  deduc- 
tions. Each  particular  wine  of  France 
is  produced  from  a  jmrticular  variety  of 
grape,  whose  cultivation  is  confined  to  a 
particular  district.  Bordeaux  or  claret 
is  obtained  in  the  Mcdoc  district,  cham- 
pagne in  the  Marne,  etc.  French  statis- 
tics show  to  what  extent  the  phylloxera 
has  destroyed  the  vines  of  each  district, 
and  much  instructive  information  can 
be  derived  from  a  study  of  separate  re- 
turns. Scarcely  any  district  has  been 
free  from  the  phylloxera.  One  by  one 
they  have  been  wasted  by  the  terrible  in- 
sect. Up  to  1890  the  champagne  vine- 
yards had  wholly  escaped,  but  in  that 
year  the  phylloxera  appeared  and  it  was 
admitted  that  all  the  champagne  vines, 
covering  35,000  acres  and  yielding  10,- 
000,000  gallons  annually,  were  doomed, 
and  that  the  supply  of  this  wine  would, 
for  the  immediate  future  at  least,  be 
very  small.  It  will  be  interesting  to 
note  whether  the  American  importations 
of  French  champagnes  will,  in  the  next 

'  United  States  Consular  Reports,  July,  1889  (pp.  65-70). 


Phylloxera.] 


480 


[Phylloxera. 


few  years,  be  in  ratio  to  the  continuing 
demand  or  to  the  exhausted  supply. 

The  history  of  the  phylloxera's  work 
in  the  cognac  brandy  district  is  typi- 
cal. Cognac  brandy  is  distilled  from 
the  wine  of  the  departments  of 
CJharente  and  Charente-Inferieure,  and 
adjacent  islands.  The  town  of  Cog- 
nac is  the  commercial  center  of  this 
district.  In  the  United  States  Consular 
reports  for  January,  1889  (pp.  145-9),  Avas 
printed  a  report  from  Oscar  Malmroc, 
Consul  at  Cognac,  in  which  the  effects  of 
the  phylloxera  scourge  upon  brandy  pro- 
duction were  thoroughly  jiresented.  The 
table  below  shows  (1)  the  number  of  gal- 
lons of  wine  produced,  respectively,  in 
the  Charente  and  the  Charente-Inferi- 
eure for  each  year  from  1877  to  1887,  in- 
clusive; and  (2)  the  number  of  gallons  of 
cognac  brandy  that  would  have  been  pro- 
duced if  the  entire  wine-yield  had  been 
turned  into  brandy.  The  official  figures 
of  wine  production  are  given  in  hecto- 
liters in  Consul  Malmroc's  report,  and  the 
quantities  below  are  calculated  on  the 
basis  of  26.417  United  States  gallons  to 
the  hectoliter.  The  "equivalents  in 
brandy  "  are  obtained  by  accepting  Consul 
Malmroc's  estimate  that  8^  hectoliters  of 
the  wine  are  required  to  produce  one 
hectoliter  of  brandy. 


Wine  Produced. 

Equivalents  in 
Brandy. 

Years. 

Charente. 

Charente- 
Inferieure. 

Charente. 

Charente- 
Inferieuie. 

Galls. 

Galls. 

Galls. 

Galls. 

1877 

94,267.057 

131. .578,834 

11.090,242 

15,479,861 

1878 

.54,'..>7-3,991 

122,:356,96f) 

6.;385.175 

14,394,9:37 

1879 

14,.'J06.684 

34,547,307 

1,706.669 

4,(M34.389 

1880 

22.070,514 

49,503,979 

2,597,590 

5.823,998 

1881 

15,169,4:34 

45,086.660 

1,784,6.39 

5,304,313 

1882 

6,523,969 

31,099.4:39 

767..526 

3,6.58,757 

188:3 

8,093.878 

38,618,590 

952,221 

4,54;3,:364 

1884 

5,726,941 

30,SM2,684 

673,758 

3,557,963 

1885 

2,976,932 

16,091,968 

350,227 

1,893,173 

1886 

1,992,159 

18,460,2.52 

234,373 

2,171,794 

1887 

1,869,505 

15,897,064)       219,942 

1,870,243 

In  the  five  years  1872-6  there  were 
412,863,632  gallons  of  wine  made  in 
the  Charente  and  687,499,915  gallons 
of  wine  in  the  Charente-Inferieure  ; 
yearly  average,  220,072,709  gallons  of 
wine  for  the  two  departments.  Equiva- 
lents in  brandy  (if  the  entire  wine  pro- 
duct were  distilled  into  brandy),  for  the 
five  years,  48,572,192  gallons  in  the 
Charente  and  80,882,343  gallons  in  the 
Charente-Inferieure;  yearly  average,  25,- 
890,907  gallons  of  brandy  for  the  two 
departments.    By  comparing  these  yearly 


averages  with  the  ones  for  1887,  it  will 
be  seen  that  the  maximum  quantity  of 
wine  available  for  cognac  brandy  (sup- 
posing every  gallon  produced  in  the  two 
Charentes  was  available)  has  been  re- 
duced 92  per  cent,  in  the  dozen  years 
during  which  the  ravages  of  the  phyl- 
loxera were  most  serious  in  the  two 
Charentes. 

The  above  estimates  of  "equivalents 
in  brandy "  are,  however,  misleading. 
The  best  cognac  brandy,  properly  so- 
called,  comes  (or  came)  chiefly  from  that 
division  of  the  Charente  known  as  the 
Grand  Champagne.  A  large  part  of  the 
wine  product  in  other  di'-dsions  of  the 
Charente  and  in  some  portions  of  the 
Charente-Inferieure  was  also  used  for 
making  cognac;  but  a  very  considerable 
part  has  always  been  deemed  unfit  for 
distillation  into  export  cognac,  and  has 
been  used  for  the  manufacture  of  spirits 
to  be  employed  in  adulteration,  while 
another  considerable  part  has  been  sent 
to  the  north  of  France  and  to  Holland  for 
consumption  among  drinkers  of  unexact- 
ing  tastes.  Singularly  enough,  the  phyl- 
loxera's fiercest  attacks  were  made  upon 
the  vines  which  produced  the  genuine 
cognac  wine,  and  these  vines  were  almost 
completely  destroyed.  Undoubtedly  the 
largest  part  of  the  crops  of  1882-7  was 
unsuitable  for  the  manufacture  of  cognac 
brandy.  From  these  facts  it  will  be 
readily  believed  that  for  quite  a  number 
of  years  past  honest  French  brandy  has 
been  one  of  the  very  scarcest  articles  of 
commerce,  in  proportion  to  the  demand. 

Yet  Consul  Slalmroc  declares  that  "dur- 
ing the  period  1886-8  an  average  ship- 
ment per  year  of  cognac  brandy  Avas  made 
of  [only]  one  half  less  than  the  average 
yearly  shipment  of  the  ante  phylloxera 
period."  and  that  "  the  consumption  of 
cognac  hrancly  in  France  during  the  last 
10  years  has  not  diminished.'"  The  im- 
ports of  French  brandy  into  the  United 
States  have  not  materially  changed  in 
the  last  decade.  Previously  to  1884  the 
United  States  statistics  did  not  classify 
brandy  imports  separately,  but  included 
them  under  the  general  head  of  "  spirits 
and  cordials."  The  total  imports  of 
spirits  and  cordials  from  France  for  the 
four  years  1880-3,  with  values,  were: 
1880 — 398,246  proof  gallons,  valued  at 
11,108,072;  1881—370,793  proof  gallons, 
valued    at    11,082,838;     1882  —  442,993 


phylloxera.] 


481 


[Phylloxera. 


proof  gallons,  valued  at  $1,303,415 ;  1883 
— 424.903  proof  gallons,  valued  at  $1,- 
319,721.  For  the  years  1884-9  the 
quantities  and  values  of  "  brandy "  im- 
ported from  France  were : 


^^  JUN^  30.' '"'    P''^"^  Gallons. 

Values. 

ia84. 

1885. 
1886. 
1887. 
1888. 
1889. 

452,570 
462,216 
388,440 
3(i4,612 
379,605 
357,658 

$1.1.31.874 
1,128,710 
1,019,630 

972,726 
l,oa5,278 

977,318 

Thus  in  1889  our  imports  of  French 
"  brandy  "  lacked  only  about  40,000  gal- 
lons of  being  equivalent  to  the  whole  im- 
ports of  French  spirits  and  cordials  in 
1880.  In  1880  the  effects  of  the  phyl- 
loxera's devastations  upon  commerce  in 
genuine  French  brandy  had  only  begun 
to  be  felt;  for  honest  brandy  is  not  mar- 
ketable until  two  or  three  years  after 
its  production.  Therefore  the  imports 
into  the  United  States  in  1880  may  possi- 
bly be  regarded  as  imports,  for  the  most 
part,  of  tolerably  pure  French  brandy. 
But  what  is  to  be  said  of  the  imports  for 
the  succeeding  nine  years?  While  the 
maximum  production  of  cognac  decreas- 
ed at  least  92  })er  cent.,  the  American 
supply  of  French  brandy  does  not  seem 
to  have  been  diminished.  And  the  arti- 
cle apparently  was  no  costlier  in  1889 
than  in  1880.  These  remarkable  figures 
can  be  explained  only  by  the  conclusion 
that  the  American  public  lias  been  drink- 
ing each  year  some  375,000  gallons,  or 
upwards  of  25,000,000  drams,  of  vilely 
adulterated  French  spirits  in  the  guise  of 
so-called  brandy. 

If  it  could  be  ascertained  how  much 
potato  and  beet  spirits  has  been  imported 
into  the  cognac  district  in  the  last  decade, 
and  to  what  extent  the  traffic  in  subtile 
chemical  substances  (such  as  are  em- 
ployed by  the  more  clever  than  scrupu- 
lous liquor-makers  in  the  United  States) 
has  been  augmented  there,  a  partial  ex- 
planation of  the  continuance  of  a  heavy 
trade  in  cognac  brandy  after  the  practi- 
cal disappearance  of  cognac  brandy  might 
be  obtained. 

The  great  lesson  taught  by  the  long- 
continued  phylloxera  plague  is  that  the 
wine  of  commerce,  the  drink  that  is  sup- 
posed to  be  both  innocent  and  grateful, 
can  no  longer  by  any  possibility  be  even 


relatively  pure.  Even  before  the  phyl- 
loxera was  known  most  of  the  wine  on 
the  market  was  regarded  with  grave  sus- 
picion, and  extensive  vineyards  in  certain 
localities  were  destroyed,  or  the  vintages 
repeatedly  failed,  on  account  of  the  in- 
jury done  by  the  oidium,  mildew,  black- 
rot  and  other  vine-pests  and  diseases. 
Since  the  phylloxera  began  its  operations 
the  demand  for  wine  has  gone  on  increas- 
ing. With  a  vastly  diminished  supply, 
it  has  of  course  been  impossible  to  meet 
this  demand  without  resorting  to  exten- 
sive adulterations.  For  the  vineyard, 
the  still  and  the  laboratory  have  been 
substituted.  France,  which  imported 
only  3,344,G5G  gallons  of  wine  in  18T0,  im- 
ported 290,874,813  gallons  in  188G.  (See 
p.  132.)  This  immense  quantity  of  wine 
now  imported  into  France  is  chiefly  cheap 
Spanish,  Portuguese  and  Algerian  stuff, 
used  for  adulterating  the  French  articles. 
Meanwhile  France's  importations  of  dis- 
tilled spirits  have  increased  three-fold 
and  her  exportations  of  spirits  have  de- 
creased nearly  40  per  cent,  (see  p.  132), 
indicating  that  not  only  cheap  wine  but 
also  raw  alcohol  has  been  used  on  a  great 
scale  to  swell  the  volume  of  her  own 
wine  product.  In  order  that  the  former 
sujierior  qualities  of  flavor  might  not 
suffer  from  all  this  blending  and  forti- 
fying, the  skill  of  the  chemist  has  been 
in  request,  and  the  most  harmful  drugs 
have  been  employed  for  "  doctoring ''  the 
French  brands.  The  phylloxera  has  not 
promoted  temperance,  but  it  has  prtjvided 
a  very  weighty  reason  for  the  discontin- 
uance of  wine-drinking:  it  has  demon- 
strated beyond  dispute  that  no  one  but 
an  expert  can  now  venture  to  drink  of 
the  decoctions  labelled  "  wine  "  with  any 
assurance  that  the  article  consumed  is 
not  highly  and  poisonously  adulterated. 
Tbough  tlie  most  destructive  attacks 
of  the  phylloxera  have  been  made  in 
France,  there  is  hardly  a  wine-producing 
country  where  its  inroads  have  not  been 
seriously  felt.  (Jfficial  reports  up  to  the 
beginning  of  1888  showed  that  some 
200,000  acres  of  vineyards  had  been  de- 
vastated in  Spain;  that  there  were  335,- 
000  acres  of  infected  vines  in  Portugal, 
nearly  one-half  of  all  the  vines  in  that 
kingdom  having  been  diseased;  that  in 
Italy  211,000  acres  of  vines  had  been  at- 
tacked by  the  phylloxera;  that  in  Hun- 
gary   190,000  acres   had   been   infected. 


Physical  Training.] 

the  vines  having  been  totally  destroyed 
throughout  nearly  one-half  of  this  area ; 
that  in  Russia  the  districts  of  Odessa, 
Bessarabia,  Crimea  and  Caucasus  were 
under  infection  in  1888,  and  that  fresh 
attacks  of  the  phylloxera  were  being 
made  yearly  in  Germany,  Switzerland 
and  other  countries.' 

Physical    Training.— Our   leading 
American  institutions  of  learning  have 
expended  hundreds  of  thousands  "of  dol- 
lars   upon   their    gymnasia,    and   these 
outlays   have   been   sanctioned   by   men 
who   may  rightfully  claim  to  rank  with 
the   wisest   of    the   nation — the    college 
presidents    and   professors.     These   pro- 
visions for  physical  training  have  been 
made  because  it  has  been  found  that  the 
youth  can  do  better  work,  both  mental 
and  physical,  if  the  body  is  properly  de- 
veloped.    Due  consideration  of  the  sig- 
nificance and  the  results  of  this  accept- 
ance of  the  physical  education  idea  in 
our  colleges  will  go  far  toward  removing 
the  impression  that  the  tendency  of  ath- 
letic culture  is    essentially   to   promote 
prize-fighting,    brutality,    a    low   moral 
standard,     betting    and    kindred    evils. 
However  serious  may  be  the  abuses  com- 
ing from  perversions  of  individual  phys- 
ical superiority,  it  is  a  fact  that  the  sys- 
tematic   and    judicious    prosecution    of 
physical  training  is  for  the  welfare  of  the 
race,  and  that  its  really  representative  and 
truly  scientific  promoters  are  among  the 
most  uncompromising  and  most  import- 
ant  advocates   and   exemplars   of    good 
personal  habits  and  practices  as  opposed 
to  bad.     No  persons  are  better  qualified 
to   testify   concerning   tlie    nature    and 
effects  of  alcohol,  and  none,  as  a  class, 
are  more  emphatic  in  condemning  drink 
as   an   unqualifiedly  worthless   and    in- 
jurious thing  or  in  declaring  that  total 
abstinence  is  not  merely  a  virtue  but  an 
advantage. 

Exercise  has  been  erroneously  associ- 
ated with  the  development  of  the  volun- 
tary muscular  system  only.  But  all  the 
organs  of  the  body,  including  the  brain, 
share  in  the  improvement  that  gymnas- 
tics gives  to  the  voluntary  muscles.  The 
heart  especially  is  stimulated  during  exer- 
cise because  of  the  added  work  it  must 
do    to    assist  in  the   metamorphosis   of 

•  Report  from  James  H.  Smith  of  the  United  States 
Commercinl  Ai;encyat  Mayence,  (iermanv;  United  States 
Coneulai'  lieports  for  June,  1890,  pp.  304-^. 


482 


[Physical  Training. 


tissue.     This   work— provided    it  is  not 
over-work— strengtliens   the   heart    and 
keeps  it  in  excellent  condition.  Deficient 
exercise  leads  to  fatty  degeneration  and 
weakness,  but  over-exertion  causes  valvu- 
lar trouble,  palpitation  and  hypertrophy 
while  straining  and  thus  weakening  the 
blood-vessels.     The  "  whiskey  heart  "  be- 
trays fatty  and  fibrous  degeneration,   a 
direct  result  of  the  use  of  alcohol.     One 
of  the  most  valuable  effects  of  muscular 
exercise  is  that  produced  on  the  lungs. 
The  pulmonary  circulation  is  quickened, 
while  the  amount  of  air  inspired  and  of 
carbon  dioxide   exhaled   is    greatly    in- 
creased.    This  is  in  accordance  with  a 
law   of  nature   and  indicates  a  healthy 
condition.     Excessive  exercise  is  danger- 
ous for  these  organs,  but  moderate  action, 
systematically  planned,  is  necessary  in  or- 
der that  the  blood  may  be  purified  and  the 
carbon  may  be  eliminated  from  the  body. 
Another   point:  if   the   loss    of    carbon 
from  the  lungs  be  great  there  must  be  a 
sufficient  supply  of  such  food  as  contains 
this  element  to  repair  the  waste.     It  has 
been  noticed  that  men  in  training  will 
choose  the  fats  rather  than  the  starchy 
foods,  thus  easily  and  naturally  preserv- 
ing the  equilibrium  of  the  body  or  sys- 
tem.    "Alcohol,"  says  Parkes,  "lessens 
the  excretion  of  pulmonary  carbon  diox- 
ide.    It  is  hurtful  during  exercise,  and 
it   is   perhaps   for   this    reason,   as  well 
as   from  the   deadening  action   on    the 
nerves  of  volition,  that  those  who  take 
alcohol  are  incapable  of  great  exertion." 
Indeed,  it  is  now  well  understood  that 
alcohol  is  not  given  by  good  trainers,  and 
that  even  its  external  application  is  not 
sanctioned. 

Exercise  increases  the  healthy  action 
of  the  organs  of  digestion  and  assimila- 
tion, while  alcohol  checks  it  and  produces 
chronic  catarrhal  conditions.  Habitual 
exercise  causes  appetite ;  habitual  indul- 
gence in  alcohol  lessens  appetite.  A 
healthy  appetite  calls  for  healthful  food 
and  thus  the  blood  is  enriched;  an  appe- 
tite that  depends  on  alcohol  is  depraved 
and  requires  a  like  food — consequently 
the  result  is  poor  blood,  watery,  and  weak 
in  reconstructive  elements.  We  have 
seen  that  the  heart  and  lungs  made  strong 
by  gymnastics  do  good  work.  Especially 
is  this  the  case  if  they  have  blood  rich  iit 
quality  to  work  with.  A  very  important 
result  of  physical  training  is  the  build- 


Physical  Training.] 


483 


[Pierpont,  John. 


ing  up  of  the  entire  body ;  but  if  alcohol 
is  habitually  used  the  whole  system 
suffers. 

Through  the  blood  the  body  is  warmed. 
Exercise  is  nature's  method  of  maintain- 
ing an  even  temperature.  On  a  cold  day 
notice  the  stamping  of  feet,  slapping  of 
hands  and  swinging  of  arms.  It  is  uni- 
versally admitted  by  Arctic  explorers  that 
alcohol  does  not  produce  heat  but  that  on 
the  contrary  it  is  harmful,  and  that 
muscular  exertion  or  exercise  is  of  far 
greater  value  than  alcoholic  beverages. 
Dr.  Hayes  not  only  refused  to  use  such 
beverages  but  also  declined  to  engage 
men  who  were  in  the  habit  of  drinking. 

One  more  comparison.  Gymnastics 
developes  not  only  the  muscular  system 
but  through  it  the  nerves  and  brain. 
Many  eminent  physiologists  agree  that 
the  gray  matter  in  the  brain  is  developed 
by  this  training,  and  that  exercise  is,  to 
a  certain  extent,  the  promoter  of  the 
highest  kind  of  will-i)ovver — that  of  self- 
control.  The  damaging  effect  of  alcohol 
on  the  brain  and  mind  is  only  too  well 
known.  The  tremor  of  the  body  of  the 
drinking  man,  the  varying  mental  power, 
the  recurring  irrita1)ility  and  lack  of 
self-control,  the  delirium,  indicate  shat- 
tered nerves.  Not  only  does  the'  man 
himself  show  the  demoralizing  effects  of 
drink  but  his  children  are  likely  to  be 
epileptic,  idiotic  or  "  odd."  On  the  other 
hand  a  man  can  so  develop  his  muscular 
and  nervous  system  that,  balanced  on  his 
head  with  feet  in  air  and  arms  extended, 
he  can  swing  on  a  small  trapeze  many 
feet  from  the  ground. 

Briefly,  the  following  important  truths 
lie  close  to  all  the  fundamental  laws 
established  by  practical  experiments  in 
physical  training : 

1. — The  continued  and  excessive  use  of 
alcohol  is  destructive  to  mind  and  body, 
or,  as  Dickinson  says,  alcohol  is  the  very 
''genius  of  degeneration." 

2. — The  result  of  temperance  and  ab- 
stinence is  to  ward  off  destruction  and 
misery,  and  to  restore  health,  vigor  and 
happiness  to  those  who  have  lost  these 
things  through  indulgence.  Thus  the 
influence  exercised  is  both  preventive  and 
curative. 

3. — The  effects  of  exercise  and  alcohol 
are  antagonistic.  Alcohol  destroys,  exer- 
cise builds  up.  Weakness,  destruction, 
misery  and  death  spring  from  alcohol; 


growth,  happiness  and  health  are  the  re- 
sults of  exercise.  The  work  done  by 
exercise  is  prophylactic  and  remedial; 
that  done  by  alcohol  is  the  reverse.  The 
best  physical  condition  is  purity  of  mind 
and  body ;  this  is  ministered  to  equally 
by  exercise  and  temperance. 

The  principles  of  temperance  are 
taught  to  children.  Tlie  principles  of 
physical  training  should  be  taught  as 
Avell.  With  a  healthy  body  is  likely  to 
go  a  healthy  mind,  ca2)able  of  finer  per- 
ceptions and  clearer  judgment.  Who 
would  knowingly  wreck  a  fine  physical 
organization,  fully  developed,  on  the 
shoals  of  vice  ?  Let  the  good  Christian 
worker  and  the  conscientious  educator 
inspire  inexperienced  youth  to  cultivate 
all  the  attractions  that  come  from  health 
and  strength,  and  the  danger  from  the 
false  allurements  of  intemperance  will 
be  greatly  reduced. 

William  G.  Andeeson. 

Pierpont,  John. — Born  in  Litch- 
field, Conn,  April  G,  1785;  died  in  Med- 
ford,  Mass.,  Aug.  27,  1866.  He  entered 
Yale  College  at  the  age  of  15,  graduating 
in  1804.  For  a  short  time  he  was  assist- 
ant in  an  academy  at  Bethlehem,  Conn., 
and  in  the  fall  of  1805  he  became  private 
tutor  in  the  family  of  Col.  William  Alls- 
ton  of  South  Carolina.  Keturning  to 
the  North  in  1809  he  began  the  study  of 
law.  In  1812  he  was  admitted  to  the 
bar  and  commenced  practice  in  Newbury- 
port,  Mass.,  but  he  soon  gave  up  the  pro- 
fession on  account  of  ill-health  and  en- 
gaged in  business  as  a  merchant,  first  in 
Boston  and  later  in  Baltimore.  In  the 
latter  city,  in  1816,  he  issued  a  volume 
of  poems,  "Airs  of  Palestine."  About 
the  same  time  he  undertook  the  study  of 
theology,  finishing  his  course  at  the  Cam- 
bridge Divinity  School.  In  April,  1819, 
he  was  ordained  pastor  of  the  Hollis 
street  (Unitarian)  Church,  Boston,  of 
which  he  retained  charge  until  1845,  al- 
though in  1835-6  he  was  absent  on  an 
extended  tour  in  Europe  and  Asia  Minor. 
Before  his  visit  to  Europe  his  radical 
temperance  views,  freely  expressed,  had 
occasioned  considerable  feeling  on  the 
part  of  some  members  of  his  congrega- 
tion who  were  engaged  in  the  liquor 
traffic,  and  after  his  return,  in  1838,  this 
prejudice  took  the  form  first  of  contro- 
versy and  afterward  of  charges  against 


Pledge.] 


484 


[Pledge. 


him.  He  sustained  himself  against  his 
enemies  for  seven  years  and  then  re- 
quested a  dismissal  from  his  church.  Jle 
was  pastor  of  the  Unitarian  Church  of 
Troy,  N.  Y.,  from  1845  to  1849,  and  dur- 
ing the  succeeding  seven  years  was  in 
charge  of  the  Congregational  Church  at 
Medford,  Mass.,  resigning  April  (i.  1851). 
He  was  a  candidate  of  the  Liberal  party 
for  Governor  of  Massachusetts,  and  in 
1850  he  was  nominated  for  Congress  hy 
the  Free-soilers.  A  zealous  advocate  both 
of  Abolition  principles  and  the  tem- 
perance reform,  he  wrote  able  articles 
and  numerous  verses  in  support  of  these 
causes.  He  was  the  author  of  the  fami- 
liar lines: 

"■  We  have  a  weapon  firmer  pet 
Ar.d  better  than  tlie  Ijayonet — 
A  weapon  that  comes  flown  as  still 

As  snowflakes  fall  upon  the  sod, 
Yet  executes  a  freeman's  will 

As  lightning  does  the  will  of  God." 

The  following  is  from  a  petition  (writ- 
ten by  him)  to  tiie  Massachusetts  Legis- 
lature : 

"  If  I  be  willingly  accessory  to  my  brother's 
deatli  by  pistol  or  cord  the  law  holds  nie  guilty, 
btit  guiltless  if  I  mix  his  death-drink  in  a  eup. 
The  halter  is  my  reward  if  1  bring  him  his  death 
in  a  howl  of  hemlock;  if  in  a  glass  of  spirits  I 
am  rewarded  with  his  purse.  Yet  who  would  not 
rather  die,  who  would  not  rather  see  his  child 
die,  by  hemlock  than  by  rum  ?  The  law  raises  me 
a  gallows  if  I  set  fire  to  my  neighbor's  house, 
though  not  a  fowl  perish  in  the  flames;  but  if  I 
throw  a  torch  into  his  bouseliold  I  may  lead  his 
children  through  a  tire  more  consuming  than 
Moloch's,  I  may  make  his  whole  family  a  burnt- 
offering  on  the  altar  of  Mammon,  and  the  same 
law  hotds  a  shield  between  me  and  harm.  It 
Ikis  installed  me  in  my  otlice,  and  it  comes  in  to 
protect  alike  the  priest,  the  altar  and  the  god. 
For  the  victims  it  has  no  sympathies;  for  them 
it  provides  neither  ransom  nor  avenger.  But 
there  is  an  Avenger.  While  these  sacrifices  are 
smoking  on  their  thousand  altars  through  the 
length  and  breadth  of  our  land,  the  Ruler  of  the 
nations  is  bringing  upon  us  the  penalties  of  his 
laws  in  the  consequence  of  breaking  them." 

Pledge. — In  all  ages  pledges  have 
been  taken  by  individuals  to  emphasize 
resolution  or  mark  im])()rtant  departures. 
The  Old  Testament  church  was  distin- 
guished by  its  solemn  covenants.  "  They 
shall  vow  a  vow  unto  the  Lord,  and  per- 
form it."  (Isa.  19 :  ;31.)  The  ordinances 
of  Christianity  are  little  else  than  prac- 
tical pledges.  Pliny  relates  that  the 
early  disciples  were  accustomed  to  meet 
before  daylight,  to  sing  hymns  to  Christ 
and  "to  bind  themselves  ijy  an  oath  "  to 
abstain  from  all  wickedness.  John  How- 


ard, the  philanthropist,  signed  a  written 
pledge  to  devote  himself  and  all  that  he 
possessed  to  the  service  of  God. 

For  many  years  j^ast  "•'  the  pledge  "  has 
been  one  of  the  chief  agencies  of  the 
temperance  reformers.  Hr.  F.  R.  Lees 
defines  a  temperance  pledge  thus:  "  (1) 
The  expression  of  a  conviction;  (-3)  The 
declaration  of  a  purpose ;  (3)  The  utter- 
ance of  a  protest;  (4)  A  bond  of  sym- 
pathetic union."  Paley,  in  his  *'  Moral 
Philosophy,"  says :  "  Many  a  man  will 
abstain  rather  then  break  his  rule  who 
would  not  easily  be  brought  to  exercise 
the  same  mortification  from  higher  mo- 
tives." True  it  is  that  a  great  many  tak- 
ing the  pledge  in  consequence  of  momen- 
tary sentimental  impulse,  or  even  of 
matured  decision,  have  not  the  moral 
strength  to  adhere  to  it,  but  relapse  into 
excess  more  or  less  speedily.  But  large 
numbers,  constituting  not  an  inconsider- 
able proportion  of  all  the  pledge-signers, 
are  saved,  are  permanently  reclaimed, 
often  by  the  force  of  that  pride  or  sheer 
tenacity  to  which  Paley  alludes,  but  not 
infrequently  from  the  very  highest  of 
motives.  The  benefits  that  the  pledge 
has  bestowed  upon  individuals  and 
families  are  inestimable.  It  is  the  in- 
strumentality to  which  the  world  owes 
the  rescue  and  great  services  of  some  of 
the  most  famous  temperance  agitators.  It 
was  the  basis  of  all  the  early  temperance 
societies  and  the  great  crusades  condttcted 
by  Father  Mathew,  the  Washingtonians 
and  others.  To-day,  althougli  eft'orts  for 
the  suppression  of  the  traffic  have  largely 
replaced  jirimitive  methods,  the  pledge 
still  plays  an  important  part.  The  differ- 
ent temperance  organizations  require 
their  members  to  subscribe  to  it  and  the 
moral  suasion  orators  at  their  numerous 
meetings  obtain  many  thousands  of  sig- 
natures to  it.  But  the  pledge  is  nov/  re- 
garded as  simply  a  preparatory  measure, 
whose  introduction,  on  however  great  a 
scale,  is  a  means  and  not  an  end. 

One  of  the  oldest  temperance  pledges 
on  record  was  written  on  tlie  blank  leaf 
of  an  old  Irish  l)i])le  by  1\.  Bolton, 
Broughton,  Northamptonshire,  April  10, 
1637,  as  follows: 

"From  this  day  forwarde  to  the  ende  of  my 
life,  I  will  never  pledge  any  healthe,  nor  drinke 
in  a  whole  carouse,  in  a  glass,  cup,  bowle  or 
other  drinking  iustnnnent,  wheresoever  it  may 
be.  from  Avhomsoever  it  come — except  the  neces- 
sity doth  require  it.    Not  my  own  most  gracious 


Poisons.] 


485 


[Poisons. 


kinge,  nor  even  the  greatest  monarch  or  tyrant 
upon  earthe,  uor  my  dearest  friend,  nor  all  the 
goulde  in  the  world,  shall  ever  enforce  me.  Not 
angel  from  heaven  (who  I  know  will  not  attempt 
it)  shall  persuade,  nor  Satan  with  all  his  oulde 
subtleties,  nor  all  the  power  of  hell  itself  shall 
betray  me.  By  this  very  sinne  (for  sinne  it  is, 
and  not  a  little  one)  I  have  more  offended  and 
dishonored  my  glorious  Maker  than  by  all  other 
sinne  that  I  am  subject  untoe,  and  for  this  very 
sinne  it  is  my  God  hath  often  been  strange  untoe 
me,  and  for  that  cause  and  no  other  respect 
have  I  thus  vowed,  and  I  heartily  beg  my  good 
Father  in  heaven  of  his  great  goodness  and  in- 
tinite  mercy  in  Jesus  Christ  to  assist  me  in  the 
same,  and  be  so  favorable  untoe  me  for  what  is 
past." 

A  simple  and  comprehensive  pledge, 
appropriate  for  all  classes  and  countries 
at  the  present  day,  is  the  following :  "  I 
solemnly  promise  to  abstain  from  the 
manufacture,  sale  and  use  of  all  alcoholic 
beverages,  and  to  labor  in  every  honora- 
ble way  to  dissuade  the  drinker  and 
destroy  the  dramshop." 

Poisons  have  been  defined  as  sub- 
stances which,  when  administered  in 
small  quantities,  are  capable  of  produc- 
ing deleterious  or  deadly  effects  upon  the 
animal  organism.  The  study  of  those 
effects  is  the  main  key  to  the  problem  of 
temperance. 

Under  the  three  heads  of  Irritants, 
'  Narcotics  and  Narcotico-Irritants  chem- 
ists have  enumerated  some  200  different 
organic  and  inorganic  simples  and  com- 
pounds, all  of  which,  in  their  action  upon 
the  human  system,  are  characterized  by 
the  following  specific  symptoms :  To  the 
palate  of  undepraved  human  beings  all 
poisons  are  either  repulsive  or  insipid, 
yet  by  their  gradual  and  persistent  obtru- 
sion upon  the  reluctant  organism  those 
objects  of  aversion  may  beget  an  un- 
natural craving  for  repetitions  of  the 
noxious  dose,  and  the  persistence  and 
progressiveness  Of  that  morbid  appetency 
is  proportioned  to  the  virulence  of  each 
poison. 

1. — Repulsiveness  of  Poisons. — Under 
normal  circumstances  the  attractiveness 
of  alimentary  substances  is  generally  pro- 
portioned to  the  degree  of  their  health- 
fulness  and  their  nutritive  value,  while 
the  repulsiveness  of  poison  is  with  rare 
exceptions  proportioned  to  the  degree  of 
tlieir  hurtfulness.  Providence  has  en- 
dowed our  species  with  a  large  share  of 
the  self-protective  instincts  that  teach 
our  dumb  fellow-creatures  to  select  their 


proper  food.  A  child's  hankering  after 
sweetmeats  is  only  an  apparent  excep- 
tion, for,  as  Dr.  Schrodt  observes,  the 
conventional  diet  of  our  children  is  so 
deficient  in  saccharine  elements  that  in- 
stinct constantly  jjrompts  them  to  supply 
an  unsatisfied  want.  Human  beings  fed 
chiefly  on  fruit-syrups  would  hanker 
after  farinaceous  substances.  The  sav- 
ages of  our  northwestern  prairies  are  as 
fond  of  honey  as  their  grizzly  neighbors. 
Sailors  in  the  tropics  instinctively  thirst 
after  refrigerating  fluids,  after  fruit  and 
fresh  vegetables.  In  the  Arctic  regions 
they  crave  calorific  food — oil  or  fat. 

But  in  no  climate  of  this  earth  is  man 
afflicted  with  an  instinctive  hankering 
after  poison.  No  human  being  ever 
relished  the  first  taste  of  any  stimulant. 
To  the  palate  of  a  healthy  child  tea  is  in- 
sipid, the  taste  of  coffee  (unless  disguised 
by  milk  or  sugar)  offensively  bitter, 
laudanum  acrid-caustic,  alcohol  as  repul- 
sive as  corrosive  sublimate.  No  tobacco- 
smoker  ever  forgets  his  horror  at  the  first 
attempt — the  seasick-like  misery  and 
headache,  expressing  nature's  protest 
against  the  incipience  of  a  health-destroy- 
ing habit.  Of  lager  beer — "the  grateful 
and  nutritious  beverage"  which  our 
brewers  are  now  prepared  to  furnish  at 
the  rate  of  2,000,000  gallons  a  day, — the 
first  glass  is  shockingly  nauseous,  so 
much  so,  indeed,  as  to  be  a  fluid  substi- 
tute for  tartar  emetic.  Nor  do  our  in- 
stincts yield  after  the  first  protest: 
nausea,  gripes,  nervous  headaches  and 
gastric  spasms  warn  us  again  and  again, 
till  the  perversion  of  our  inborn  tastes  at 
last  begets  a  morbid  craving  for  the 
repetition  of  the  unnatural  process  of 
irritation. 

As  a  singular  exception  to  this  gen- 
eral rule  physiologists  have  often  men- 
tioned the  non-rei^ulsiveness  of  certain 
mineral  poisons.  Arsenious  acid  (com- 
mon white  arsenic),  for  instance,  does 
not  betray  itself  by  any  taste  indicating 
the  banefulness  of  its  effects,  and  it 
would  almost  seem  as  if  in  the  case  of 
such  out-of-the-way  poisons  nature  had 
thought  it  superfluous  to  secure  the 
safety  of  her  creatures  by  the  warnings 
of  a  i^rotective  instinct.  But  even  ar- 
senic, though  not  violently  repulsive,  is 
certainly  not  attractive,  either  in  taste  or 
odor,  while  on  the  other  hand  a  decidedly 
disagreeable  taste  is,  almost  Avithout  an 


Poisons.] 


486 


[Poisons. 


exception,  an  a  priori  argument  against 
the  wholesomeness  of  any  mineral  or 
vegetable  substance.  No  creature  is  mis- 
led by  an  innate  craving  for  unwhole- 
some food,  and  our  natural  aversion  to 
nearly  all  kinds  of  drastic  "  medicines  " 
(«.'.  e.,  virulent  stimulants)  has  already  be- 
gun to  be  recognized  as  a  suggestive  illus- 
tration of  that  rule. 

2. — Identity  of  Poisons  and  Stirmrlants. 
— One  effect  upon  the  system  of  any  vio- 
lent chemical  stimulant  is  strictly  that  of 
a  poison,  and  every  poison  may  become  a 
stimulant.  There  is  no  bane  in  the  South 
American  swamps,  no  virulent  compound 
in    the    North    American     drug-stores, 
chemistry    knows    no    deadlier   poison, 
whose  gradual  and  persistent  obtrusion 
upon  the  human  organism  will  not  beget 
an  unnatural  craving  after  a  repetition 
of  the  baneful  dose,  a  morbid  appetency 
in  every  way  analogoiis  to  the  hankering 
of  the   toper   after   his   favorite   tipple. 
Entirely   accidental    circumstances,   the 
accessibility  of  special  drugs,  imitative- 
ness  and  the  intercourse  of  commercial 
nations,  the  mere  whims  of  fashion,  the 
authority  of   medical   recommendations 
have  often  decided  the  first  choice  of  any 
special  stimulant  destined  to  become  a 
*'  national    beverage "    and    a    national 
curse.     The  contemporaries  of  the  Veda 
v/riters   fuddled    with    soma- juice,    the 
decoction  of  a  narcotic  ]dant  indigenous 
to  the  Himalaya  foot-hills.    Their  neigh- 
hors,  the  pastoral  Tartars,  have  for  ages 
got     drunk    on   koumiss,    or  fermented 
mare's   milk,  an  abomination  which  in 
Eastern  Europe  threatens  to  increase  the 
list  of  imported  poisons,  while  opium  is 
gaining  ground  in  our  Pacific  States  as 
fast    as   lager  beer,   chloral   and   patent 
"  bitters  "  are  acquiring   popularity   on 
the   Atlantic   slope.     The  French   have 
added  Swiss  absinthe  to  their  wines  and 
liquors,  the  Turks  hasheesh  and  opiates 
to   strong   coifee.      North   America  has 
adopted  tea  from  China,  coifee  from  Ara- 
bia (or  originally  from  Ceylon),  tobacco 
from  the  Caribbean  savages,  high-wines 
from  France  and   Spain,  and  may  possi- 
bly learn  to  drink  Mexican  aloe-sap,  or 
chew  the  coca-leaves  in  imitation  of  the 
South  American   Indians.     Arsenic   has 
its  votaries  in  the  southern  Alps.    Cinna- 
bar and  acetate  of  copper  victimize  the 
miners   of  the    Peruvian    sierras.       The 
Ashantees  are  so  fond  of  sorffhum  beer  that 


their  chieftains  have  to  keep  special  bam- 
boo cages  for  the  benefit  of  quarrelsome 
drunkards.     The  pastor  of  a  Swiss  colony 
in  the  Mexican  State  of  Oaxaca  told  me 
that  the  mountaineers  of  that  neighbor- 
hood  befuddle   themselves   Avitli   cicuta 
syrup,  the  inspissated  juice  of  a  kind  of 
hemlock  that  first  excites  and  then  de- 
presses the  cerebral  functions,  excessive 
garrulity  being  the  principal  symptom  of 
the  exalted  stage  of  intoxication.     A  de- 
coction   of    the    common    fly-toadstool 
{aciaricus  ^naculatas)  inflames  the  pas- 
sions   of   the  Kamtchatka   natives   and. 
makes  them  pugnacious,  disputative,  but 
eventually  splenetic.    (Chamino's  Reisen, 
p.    32;2.)      Tlie   Abyssinians   use   a   fer- 
mented preparation  of  dhurra  corn  that 
causes    more    quarrels   than    gambling. 
According  to  Prof.  Vand3erry  the  Syrian 
Druses  pray,  though  apparently  in  vain, 
to  be  delivered  from  the  temptation  of 
fox-glove  tea.      Comparative   pathology 
has   multiplied   these   analogies   till,  in 
spite  of   the   arguments  of  a  thousand 
specious    advocates,   there    is   no    valid 
reason  to  doubt  that  the  alleged  innate 
craving  for  the  stimulus  of  fermented  or 
distilled  beverages  is    wholly   abnormal 
and  that  the  alcohol  habit  is  character- 
ized by  all  the  distinctive  symptoms  of  a 
poison  habit.     Chemistry  has  confirmed 
that   conclusion.      "There   is   no   more 
evidence,"  says  Dr.  Parkes,  "of  alcohol 
being  in  any  way  utilized  in  the  body 
than   there   is   in   regard  to  ether   and 
chloroform.     If  alcohol  is  still  to  be  des- 
ignated as  a  food,  we  must  extend   the 
meaning  of  that  term  so  as  to  make  it 
comprehend  not  only  chloroform  but  all 
medicines  and  jioisons— in   fact,  every- 
thing which  can  be  swallowed  and  ab- 
sorbed, however  foreign  it  may  be  to  the 
normal  condition  of  the  body  and  how- 
ever injurious  to  its  functions.     On  the 
other  hand,  from  no  definition  that  can 
be  framed  of  ?k  poison — which  should  in- 
clude  those   more  powerful   ana3sthetic 
agents    whose   poisonous   character   has 
been  unfortunately  too  clearly  manifest- 
ed in  a  great  number  of  instances — can 
alcohol  be  fairly  shut  out." 

3. — Profjressiveness  of  the  Poison  Vice. 
— There  is  a  deep  significance  in  that 
term  of  our  language  which  describes  an 
unnatural  habit  as  "  growing  upon  "  its 
devotees,  for  we  find,  indeed,  a  striking 
analogy  between  the  development  of  the 


Poisons.] 


487 


[Political  Evils. 


stimulant  liabit  and  that  of  a  parasitical 
plant,  which,  sprouting  from  tiny  seeds, 
fastens  upon,  preys  upon  and  at  last 
strano-les  its  victims.  The  seductiveness 
of  every  stimulant  habit  gains  strength 
with  every  new  indulgence,  and  it  is  a 
curious  fact  that  that  power  is  propor- 
tioned to  the  original  repulsiveness  of 
the  poison.  The  tonic  influence  of 
Chinese  tea  is  due  to  the  presence  of  a 
stimulating  ingredient  known  as  tlte'ine, 
in  its  concentrated  form  a  strong  narcotic 
poison,  but  forming  only  a  minute  per- 
centage of  the  component  parts  of  com- 
mon green  tea.  On  the  Pacific  coast  of 
our  country  thousands  of  Chinese  immi- 
grants carry  their  thrift  to  the  degree  of 
renouncing  their  favorite  beverage;  but 
neither  considerations  of  economy  nor  of 
self-preservation  will  induce  the  same 
exiles  to  break  the  fetters  of  the  opium 
habit.  Not  one  hasheesh-eater  in  a  hun- 
dred can  hope  to  emancipate  him- 
self from  the  thraldom  of  his  vice, 
and  experience  has  only  too  well  proved 
the  truth  that,  while  the  difficulty  of 
total  abstinence  has  perhaps  been  over- 
rated, the  difficulty  of  curing  the  habit 
of  a  confirmed  alcohol-drinker  has  been 
very  much  underrated.  "  If  a  man  were 
sent  to  hell,"  says  Dr.  Hush,  "  and  kept 
there  a  thousand  years  as  a  punishment 
for  drinking,  and  then  returned,  his  first 
cry  would  be  '  Give  me  rum  !     Give   me 


rum 


!  "' 


And  moreover,  the  alcohol  habit 
grows  outward  as  well  as  inward.  Each 
gratification  of  the  poison  vice  is  fol- 
lowed by  a  depressing  reaction.  But  this 
feeling  of  exhaustion  is  progressive,  and 
the  correspondingly  increased  craving 
for  a  repetition  of  the  stimulating  dose 
forces  its  victims  either  to  increase  the 
quantity  of  the  M^onted  tonic  or  to  re- 
sort to  a  stronger  poison.  Beer-drinkers 
advance  from  small  beer  to  lager  beer, 
wine-drinkers  from  claret  to  port  and 
high-wines.  The  dupes  of  the  "bitters  " 
quack  have  to  swallow  his  nostrum  at 
sliorter  and  shorter  intervals.  One  radi- 
cal fallacy  identifies  the  stimulant  habit 
in  all  its  disguises:  its  victims  mistake  a 
process  of  irritation  for  a  process  of 
invigoratiou.  The  self-deception  of  the 
dyspeptic  philosopher  who  hopes  to 
exorcise  his  blue-devils  with  the  fumes  of 
the  same  weed  that  caused  his  sick- 
headaches  is  absolutely  analogous  to  that 


of  the  pot-house  sot  who  tries  to  drown 
his  cares  in  the  source  of  all  his  sorrows ; 
and  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  it  is 
precisely  the  same  fallacy  which  formerly 
ascribed  remedial  virtues  to  the  vilest 
stimulants  of  the  drug-store,  and  that 
Avitli  the  rarest  exceptions  the  alcoholic 
poisons  administered  for  "medicinal" 
purposes  have  not  decreased  but  con- 
siderably increased  the  sum  of  human 
misery.  Felix  L.  Oswald. 

Political  Evils. — Republics  are  not 
exempt  from  serious  political  evils.  Brib- 
ery of  executive  oflicers  and  legislators, 
government  by  the  corrnpt,  criminal  and 
ignorant  classes,  wasteful  expenditure, 
intimidation  and  purchase  of  voters,  dis- 
reputable or  unscrupulous  party  leader- 
ship, misrepresentation  of  issues  or  per- 
version of  facts  by  a  designing  press,  ap- 
peals to  prejudice  and  selfishness,  acrimo- 
nious discussion,  "personalities"  and  even, 
violence  are  familiar  developments  of 
American  politics.  It  is  now  frankly 
admitted  by  all  intelligent  persons,  even 
by  those  who  do  not  favor  radical  liquor 
legislation,  that  broadly  viewed,  the  un- 
welcome conditions  and  unwholesome 
tendencies  in  our  politics  and  Govern- 
ment have  their  chief  roots  in  the  drink 
traffic.  Drink,  said  the  New  York  Trib- 
unelloiiig  after  that  journal  had  ceased 
urging  the  strong  Prohibition  policy  ad- 
vocated by  its  founder,  "  lies  at_the  cen- 
tre of  all  social  and  political  mischief/'' 

Because  of  flie  results  of  the  ti-affic — 
crime,  pauperism,  turbulence,  vice,  mur- 
der and  the  like — it  is  constantly  under 
police  surveillance.  If  there  were  no 
restrictive  law  on  the  statute-book  the 
necessity  of  watching  the  saloons  day 
and  night  for  violations  of  law,  decency 
and  order  would  in  nowise  be  dimin- 
ished :  no  conditions  of  laxity  on  the  one 
hand  or  restriction  on  the  other  have 
ever  been  devised  by  which  the  character 
of  the  dramshop  as  the  principal  agent 
in  the  production  of  all  the  evils  known 
to  organized  society  has  been  mende'd. 
The  dramshop  proprietor,  as  well  as  his 
customers,  may  personally  desire  to  da 
no  wrong,  but  the  worst  forms  of  wrong 
are  inevitably  nourished  by  the  article 
dealt  in  and  consumed.  Therefore  it  is  not 
true  that  the  evils  complained  of,  though 
probably  aggravated   by  license  experi- 

1  New  York  Tribune,  March  2,  1884. 


Political  Evils.] 


488 


[Political  Evils. 


inents,  would  be  comparatively  unim- 
portant if  the  restrictions  on  the  traffic 
were  removed  and  the  rumseller  were 
treated  with  tlie  toleration  shown  to 
otlier  tradesmen. 

Thus  from  the  nature  of  his  business 
the  liquor-dealer  is  in  close  and  perma- 
nent contact  with  the  administrative  de- 
])artments  of  local  government.  It  is  not 
j'emarkable  if  a  trade  against  which  the 
law  discriminates  is  diligent  in  seeking 
to  control  the  officers  of  law, — if  indi- 
viduals whose  interests  depend  upon  offi- 
(;ial  favor  are  incessantly  employing  all 
the  means  by  which  official  favor  may  be 
cultivated.  The  pages  of  history  are 
filled  with  ii!*tances  of  corrupting  and 
powerful  political  influence  acquired  by 
the  unworthiest  and  most  dangerous 
)nen  and  associations  of  men,  whose  pur- 
suits have  been  such  as  to  place  them 
without  (or  barely  within)  the  pale  of  the 
law.  There  never  has  existed  an  associa- 
tion of  evil  or  evil-working  men  so 
strong  numerically,  so  wealthy  or  so 
lirmly  established  as  the  association  now 
known  as  the  liquor  traffic  or  "  rum 
power."  In  the  United  States  more  than 
l)i)OJ}00  men  are  engaged  in  the  traffic  as 
]iroprietors  or  employes;  and  counting 
the  adult  males  who  are  entirely  depen- 
dent upon  it  or  whoso  political  action  is 
absolutely  subject  to  barroom  dictation, 
it  is  hardly  possible  to  estimate  the  vot- 
ing strength  of  the  ''  rum  power,"  in 
round  numbers,  at  less  than  1,400,000,  or 
^abput  12  per  cent,  of  the  aggregate  vote 
of  the  country.     (See  pp.  382-5.) 

It  is  characteristic  of  the  liquor 
vote  that  it  is  easily  controlled  and  mo- 
bilized. As  a  class  and  as  individuals 
the  liquor-sellers  and  their  followers  care 
)iothing  for  principles  and  little  for 
party.  Their  leaders  are  quick  to  de- 
termine the  merits  of  each  measure  of 
public  policy  from  the  pro-liquor  point 
of  view,  and  to  decide,  in  any  case, 
whether  their  interests  make  it  advisable 
to  unitedly  support  one  party  and  one 
candidate  in  preference  to  another. 
They  are  rarely  deceived,  and  they  can 
count  upon  the  solid  support  of  the 
**  rum  vote  "  with  perfect  certainty. 

Since  the  ternperance  question  is  no 
longer  a  merely  local  issue  l)ut  has  a 
})roniinent  place  in  Bt^Eite  and  national 
})olitics,  the  activity  of  the  liquor  ele- 
ment affects  State  and  national  as  well  as 


municipal  affairs.  It  is  of  the  utmost  im- 
portance to  the  traffic  that  the  State 
Legislatures  and  Congress  which  enact 
laws,  and  the  Governors  and  Presidents 
who  are  vested  with  veto  and  appointive 
powers,  shall  have  friendly  or  moderate 
inclinations.  The  following  resolutions, 
adopted  by  the  New  York  State  Brewers 
and  Maltsters'  Association,  March  20, 
1883,  define  the  political  attitude  of  the 
"trade"  everywhere  : 

"  Resolved,  That  this  Association  is  an  anti- 
Prohibition  Association,  pure  and  simple,  and 
that  we  do  not  affiliate  with  any  political 
party. 

"  Resola^ed,  That  all  candidates  for  office, 
whether  for  Representatives  in  Congress,  Gov- 
ernors, State  Senators  or  Members  of  Assembly, 
shall  have  a  circular  addressed  to  them  of  the 
same  wording  as  was  sent  to  candidates  in  1883, 
bearing  date  Oct.  23. 

"Resolved,  When  candidates  of  both  and 
all  parties  answer  in  the  affirmative  (that  is, 
opposed  to  Prohibition),  each  member  of  this 
Association  shall  be  at  liberty  to  vote  as  he 
deems  best.  Where  they  fail  to  communicate 
it  will  be  considered  as  an  answer  in  the  nega- 
tive, in  which  case  we  shall  withhold  our  votes 
or  select  an  independent  candidate.  When  one 
answers  in  the  affirmative  and  the  other  in  the 
negative  we  shall  always  support  the  man  who 
co-operates  with  us,  whatever  may  be  his 
party."  ' 

Probably  the  gravest  political  evil 
for  which  the  saloon  is  responsible  is 
government  by  the  direct  representatives 
of  the  saloon.  In  many  cities  the  traffic, 
dominating  the  leading  parties,  is  not 
content  with  obedience  but  insists  upon 
the  nomination  and  election  of  notorious 
and  unscrupulous  liquor-vendors.  Thus 
the  offices  are  filled  with  the  most  de- 
graded and  barbarous  men  of  the  com- 
munity, men  whose  livelihood  depends 
essentially  upon  vice  and  plunder. 
"  New  York,  ruled  by  drunkards,"  said 
AVendell  Phillips,  in  1870,  "  isproof  of  the 
despotism  of  the  dramshop.  Men  whom 
murderers  serve  that  they  may  escape, 
and  because  they  have  escaped  the  gal- 
lows, rule  that  city.  The  ribald  crew 
which  holds  them  up  could  neither 
stifle  its  own  conscience  nor  rally  its 
retinue  but  for  the  heljJ  of  the  grogshop. 
A  like  testimony  comes  from  the  history 
of  our  other  great  cities,  ^t^tfi- lawa^re 
defied_in  their  streets ;  and  by  means  of 
the  dramshop  and  the  gilded  saloon  of 
fashionable  hotels  their  ballot-box  is  in 
the   hands   of  the  criminal  classes, — of 

»  The  Voice,  Sept.  34, 1865. 


Political  Evils.] 


489 


[Political  Evils. 


men  who  avowedly  and  systematically 
defy  the  laws.  Indeed  this  is  the  case  in 
Boston."  1 

The  relations  of  the  saloon  to  politics 
in  New  York  City,  the  metropolis  of  the 
Western  hemisphere,  deserve  more 
than  this  passing  allusion.  They  are 
typical  of  conditions  in  scores  of  other 
cities  and  will  give  a  clear  idea  of  the 
character  and  results  of  government  by 
the  liquor  traffic  wherever  the  traffic  is 
strong  or  arrogant  enough  to  assume 
direct  responsibility. 

The  words  from  Wendell  Phillips 
which  we  have  quoted  were  written  when 
the  famous  Tweed  Ring  was  in  full  con- 
trol of  New  York.  This  organization 
of  thieves,  as  Mr.  Phillips  intimates, 
owed  its  supremacy  to  the  grogshops 
and  to  the  criminals  who  did  their  bidding. 
Next  to  the  Tweed  episode  no  other 
scandal  in  the  political  history  of  New 
Y''ork  can  be  compared  with  that  aris- 
ing from  the  disgraceful  transactions 
of  the  so-called  "  Boodle  "  Board  of  Al- 
dermen of  1884;  and  of  the  'ii  members 
of  that  Board  12  were  saloon-keepers  or 
ex-saloon-keepers  and  4  were  saloon 
politicians."  Indeed,  the  Board  of  Al- 
dermen always  contains  more  liquor- 
dealers  than  men  of  any  other  occupa- 
tion, and  not  infrequently  the  rumsellers 
have  a  clear  majority  in  it :  at  the  elec- 
tions of  1890  11  of  the  24  members  chosen 
were  saloon-keepers.'  This  is  unques- 
tionably the  most  odious  legislative  body 
to  be  found  in  the  United  States:  its 
acts  have  been  so  shameful  that  the 
State  Legislature,  with  tlie  approval  of 
all  good  citizens,  has  deprived  it  of  most 
of  its  power. 

In  1884  a  valuable  investigation  was 
conducted  by  Robert  Graham,  Secretary 
of  the  Church  Temperance  Society.  He 
located  all  the  nominating  conventions 
and  primaries  of  the  Democratic  and 
Republican  parties  in  New  Y^ork,  and 
found  that  in  a  total  of  1,002  conven- 
tions and  primaries  of  these  parties  G33 
were  held  in  saloons  OJitLJlii  Jji  places 
next  door  to  saloons/  The  political 
organizations  of  the  city  are  subservient 
to  the  rumsellers.     The  chief  organiza- 


1  Letter  accepting  the  Prohibition  nomination  for  Gov- 
ernor of  Massacliutietts,  Sept.  4,  1870. 

'  New  Yorlv  City  and  Its  Masters  (New  York,    1887),  by 
Robert  Graham,  p.  39. 

3  See  the  Voice.  Nov.  20.  1890. 

•*  New  York  City  aud  Its  Masters,  p.  38. 


tion  is  Tammany  Hall,  and  in  1890  a 
careful  analysis  of  the  membership  of  its 
General  Committee  showed  that  in  a 
total  of  4j56i  Committeemen  ,681  were 
liquor-dealers  (of  whom  59.1.  were  crim- 
inal liquor-dealers),  while  1^4^members 
had  withheld  their  names  from  the  City 
Directory,  and  manifestly — with  perhaps 
some  exceptions — were  men  of  question- 
able or  disreputable  character,  gamblers, 
criminals  and  creatures  of  the  saloon.^ 

The  New  York  (!ity  Reform  Club  is  an 
indefatigable  society  that  has  devoted  it- 
self to  publishing  the  records  of  the  per- 
sons who  represent  the  city  in  the  State 
Legislature  at  Albany.  Many  of  these 
legislators — 32  in  number — are  chosen  by 
dramsho]!  influences  and  are  mere"  repre- 
sentatives of  the  saloons.  Almost  invari- 
ably it  has  been  found  that  those  for 
whom  the  traffic  is  peculiarly  responsible 
are  unprincipled  and  unfit  men.® 

New  York's  experience  is  illustrative 
of  the  situation  in  every  community 
where  the  traffic  is  tolerated.     The  re- 


*  See  the  New  York  Evening  Post,  October,  1890. 

'  The  following  are  significant  extracts  from  the  Keform 
Club's  reports: 

Charles  Smith,  proprietor  of  the  "Silver  Dollar"  saloon 
and  member  of  the  Assembly:  "  Was  intercst(^(l  in  a  faro 
hank  at  39  Bowery  some  years  ago,  and  still  Lrambles. 
Often  interests  himself  in  helping  'crooks'  of  varions 
kinds  out  of  trouble,  squaring  many  a  case  for  sawdust 
swindlers.  His  associates  are  of  the  lowest.  .  .  .  Mr. 
Smith  is  probably  the  worst  man  in  the  Assembly.  He  is 
the  recognized  agent  on  the  floor  of  a  well-known  loliby- 
ist,  and  talks  carelessly  of  having  money  to  use  for  tlie 
passage  or  defeat  of  this  or  that  measure.  .  .  .  Was 
constantly  on  the  side  of  the  liquor  interest,  even  refusing 
to  be  bound  by  the  action  of  the  party  caucus  in  Excise 
matters.  He  is  the  most  injurious  man  to  the  city  in  the 
New  York  delegation,  because  of  the  boldness,  pertinacity 
and  constancy  of  his  rascality." 

Daniel  E.  Finn,  liquor-dealer  and  Assemblyman:  "He 
is  known  to  be  a  dangerous  man,  and  has  a  record  of  vot- 
ing for  every  bill  that  had  money  in  it.  ...  He  is 
ignorant  and  corrupt,  and  all  his  affiliations  are  bad.  He 
has  served  four  consecutive  terms  as  Assemblyman,  and 
lias  made  a  consistent  record  as  a  friend  of  the  liquor  in- 
terests in  politics,  an  enemy  to  Civil  Service  Reform  and  a 
disgraceful  exponent  of  the  worst  influences  in  New  York 
City  politics." 

Timothy  D.  Sullivan,  liquor-dealer  and  Assemblyman: 
"He  has  interests  in  several  saloons:  one.  nominally- 
owned  by  his  brother  Jeremiah,  at  71  Chrystie  street,  is 
connected  with  a  house  of  prostitution,  and  is  frequented 
by  men  and  women  of  the  lowest  type.  He  associates 
with  '  toughs  '  and  is  ready  to  use  his  influence  for  their 
protection  In  April  .  .  .  Inspector  Byrnes  charged 
Mr.  Sullivan  with  being  an  associate  of  thieves  and  crimi- 
nals, specifying  among  others  Peter  Barry,  one  of  the 
leaders  of  the  Whyo  Gang,  Danny  Lyons  and  Dan  Dris- 
coll,  hanged  for  murder.  Mr.  Byrnes  also  said  of  Mr. 
Sullivan:  '  His  place  (No.  116  Centre  street)  is  well-known 
locally,  and  he  wanted  to  advertise  to  all  thieves  that  it 
would  be  a  headquarters,  a  rendezvous  for  them  during 
the  [Constitution]  Centennial  celebration.'  " 

Michael  Brennan,  liquor  dealer  and  Assemblyman  : 
"  His  character  as  a  legislator  has  been  fully  established 
by  four  consecutive  terms  in  the  Assembly —'85.  '86,  '87 
and  '88.  It  is  as  bad  as  he  could  make  it  by  the  unremit- 
ting and  dishonest  industry  of  these  four  terms.  If  the 
amount  of  mischief  which  he  has  worked  seems  compara- 
tively small,  it  must  be  remembered  that  his  efforts  were 
liampered  by  ignorance." 

(See  the  Voice,  Nov.  7, 1889.) 


Popular  Fallacies.] 


490 


[Popular  Fallacies. 


suiting  evils  may  not  always  be  the  same 
in  degree,  but  they  are  the  same  in  kind. 
More  serious  evils — if  possible — are  en- 
countered at  times.  For  example,  in 
some  of  the  Western  cities — notably 
Omaha — the  licensmgrofsalbons  has  led 
to  the  practicaTTicensing  of  houses  of 
j^rostitution.  And  High  License  legisla- 
tioBTdoes  not  in  any  manner  modify  the 
political  offensiveness  of  the  traffic.  The 
Voice,  Sept.  26,  1889,  published  a  for- 
midable table  for  33  High  License  cities 
(the  fees  ranging  from  $500  to  $1,000), 
showing  that  many  liquor-dealers  had 
been  chosen  to  fill  important  public 
offices:  in  Chicago  there  were  nine 
saloon-keepers  in  the  Board  of  iVldermen, 
in  Detroit  nine,  in  Omaha  four  in  the 
City  Council,  etc.  In  fact,  after  making 
a  fair  and  prolonged  trial  of  all  kinds  of 
exi^eriments,  Americans  have  discovered 
that  Prohibition,  thoroughly  enforced,  is 
the  only  method  by  which  politics  can 
be  purified  of  the  liquor  influence. 

Popular  Fallacies. — Logicians  tell 
us  that  a  large  plurality  of  popular  fal- 
lacies are  founded  on  correct  inferences 
drawn  from  erroneous  premises.  More 
rarely  the  mistake  is  due  to  an  error  of 
conclusion,  but  rarest  of  all  to  the  double 
blunder  of  a  wrong  proposition  climaxed 
by  an  unwarranted  inference.  That  egre- 
gious class  of  mistakes  is,  however,  well 
illustrated  in  some  of  the  favorite  soph- 
isms of  the  alcohol-worshiper,  while  in 
others  the  erroneousness  of  the  premises 
is  becoming  more  and  more  evident  even 
to  the  unlearned — to  all,  in  fact,  but  the 
willfully  blind. 

1. — "  Moderate  Drmhing." — The  ad- 
vocates of  natural  hygiene  have  for  years 
insisted  on  tlie  jiossibility  of  curing  the 
disorders  of  the  human  organism  by  the 
simple  removal  of  the  cause,  and  the 
leaders  of  that  reform  agree  that  the  ob- 
jections to  the  medical  use  of  mineral 
and  vegetable  poisons  are  by  no  means 
limited  to  the  ro.omentary  influence  of 
virulent  drugs.  There  is  always  a  further 
and  greater  danger:  the  risk  of  the 
poison's  getting  a  permanent  hold  upon 
the  human  system  and  becoming  the 
object  of  an  unnatural  appetite,  apt  to 
make  i\\Q  patient  a  life-long  slave  to  the 
witchery  of  an  abnormal  stimulant.  The 
opium  habit  is  only  too  often  contracted 
in   that   way;   chloral,   belladonna    and 


even  the  intensely  bitter  sulphate  of 
quinine  are  known  to  have  become  in- 
dispensable "tonics."  In  exactly  the 
same  way  the  habit  of  using  alcoholic 
liquors  is  apt  to  "grow  upon"  the 
drinker,  as  our  language  so  significantly 
expresses  it.  For  a  time — sometimes  for 
weeks — instinctive  aversion  warns  the 
incipient  toper  against  the  folly  of  toy- 
ing with  the  spell  of  a  soul-enslaving 
poison,  but  the  persistent  disregard  of 
that  protest  at  length  begins  to  silence 
the  voice  of  the  inner  monitor,  and  by 
imperceptible  degrees  the  insidious  habit 
acquires  the  strength  of  a  dominant  jias- 
sion  wliich  at  last  overcomes  the  resist- 
ance of  every  better  instinct. 

That  inevitable  progressiveness  of  the 
alcohol  habit  can  be  clearly  understood 
only  by  an  explanation  of  its  physiolog- 
ical cause.  The  alleged  invigorating  in- 
fluence of  virulent  drugs  is,  in  reality, 
only  a  jirocess  of  irritation.  The  organ- 
ism labors  with  feverish  activity  to  rid 
itself  of  a  life-endangering  poison,  and 
the  excitement  of  that  poison  fever  is  by 
millions  of  patients  mistaken  for  a 
symptom  of  returning  strength.  They 
might  be  undeceived  by  the  distressing 
reaction  which  never  fails  to  follow  the 
abnormal  excitement,  but  in  a  sad  plur- 
ality of  cases  the  sufferers  from  that 
penalty  of  the  stimulant  vice  will  fall 
into  the  further  mistake  of  hoping  to 
relieve  this  distress  by  a  repetition  of 
the  poison  dose.  For  a  little  while  that 
expedient  seems  to  answer  its  purpose; 
a  second  and  a  third  poison-fever  goad 
the  weary  system  into  renewed  activity, 
but  by  and  by  the  jaded  nerves  fail  to 
respond  to  the  wonted  spur,  and  the  dull 
torpor  of  the  organism  can  be  relieved 
only  by  a  more  and  more  considerable 
increase  of  the  dose.  The  vital  energies, 
as  it  were,  have  to  be  roused  from  lower 
and  ever  lower  depths  of  depression,  and 
that  purpose  can  at  last  be  attained  only 
by  an  enormous  multiple  of  the  quantum 
of  poison  which  at  first  produced  all  the 
effect  of  a  "  bracing  and  exhilarating 
stimulant."  Hence  the  well-known  phe- 
nomenon of  tlie  dram-drinker's  progress 
from  a  glass  of  light  wine  to  a  bottle  of 
strongest  brandy,  or  the  lager  beer  guzz- 
ler's advance  from  aii  occasional  sip  to  a 
daily  symposium  of  12  or  15  bumpers. 
Honco  ijlso  the  cliief  fallacy  of  the  advo- 
cates of  "  moderate  drinking."     Judging 


Popular  Fallacies."] 


491 


[Popular  Fallacies. 


from  the  effects  of  the  first  few  ghisses 
they  foresee  no  difficulty  in  controlling 
their  passion :  they  feel  only  the  cheer- 
ing warmth  of  the  fire  which  will  soon 
defy  all  efforts  to  quench  the  conflagra- 
tion of  its  devouring  flames. 

2.—"  Strong  Drink  for  Men."— A  fa- 
vorite argument  of  habitual  drinkers  is 
founded  upon  the  idea  that  men  engaged 
in  laborious  work  need  the  aid  of  strong 
stimulants.  ''  The  light  domestic  labors 
of  women,"  those  j)hilosophers  inform 
us,  "  can  be  performed  without  the  stim- 
ulus of  powerful  tonics,  and  as  a  conse- 
quence women  feel  no  desire  for  strong 
drink,  except  perhaps  in  Ireland  and 
certain  parts  of  Eastern  Europe,  where 
poverty  often  obliges  farm  laborers  to 
delegate  a  share  of  their  hard  work  to 
their  wives.  Boys,  too,  can  and  ought  to 
dispense  with  artificial  tonics,  but  after 
crossing  the  threshold  of  manhood  ex- 
acting labor  will  soon  beget  a  craving  for 
sustaining  stimulants,  and  it  would  be 
wrong  to  suppress  that  instinct."  Now, 
in  the  first  place,  there  is  not  a  vestige  of 
basis  for  the  assumption  that  laborious 
work,  mental  or  physical,  requires  the 
stimulus  of  toxic  drugs.  Without  such 
aids  to  cerebral  activity  the  Pythagorean 
philosophers  became  the  scientific  leaders 
of  a  science-loving  age.  Without  the 
aid  of  fermented  or  distilled  tonics  the 
nations  of  Islam  produced  a  whole  gal- 
axy of  inspired  poets,  of  philosophers, 
statesmen,  historians,  physicians  and 
naturalists.  An  equally  unwarranted  as- 
sertion is  the  oft-rei)eated  statement  that 
experience  proves  the  dependence  of 
physical  energy  on  the  sustaining  aid  of 
artificial  tonics.  The  most  vigorous  of 
our  instinct-guided  fellow-creatures  dis- 
pense even  with  the  stimulant  of  salt. 
On  the  scant  herbage  of  the  Arctic  Circle 
the  reindeer  sustains  the  vital  strength 
that  enables  it  to  resist  an  ice-tornado 
of  65°  below  zero,  while  drawing  a  heavy- 
loaded  sledge  at  the  rate  of  eight  miles 
an  hour,  for  10  or  12  consecutive  days. 
Without  "peptic  bitters,"  without  all- 
spice or  salt,  the  Indian  leopard  manages 
to  digest  a  meal  of  20  pounds  of  raw 
meat  in  a  sweltering  clinuite.  From  a 
purely  vegetable  and  non-stimulating 
diet  the  elephant  derives  the  strength 
that  enables  him  to  uproot  trees  a  foot  in 
diameter  and  hurl  down  a  tiger  with 
force   sufficient   to   break    every   larger 


bone  in  its  body.  The  strictly  frugal 
diet  of  our  next  zoological  relatives,  the 
orangs,  gibbons  and  gorillas,  furnishes 
them  an  amount  of  physical  vigor  in- 
credibly far  exceeding  the  strength  of 
our  lager  beer-fuddled  athletes.  The 
testimony  of  numerous  Eastern  travellers 
leaves  no  doubt  of  the  fact  that  the 
freight-carriers  of  Constantinople  think 
nothing  of  shouldering  a  burden  of  600 
pounds  and  walking  off  with  a  firm,  even 
step,  like  soldiers  marching  along  with 
light  haversacks.  Yet  poverty,  if  not 
religious  scruples,  obliges  those  turbaned 
Samsons  to  dispense  with  all  "  tonic " 
liquors,  and  often  even  with  meat  and 
tobacco. 

It  must  be  admitted  that  the  stimulant 
habit  in  its  grosser  forms  claims  about  a 
hundred  male  victims  to  one  female;  but 
the  chief  cause  of  that  difference  is  the 
retired  mode  of  life  incident  to  the  do- 
mestic occupations  of  our  mothers  and 
sisters.  The  temptations  of  the  grog- 
shop do  not  exist  for  a  large  portion  of 
our  female  i)opulation,  and  the  force  of 
public  opinion  itself  is  a  potent  safe- 
guard of  female  temperance.  In  Eng- 
land and  North  America  it  has  saved 
women  from  the  tobacco  habit  as  well  as 
from  alcoholism,  while  the  social  toler- 
ance of  the  Spanish-American  republics 
has  developed  millions  of  girl-smokers. 
Two  hundred  years  ago,  when  infants 
were  fuddled  with  beer-sovips,  even 
maids-of-honor  confessed  to  a  fondness 
for  a  luncheon  of  ale  and  beef,  and  many 
a  Highland  lassie  pledged  her  departing 
lover  in  a  cup  of  iisquchaugh.  The  hap- 
piest of  all  social  ostracisms  has  now  ban- 
ished such  practices  to  the  wigwams  of 
the  Chippewa  Indians,  and  the  total  ab- 
stinence of  thousands  of  hard-working 
women  in  the  farming  districts  of  Aus- 
tralia, North  America  and  Western  Eu- 
rope conclusively  proves  that  physical 
vigor  can  dispense  with  the  aid  of  arti- 
ficial stimulants. 

3. — '•  Care-Dispelling  Wine.'" — Drunk- 
enness has  often  been  defined  as  an  ad- 
vance-draft on  the  enjoyment  of  future 
years,  and  men  whose  tenure  of  life 
seemed  rather  dubious  may  often  have 
congratulated  themselves  on  the  wisdom 
of  thus  anticipating  their  due  of  pleas- 
ure, and,  as  it  were,  foreclosing  a  claim 
to  happiness  which  coming  years  might 
have  failed  to  settle.     But  in  reality  the. 


Popular  Fallacies.] 


49- 


[Popular  Fallacies. 


self-delusion  of  the  wine-worsliiper  is  a 
much  more  serious  mistake.  The  effect 
of  the  first  large  dose  of  alcohol  is  simply 
that  of  a  poison  fever.  In  its  eagerness  to 
rid  itself  of  a  life-endangering  drug  the 
organism  rises  in  revolt  and  calls  upon 
all  the  reserve  force  of  vital  energy  to 
participate  in  the  work  of  expurgation. 
But  a  frequent  repetition  of  the  poison 
dose  considerably  modifies  that  sensi- 
tiveness of  the  system.  It  would  be  a 
mistake  to  suppose  that  the  human  body 
could  become  inured  (accommodate 
itself,  as  it  were)  to  the  effects  of  alco- 
hol ;  but  every  successive  poison-fever  is 
followed  by  a  greater  and  ever  greater 
exhaustion  of  the  nervous  system,  and 
the .  next  following  dose  of  the  baneful 
stimulant  has  therefore  to  rouse  the 
vital  energies  from  a  greater  depth  of 
depression.  That  depression  will  soon 
reach  a  degree  when  even  a  large  quan- 
tum of  the  most  powerful  toxic  irritant 
can  procure  the  toper  only  a  few  min- 
utes' relief  from  the  dull,  soul-sickening 
misery  of  alcoholism. 

The  confirmed  toper,  in  fact,  will  try 
in  vain  to  delude  himself  any  longer 
even  with  the  momentary  hope  of  being 
able  to  trick  fate  out  of  a  surplus  of  en- 
joyment. He  has  sunk  beyond  the 
depth  of  that  hope,  and  even  in  the  cri- 
sis of  the  stimulant  fever  the  momentary 
return  of  a  factitious  elation  will  fall  far 
short  of  the  spontaneous  buoyancy  of 
his  childhood  years.  His  lucid  intervals 
are  only  brief  glimpses  of  the  light 
cheering  inhabitants  of  the  brighter 
world,  forfeited  by  his  contrast  with  the 
power  of  darkness.  Wine  is  a  mocker, 
even  in  its  after  effects;  and  the  influ- 
ence of  the  more  concentrated  alcoholic 
poisons  has  evolved  mental  types  so  de- 
void of  the  very  capacity  for  enjoyment 
that  their  condition  might  seem  to  justify 
the  gloomiest  inferences  of  pessimism. 
Since  the  introduction  of  gin  and  rum 
many  districts  of  Great  Britain  would 
fail  to  explain  the  ancient  natne  of 
"  Merry "  old  England.  Life-weary, 
world-hating  and  self-despising  wretches 
sneak  like  specters  through  the  gloom  of 
liquor-reeking  slums,  where  the  com- 
panions of  Robin  Hood  once  followed 
the  chase  through  the  greenwoods;  and 
in  the  absinthe-hells  of  the  French 
manufacturing  towns  Pandora  seems 
to    have    turned    loose    all   her    curses 


without  the  compensating  blessing  of 
Hope. 

"  I  seem  to  feel,  wherever  I  go, 

Tliiit  there  has  passed  away  a  glory  from  this  earth," 

says  Wordsworth,  whose  studies  of  by- 
gone times  enabled  him  to  realize  the 
loss  of  that  sjiontaneous  gayety  which 
constituted  the  chief  charm  of  the  golden 
age  of  health  and  nature-worship.  In- 
sanity and  suicide  have  never  failed  to 
increase  with  the  growth  of  the  alcohol 
vice;  and  the  best  authorities  on  mental 
pathology  agree  that  in  nine  out  of  ten 
cases  mental  derangements  supervene  as 
a  consequence  of  afflictions  so  burdensome 
as  to  make  oblivion  a  lesser  evil.  In 
other  words,  the  practical  evidence  of 
statistics  proves  the  fact  that  even  the 
total  loss  of  reason  is  preferable  to  the 
misery  resulting  from  the  habitual  use 
of  liquors  which  their  vendors  recommend 
as  soul-cheering  and  care-dispelling  bev- 
erages. 

A.^Tlie  Revenne  Argument. — In  the 
summer  of  1888  the  garrison  of  a  German 
trading-post  on  the  Lower  Congo  river 
captured  a  chieftain  who  had  puzzled 
the  colonists  by  the  persistence  of  his 
hostility  and  whose  last  raid  seemed  to 
have  been  prompted  by  a  sheer  wanton 
love  of  havoc.  At  first  he  refused  to 
speak,  but  in  the  presence  of  a  military 
conmiission  he  at  last  consented  to  ex- 
plain his  conduct  by  the  confession  that 
"  tlie  importation  of  salted  beef  from 
Port  Loando  had  diminished  the  demand 
for  man-meat  and  thus  curtailed  his 
revenues."  From  a  financial  point  of 
view  that  argument  compares  favorably 
with  the  logic  of  the  political  economists 
who  try  to  persuade  us  that  the  pros- 
perity of  our  Eepublic  would  be  imper- 
illed by  the  abolition  of  the  poison 
traffic.  The  Congo  chief  might  have 
furnished  actual  proof  that  his  income 
depended  on  the  encouragement  of  can- 
nibalism, while  even  the  complete  sup- 
pression of  the  manufacture  of  alcoholic 
poisons  would  in  no  way  impair  the  pro- 
fits of  scores  of  different  industries  that 
have  laid  the  foundations  of  our  national 
wealth ;  but  moreover  it  admits  of  mathe- 
matical demonstration  that  the  fiscal 
emoluments  derived  from  the  tax  on  in- 
toxicating liquors  are  enormously  out- 
weighed by  the  burdens  which  the  con- 
sequences of  the  alcohol  vice  entail  on  the 
resources  of  the  nation.    Alcohol  is  the 


Port.] 


49i 


[Portugal. 


chief  cause  of  crime,  a  principal  cause 
of  vice,  idiocy  and  disease,  and  the  main 
obstacle  to  the  progress  of  industry  and 
education.  War  itself  has  been  a  less 
grievous  burden  to  the  nations  of  the 
Caucasian  race  than  the  monster  curse  of 
alcohol,  and  the  shortsightedness  must 
approach  blindness  that  can  seriously 
insist  on  the  perpetuation  of  that  curse 
for  the  sake  of  a  government  share  in 
the  profits  of  the  poison-monger.  We 
might  as  well  license  a  horde  of  train- 
wreckers  and  try  to  silence  the  protests 
of  the  victims  by  quoting  the  endorse- 
ments of  a  bribed  revenue  committee  and 
flaunting  the  C"  ined  proceeds  of  the  in- 
famous contract.       Felix  L.  Oswald. 

Port. — See  Portugal  and  Vixous 
Liquors. 

Portugal. — During  the  IGO  years  of 
its  union  with  the  Spanish  monarchy 
Portugal  was  the  most  drink-cursed 
country  of  southern  Europe.  Political 
ambition  was  suppressed,  commerce  and 
industry  languished  and  the  discontented 
nobles  sought  diversion  in  alcoholic  ex- 
cesses. Wealthy  individuals  of  the  middle 
classes  followed  their  example,  and  the 
writers  of  that  period  agree  in  represent- 
ing the  17th  Century  as  an  age  of  reck- 
lessness and  intemperance.  The  national 
revival  following  the  war  of  independence, 
however,  inaugurated  an  era  of  reform, 
and  since  the  treaty  of  Lisbon  (1GG8) 
habitual  intemperance  has  been  discour- 
aged by  the  example  of  the  transatlantic 
colonists  and  the  influence  of  the  clergy. 
''  American  banquets,"  i.e.,  convivial 
assemblies  without  the  mediaeval  orgies 
of  intoxication,  were  at  first  a  topic  of 
2)opular  ribaldry,  but  became  gradually 
a  synonym  of  decent  entertainments ;  and 
the  humorist  Almeida,  in  his  comic 
dramas,  invariably  represents  drunkards 
as  persons  of  extravagant  hostility  to  the 
progress  of  culture. 

In  1851  the  Marquis  de  Saldanha,  the 
Cromwell  of  Portugal,  left  the  real  estate- 
owning  clergy  the  alternative  of  confisca- 
tion or  reform,  and  specially  urged  the 
Cortes  to  abolish  the  system  of  peddling 
the  produce  of  the  convent  vineyards  at 
church-festivals  and  religious  pilgrim- 
ages. After  a  bitter  and  protracted  con- 
troversy the  clerics,  in  the  words  of  a 
Portuguese  writer,  "  decided  to  control  a 
movement    which  they   were  unable  to 


suppress,"  and  at  first  from  necessity,  but 
before  long  from  motives  of  honest  con- 
viction, did  their  best  to  educate  the 
country  population  in  the  temperate 
habits  of  the  upper  classes.  The  absolute 
prohibition  of  the  liquor  traffic  seemed  a 
task  too  hopeless  to  attempt  ;  but  much 
has  been  done  in  the  way  of  mitigating 
the  consequences  of  the  evil.  Through- 
out the  provinces  of  Minho  and  Tras  os 
Montes  the  sale  of  wine  to  minors  is 
strictly  interdicted,  and  the  cities  of  Lis- 
bon, Coimbra,  Oporto  and  Villa  Eeal  have 
abolished  the  lottery  osierias  —  gam- 
bling dens  Avhere  the  recklessness  of  the 
]flayers  was  stimulated  by  a  liberal  distri- 
bution of  intoxicating  liquors.  Drunk- 
enness has  been  considerably  diminished 
by  tlie  municipal  regulations  of  many  in- 
corporated towns,  as  well  as  by  the  reform 
of  army  discipline,  absence  without  leave, 
in  a  state  of  intoxication,  being  now 
punished  as  desertion  in  the  field  and  as 
a  gross  neglect  of  duty  in  times  of  peace. 

Felix  L.  Oswald. 

The  retail  liquor  traffic  in  Portugal 
is  subject  to  license  regulations,  and  the 
sale  in  certain  places  is  carried  on  under 
various  police  restrictions.  The  Avhclc- 
sale  trade  is  taxed  in  proportion  to  the 
quantity  of  liquor  sold. 

The  wine  interest  overshadovrs  all 
other  industries,  ^  and  next  to  it,  among 
the  manufacturing  industries,  ranks 
tobacco  manufacture.  ^  Li  this  connec- 
tion it  is  interesting  to  note  that  the 
condition  of  the  people  is  lamentable 
and  that  they  are  very  low  in  the  scale 
of  intelligence  :  according  to  the 
"  Statesman's  Year  Book "  for  1889  83 
per  cent,  of  the  inhabitants  of  Portugal 
and  her  islands  were  illiterate.  (In  this 
estimate,  hoAvever,  young  children  wore 
included.)     The   principal   wine   is    the 


•  The  Ptate  of  aRriculture  in  Portugal  is  still  deplorable. 
The  wealth  and  energy  of  the  country  have  been  thrown 
into  the  wine-trade,  and  the  production  and  cultivation 
of  cereals  have  been  so  ninch  neglected  that,  in  spite  of 
its  being  eminently  adai)ted  for  such  cultivation,  nearly 
all  its  cereals  are  imported  from  the  United  States,  to  the 
value  in  1883  of  over  £1.000,000.  The  wine  production,  on 
which  Portugal  has  so  long  depended,  was  tlie  work  of 
the  Methuen  treaty  of  1703.  for  it  was  not  until  after  that 
treaty  that  the  barren  rocks  of  the  Alto  Pouro  were  cov- 
ered with  vines.  But  now.  though  the  returns  show  slight 
alteration,  there  must  soon  be  a  great  change.  The  phyl- 
loxera ha"  utterly  destroyed  thousands  of  vineyards  in 
Entre  Minho  e  Douro  and  in  Beira.  ...  To  remedy 
the  failure,  which  can  be  only  a  matter  of  time,  tobacco- 
growing  has  been  proposed  and  will  proliably  be  tr'ed  in 
place  of  vine-culture  —Encyclopcedia  Uritannica,  article 
0/1  •'  Portugal.^'' 

2  Ibid. 


Presbyterian  Church.] 


494 


[Presbyterian  Church. 


Oporto,  or  port,  produced  from  vines  on 
the  Alto  Douro,  in  a  region  about  150 
square  miles  in  area.  These  and  the  other 
vines  have  suffered  fearfully  from  the 
ravages  of  the  phylloxera  ;  indeed  offi- 
cial figures  show  that  up  to  1887  about 
half  of  all  the  vineyards  of  the  kingdom 
had  been  infected.  (See  p.  481.)  Yet  the 
exports  of  Portuguese  wines  have  in- 
creased. The  following  comparative 
figures  of  exports  of  wines  are  taken  from 
the  United  States  Consular  Keports  for 
1887,  pp.  70-1 : 


1875. 

1885. 

Port 
Madeira 
Other  Wines 

Totals 

Galls. 

8,566.840 

221.902 

4,019,924 

Dollars. 

9,770,788 

461,592 

1,792,800 

Galls. 

9,189,055 

497,828 

29,610,551 

Dollars. 

6,534.000 

723,600 
8,792,280 

13.408,606 

12,025,180J  39,298,034 

16,049,880 

The  total  annual  wine-yield  of  the 
kingdom  (if  the  Portuguese  drink  may 
now  be  considered  wine)  is  from  75,000,- 
000  to  100,000,000  gallons. 

Presbyterian  Church.  —  This 
church  was  among  the  first  of  the  religi- 
ous denominations  in  the  United  States 
to  formulate  radical  temperance  utter- 
ances. In  1834  it  was  declared  that  "as 
friends  of  the  cause  of  temperance  this 
[General]  Assembly  rejoices  to  lend  the 
force  of  their  example  to  that  cause  as 
an  ecclesiastical  body  by  an  entire  ab- 
stinence themselves  from  the  use  of 
ardent  spirits,"  and  that  "  The  traffic  in 
ardent  spirits,  to  be  used  as  a  drink  by 
any  people,  is,  in  our  judgment,  morally 
wrong,  and  ought  to  be  viewed  as  such 
by  the  churches  of  Jesus  Christ  univers- 
ally." As  early  as  1842  it  was  proposed 
to  exclude  liquor-makers  and  sellers  from 
the  privileges  of  membership  in  the 
church;  but  this  movement  was  not  suc- 
cessful until  18G5,  when  the  General 
Assembly  decreed  that  the  church  "■  must 
purge  herself  from  all  participation  in 
the  sin  by  removing  from  her  pale  all 
who  are  engaged  in  the  manufacture  and 
sale  of  intoxicating  drinks  for  use  as  a 
common  beverage."  The  church  was  in 
full  sympathy  with  the  Prohibitory  agi- 
tation which  followed  the  enactment  of 
the  Maine  law.  In  1854  the  General 
Assembly  expressed  the  hope  that  the 
time  was  not  far  distant  "  when  such  a 
law  [Prohibition]  should  be  universally 


adopted  and  enforced,"  and   in   1855  it 
declared : 

"  The  experience  of  200  years  proves  that  this 
evil  can  never  be  removed  or  effectively  resisted 
while  the  traffic  in  intoxicating  liquors  is  con- 
tinued, it  being  necessary,  if  we  would  stop  the 
effect,  to  remove  the  cause.  Laws  prohibiting 
the  sale  of  intoxicating  drinks  can  interfere  with 
the  rights  of  no  man,  because  no  man  has  a 
right  of  any  name  or  nature  inconsistent  with 
the  public  good,  or  at  war  with  the  welfare  of 
the  community,  it  being  a  well-known,  univers- 
ally acknowledged  maxim  of  law  that  '  no  man 
has  a  right  to  use  his  own  to  the  injury  of  his 
neighbor.'  " 

The  utterances  of  the  General  Assem- 
bly have  lost  none  of  their  aggressive- 
ness in  recent  years.  In  1889  this  body 
held  its  sessions  in  the  church  of  Dr. 
Howard  Crosby,  and  against  the  opposi- 
tion of  Dr.  Crosby  reaffirmed  the  declara- 
tion made  in  1883,  as  follows  : 

"  We  earnestly  recommend  to  ministers  and 
congregations  in  our  connection  and  to  all 
others  to  persevere  in  vigorous  efforts  until  laws 
shall  be  enacted  in  every  State  and  Territory  of 
our  beloved  country  prohibiting  entirely  a 
traffic  which  is  the  principal  cause  of  the 
drunkenness  and  its  consequent  pauperism, 
crime,  taxation,  lamentations,  war,  and  ruin  to 
the  bodies  and  souls  of  men  with  which  the 
country  has  so  long  been  afflicted." 

The  following  is  a  part  of  the  report 
made  by  the  Standing  Committee  on 
Temperance  to  the  General  Assembly  in 
1890,  and  adopted  by  the  Assembly : 

"  More  and  more  deeply  the  conviction  has 
been  burning  itself  into  the  public  mind  that 
however  checked  by  legislative  restrictions,  or 
burdened  by  heavier  taxation,  the  peril  of  the 
public  sale  of  intoxicants  is  too  great  for  any 
valid  excuse  of  its  existence.  In  regard  to  such 
an  evil  that  affects  the  whole  body  of  our 
people,  the  issue  is  being  steadily  pressed  by 
conscience  and  self-preservation  against  the 
greed  which  is  now  absolutely  the  only  cause 
for  the  retention  of  the  dramshop. 

"  Indeed,  the  saloon  has  well-nigh  pf..ssed  the 
period  of  its  defense.  Nobody  stands  up  for  it 
to-day,  except  as  an  alleged  necessary  evil  sup- 
posetl  to  be  so  strong  as  to  be  incapable  of  sup- 
pression and  which  must  continue,  only  to  be 
curbed  and  prevented  from  venting  quite  its 
full  curse.  It  must  be  the  business  of  the 
better  class  of  our  citizens,  and  of  Christian 
society  at  large,  to  prove  that  theory  false. 

"  Eventually  the  open  sale  of  liquor  must  go. 
Forces  are  now  at  work  that,  however  tempo- 
rarily resisted,  will  yet  crush  the  life  out  of 
it.  .  .  . 

"  Besides  the  principles  hitherto  stated,  and 
the  resolutions  offered,  we  suggest  the  follow- 


ing action 


''  1. — We  stand  by  the  deliverances  hitherto 
issued  by  our  Church  upon  the  temperance 
question,  .  .  .  and  we  enjoin  our  ministers  and 


Prohibition.] 


495 


[Prohibition. 


people  to  abate  nothing  in  their  zeal  and  effort 
in  or  out  of  the  churches  to  check  the  drinking 
habits  of  society,  and  by  effort,  voice  and  vote 
to  oppose  the  traffic  in  intoxicants  as  a  beverage, 
believing  with  intensified  conviction  that  it  is  a 
direct  inexcusable  curse  to  our  country  and 
our  age. 

"  2. — While,  as  a  church,  v^e  neither  advocate 
nor  antagonize  any  political  party,  we  earnestly 
commend  to  our  ministers  and  people,  as  Chris- 
tian citizens,  such  vigorous,  persevering  efforts 
as  may  seem  wisest  to  them  toward  the  enact- 
ment in  every  State  and  Territory  of  statutes 
which  shall  hopefully  secure  entire  Prohibition 
of  a  traffic  largely  responsible  for  the  bulk  of 
the  drunkenness,  crime,  pauperism  and  social 
miseries  which  afflict  our  land.  ..." 

Prohibition  (General  Princi- 
ples).— Prohibition,  the  opposite  of  per- 
mission, is  not  a  synonym  of  anniliila- 
tion.  Those  who  say  "  Prohibition  does 
not  prohibit " — a  self-contradictory  prop- 
osition— mean  that  Prohibition  does  not 
annihilate.  This  is  manifestly  true  of 
all  kinds  of  prohibitions  in  this  world — 
those  of  the  divine  government,  of  fam- 
ily government  and  of  civil  government 
alike.  Prohibition  does  not  annihilate, 
not  even  when  it  forbids  murder,  adul- 
tery, theft,  false  witness  and  Sunday 
work.  If  a  threefold  alliance  of  man, 
woman  and  the  devil,  to  break  a  Prohib- 
itory law  and  then  hide  away  from  jus- 
tice, proves  the  law  a  "  blunder,"  what  is 
to  ])e  said  of  that  first  prohibition,  given 
to  man  by  God  himself,  in  Eden  ":'  If 
Prohibition  is  a  "  failure  "  when  it  does 
not  at  once  destroy  the  evils  which  it 
forbids,  then  the  Prohibitory  law  of 
Sinai  is  the  masterpiece  of  failures. 

Prohibition  does  not  define  accomplish- 
ment, but  only  the  aim  and  attitude  of 
government  toward  wrong.  License  is 
a  purchased  truce — sometimes  a  sur- 
render; Prohibition  is  a  declaration  of 
war.  License  is  an  edict  of  toleration — 
sometimes  a  certificate  of  "  good  moral 
character ;"  Prohibition  is  a  proclamation 
of  outlawry.  As  murder,  adultery,  theft, 
false  witness  and  political  corruption  are 
outlawed,  the  ringleader  of  this  "  gang  " 
ought  also  to  be  outlawed.  The  first  re- 
quisite of  law  is  justice.  A  law  that 
sanctions  wrong  is  not  law  at  all  but  leg- 
islative crime.  It  is  not  "public  senti- 
ment" but  public  conscience  out  of 
which  law  should  be  quarried.  Law  is 
an  educator.  Duelling  and  smuggling 
and  liquor-selling  were  once  in  the  '*  best 
society."     Gradually  the  law  has  made 


them  disreputable.  Rumsellingin  Maine 
is  a  sneaking  fugitive,  like  counterfeit- 
ing— not  dead  but  disgraced,  and  so 
shorn  of  power. 

Prohibition  of  the  liquor  traffic  is 
more  than  a  standard  or  a  flag  to  mark 
the  height  to  which  we  are  marching. 
No  other  kind  of  prohibition,  as  I  have 
said,  has  had  greater  victories.  In  Maine 
children  grow  up  without  ever  seeing  a 
drunken  man.  In  most  parts  of  Kansas 
and  Iowa  the  law  against  the  saloon  is  as 
effective  as  the  law  against  the  brothel 
or  the  burglar.  To  this  fact  testify  a 
glorious  company  of  witnesses — Govern- 
ors, Senators,  Congressmen,  pastors,  phy- 
sicians, manufacturers — against  whose 
evidence  scarcely  a  witness  can  be  brought 
in  rebuttal  except  ''  anonymous."  The 
liquor-dealers  have  saved  us  the  trouble 
of  summing  up  this  testimony.  Their 
statement  that  more  liquor  is  consumed 
under  Prohibition  than  without  it  is  can- 
celled by  actions  that  speak  louder  than 
words,  by  frantic  efforts,  at  great  cost,  to 
defeat  Prohibition  wherever  it  is  pro- 
])osed.  If  while  cancelling  their  license 
fees  it  really  increased  their  sales  and  so 
gave  them  double  gains,  as  they  are 
sometimes  able  to  make  even  Christians 
believe,  they  would  hardly  fight  so  help- 
ful a  friend. 

The  argument  for  Prohibition  may  be 
concisely  stated  in  four  propositions,  the 
four  strands  of  the  halter  with  which 
the  rum  traffic  is  to  be  hung: 

1. — The  business  interests  of  our  coun- 
try demand  the  suppression  of  their 
worst  foe — the  saloon. 

2. — The  homes  of  our  country  demand 
the  suppression  of  their  worst  foe — the 
saloon. 

3. — The  political  liberty  of  our  country 
demands  the  suppression  of  its  worst  foe 
— the  saloon. 

4, — The  conscience  of  the  country  de- 
mands that  the  attitude  of  Government 
toward  this  foe  of  business,  home  and 
liberty,  as  toward  other  foes  of  the  pub- 
lic good,  shall  be  one  of  uncompromising 
hostility. 

The  prohibiting  of  maddening  poison 
is  not  a  "•  sumptuary  law  "  that  is,  a  law 
against  luxury — but  rather  a  law  to  pro- 
mote luxury,  to  give  every  year  to  the 
impoverished  families  of  those  who  waste 
their  money  for  drink,  in  place  of  it,  a 


Prohibition.] 


496 


[Prohibition. 


billion  dollars'  worth  of  pianos,  books, 
pictures,  etc. 

Prohibition  is  consistent  with  liberty 
in  the  same  way  as  fire-escapes  and 
quarantines  are.  A  Prohibitory  liquor 
law  is  a  law  for  the  promotion  of  com- 
merce, for  the  protection  of  labor,  for  the 
prevention  of  cruelty  and  crime,  for  the 
preservation  of  health  and  home  and 
liberty. 

The  capital  that  is  invested  in  the 
liquor  business,  if  invested  in  legitimate 
forms  of  trade,  would  give  employment  to 
hundreds  of  thousands  more  people  than 
are  now  employed  by  it.  This  added 
number  of  workers  would  be  needed  in 
mills  and  shops  if  the  money  spent  for 
drink  were  turned  into  those  channels  of 
trade  where  there  is  a  "  fair  exchange  " 
and  so  "  no  robbery." 

Not  only  life  but  liberty  itself  is 
menaced  by  alcohol.  In  the  words  of  the 
Catholic  Review,  "  There  is  nothing  fanci- 
ful in  the  assertion  that  in  most  of  the 
large  cities  the  saloon-keeping  interest 
has  as  much  representation  in  the  Com- 
mon Council  as  have  all  other  interests 
combined — that  is  to  say,  the  minority  in 
numbers,  intelligence  and  decency  gov- 
erns the  majority  in  most  of  our  large 
cities."  It  is  this  *'  spoils  system  "  of  the 
saloons  that  Civil  Service  Reformers 
should  strike  at  if  they  would  cure 
political  corruption  at  the  root.  It  is  not 
so  much  examination  of  office-seekers  as 
extermination  of  these  office-brokers  of 
the  saloon  that  is  needed.  Municipal  re- 
formers also  should  learn  that  it  is  not 
by  a  change  in  the  Mayor's  office  but  by 
a  change  in  the  saloon  that  city  politics 
is  to  be  purified.  If  our  city  politics  is 
in  slavery  to  the  saloons  to-day,  when 
the  States  are  able  to  restrain  them  by 
their  yeoman  majorities  in  the  Legis- 
latures, what  of  the  time  when  the  cities 
shall  have  the  majority  of  our  voters,  as 
they  will  only  eight  Presidential  elections 
from  now — the  third  national  campaign 
in  which  the  babes  now  in  your  cradles 
will  vote  ?  In  1920,  at  the  present  rate 
of  growth,  cities  of  above  S,()()0  inhabi- 
tants will  have  a  clear  majority  of  the 
voters  of  the  country.  The  peril  is  not 
even  so  far  oil:  as  that,  for  the  cities  have 
to-day  a  power  out  of  proportion  to  their 
numbers  as  compared  with  country  dis- 
tricts, because  their  forces  are  more  con- 
centrated  and   better    organized.     And 


besides  this,  the  saloon  has  carried  city 
corruption  into  the  country,  except 
where  Local  Option  or  some  other  form 
of  Prohibition  has  barred  the  way. 
"  Ireland  sober  is  Ireland  free."  So  we 
may  say  of  our  own  country:  America's 
liquor  or  its  liberty  must  go. 

There  is  reason  to  believe  that  alcohol 
may  be  not  only  universally  prohibited 
in  our  country  but  also  annihilated.  The 
Journal  of  Chemistry  has  shown  that  the 
dangerous  exceptions  made  for  its  use  in 
medicine  and  the  arts  are  unnecessary, 
since  science  has  safer  substitutes  (see 
'*  The  Temperance  Century  "  p.  87).  It 
is  also  to  be  remembered  that  the  passion 
for  alcohol  is  not  a  natural  passion  like 
sexuality,  but  wholly  artificial,  making 
it  an  evil  like  slavery  that  may  be  wholly 
obliterated.  It  may  not  be  wise  to  pro- 
hibit any  but  the  beverage  use  of  alcohol 
until  a  generation  of  physicians,  intelli- 
gent enough  to  doctor  without  this  dyna- 
mite, has  been  raised,  but  the  goal  which 
we  should  set  before  us  should  be,  after 
Prohibition,  annihilation. 

Wilbur  F.  Crafts. 

A  most  observable  fact  in  the  temper- 
ance reform  has  been  its  constantly 
Avidening  range.  It  started  in  individual 
action,  but  passed  almost  immediately 
into  various  kinds  of  association  for 
mutual  aid.  Indeed,  this  transition  may 
be  looked  on  as  the  first  step  in  temper- 
ance as  a  reform.  From  a  guarded  use 
of  intoxicants,  pressed  by  the  exigencies 
of  the  case,  it  moved  forward  to  their 
absolute  rejection.  In  a  similar  Avay  it 
was  forced  beyond  individual  abstinence 
into  civic  Prohibition.  From  Prohibi- 
tion in  towns  and  counties  it  advanced 
to  Constitutional  Prohibition  in  the 
State,  and  from  this  it  is  advancing  to 
Prohibition  by  the  general  Government. 
Each  of  these  steps  has  been  taken  be- 
cause of  the  necessary  widening  of  the 
conflict  and  the  need  for  more  resources 
in  meeting  it. 

Some  may  look  upon  this  constant 
increase  of  demands  as  evidence  of  the 
impossibility  and  futility  of  the  entire 
movement.  The  believers  in  Prohibi- 
tion regard  it  as  the  inevitable  result 
of  the  breadth  and  unity  of  thosQ.  social 
relations  which  enclose  us.  We  cannot 
win  our  oAvn  witliout  seeking  like  gifts 
for  all.     Each  step  of  extension  makes 


Prohibition.] 


497 


[Prohibition. 


the  previous  position  more  secure.  We 
are  compelled  to  conquer  a  boundary  or 
lose  Avhat  we  have  already  gained,  and 
that  boundary  is  the  world.  A  nation 
doubtless  offers  a  fairly  defensible  unit 
in  this  strife,  and  yet  the  moment  we 
achieve  this  success  we  shall  become  in- 
creasingly sensible  of  an  outside  pres- 
sure from  other  nations  opposed  to  us  in 
sentiment  and  action.  International  co- 
operation is  necessary  to  make  Prohibi- 
tion effectual.  This  was  recognized  by 
the  Powers  bordering  on  the  North  Sea, 
when,  perceiving  the  dire  consequences 
of  intern [)erance  among  the  fishermen  in 
those  waters,  they  joined  in  promulgating 
the  celebrated  Prohibitory  agreement 
of  1887.^  The  absolute  and  sweeping 
Prohibitory  law  for  the  Samoan  Islands, 
against  alcoholic  beverages  of  all  kinds, 
incorporated  in  the  treaty  for  the  govern- 
ment of  those  islands  drawn  up  in  Berlin 
in  1889  by  the  plenijDotentiaries  of  the 
United  States,  Great  Britain  and  Ger- 
many (and  subsequently  ratified  by  the 
three  Powers),  is  another  instructive 
instance." 

The  most  constant  and  obviously  in- 
fluential activity  which  unites  us  to  other 
countries  is  that  of  commerce.  Com- 
merce is  a  chief  medium  to  the  better 
as  well  as  to  the  worst  influences  that  lie 
between  different  peoples  and  races. 
Notably,  three  forms  of  trade — that  in 
slaves,  that  in  o])ium  and  that  in  rum — 
have  carried  with  tliem  the  most  terrible 

'  The  six  Powers  borderins  on  the  North  Sea— viz,.  Oreat 
Britain.  France,  Belsrium,  Holland,  Germany  and  Den- 
mark—have come  to  ;in  international  agreement  which 
applies  to  that  i)art  of  the  North  Sea  which  is  outside  ter- 
ritorial limits.  [Inside  territorial  waters  each  countrj-can 
make  its  own  laws.] 

The  arransrement  is  shortly  as  follows  : 

The  sale  of  spirits  to  tishermen  and  other  persons  on 
board  fishine-vessels  is  prohibited. 

Fishermen  are  equally  forliidden  to  buy  spirits. 

The  exchaniic  or  barter  for  spirits  of  any  article,  especi- 
ally tnefish  can^bt,  nets  or  any  part  of  the  cear  or  "  equi- 
page "  of  the  lishinw-lioat,  is  also  prohibited. 

Vessels  which  ply  on  the  North  Sea  for  the  purpose  of 

sellinj:;  to  fishermen  other  articles  (not  spirits)  will  have  to 

■  i)e  licensed  by  the  Covernment  of  their  own  country,  and 

to  be  liable  to  strict  resrulations,  with  the  object  of  insur- 

ina:  their  not  havin<;j  spirits  on  board  for  sale. 

The  six  countries  enframe  to  propose  to  their  respective 
Legislatures  laws  to  carry  this  arrangement  into  effect  and 
to  punish  those  who  do  not  conform  to  it. — Political  Pi'o- 
hibitionist  for  1888,  p.  10. 

■■^  This  treaty  was  sic;ned- June  14.  1880.  and  its  provis- 
ions have  been  promulgated  by  proclamation  hy  the  Kins; 
of  Samoa.  The  following  is  "the  text  of  the  Prohibitory 
clause  : 

'•  No  spirituous,  vinous  or  fermented  liquors,  or  intox- 
icating drinks  w'hatever.  shall  be  sold,  given  or  offered  to 
any  native  Samoan  or  South  Sea  islander  resident  in 
Samoa,  to  be  taken  as  a  beverase.  Adequate  penalties, 
including  imprisonment  for  the  violation  of  the  provisions 
of  this  Article,  shall  be  established  by  the  Municipal 
Council  for  api>lication  within  its  jurisdiction,  and  by  the 
Samoan  Government  for  all  the  islands." 


evils  and  drawn  out  the  most  brutish 
and  diabolical  passions.  The  results  of 
traffic  at  war  with  all  sense  of  right  have 
been  the  more  disastrous  and  more  con- 
siderable because  it  has  been  carri'^d  on 
between  the  weak  and  the  strong,  the 
ignorant  and  the  enlightened,  unchris- 
tian and  Christian  nations.  It  has  had 
no  other  motive  than  the  unscrupulous 
greed  of  those  who  had  the  world  in  their 
avaricious  grasp.  The  slave  trade  has 
at  length  come  under  the  censure  and 
partial  repression  of  the  Christian  w^orld. 
The  trade  in  rum  is  in  full  activity.  Less 
immediate  violence  attends  upon  it,  but 
its  evils  are  more  pervasive  and  far  less 
remediable  than  those  of  the  slave 
trade.  Africa  is  the  dark  continent  be- 
cause of  the  barbarism  of  so  large  a  part 
of  its  inhabitants,  because  of  the  slave 
trade,  and  still  more,  just  now,  because 
of  the  sale  of  those  fiery  liquors,  full  of 
all  evil  inspiration,  of  which  rum  stands 
the  representative.  This  couimerce  brings 
at  once  the  worst  vices  of  civilized  life 
to  those  who  have  neither  the  experience, 
the  interests,  the  intellectual  force  nor 
the  moral  motives  fitting  them  for  re- 
sistance. If  civilization  offers  to  those 
under  it  new  temptations  it  also  fur- 
nishes them  new  incentives  of  self-gov- 
ernment; but  rum  in  Africa  carries  ruin 
without  mitigation  or  relief  of  any  sort. 
I'he  black  man  is  debauched  immediately 
and  completely  by  intoxication.  For  a 
nation  like  the  United  States  to  suffer 
such  a  commerce  on  the  part  of  its  sub- 
jects is  to  impose  a  collective  respon- 
sibility on  each  citizen  for  a  line  of  action 
which  is  simply  devilish  in  every  phase 
of  it. 

For  other  Christian  nations  to  permit 
and  to  share  this  commerce — since  the 
principle  of  common  interest  and  respon- 
sibility in  defining  the  connections  of 
the  civilized  and  uncivilized  portions  of 
the  world  to  each  other  has  long  been 
recognized,  and  has  just  been  renewedly 
applied  in  adjusting  the  relation  of 
Africa  to  outside  claims — is  to  weigh 
down  the  moral  sense  of  the  world  col- 
lectively with  the  worst  of  crimes.  We 
cannot  easily  overestimate  the  moral  re- 
sults of  such  a  fact.  International  re- 
lations rest,  for  equity  and  safety,  on  the 
collective  convictions  of  men.  Inter- 
national law  and  comity  are  the  slow  ex- 
tension   between    nations    of    just   and 


Prohibition.] 


498 


[Prohibition. 


humane  principles.  The  hurden  most 
oppressive  to  the  prosperity  of  the  world 
is  that  incident  to  war.  As  long  as  force 
is  more  significant  than  right  this  danger, 
intolerable  as  it  is,  will  increase  rather 
than  diminish.  The  civilized  world  can- 
not take,  as  in  the  Conference  at  Berlin, 
the  attitude  of  unhesitating  selfishness, 
indicated  by  free  rum  on  the  Congo,  and 
not  feel  in  all  its  own  relations  the  dis- 
astrous influence  of  the  principle  there 
recognized. ' 

1  The  action  in  regard  to  the  African  liquor  trade  talicn 
by  the  Anti-Slavery  Conference  at  Brussels  in  18'.I0  indicates 
a  decided  change  from  the  attitude  of  the  Powers  at  the 
Berlin  Conference  of  1884.  The  Brussels  Conference  in- 
corporated the  following  in  its  sreneral  act: 
"CHAPTER  VI. 

"Restrictive  Measures  Concerning  the  Traffic  in 
Spirituous  Liquors. 

"^r^^'c/f  90.— Justly  anxious  about  the  moral  and  ma- 
terial consequences  which  the  abuse  of  spirituous  liquors 
entails  on  the  native  populations,  the  signatory  Powers 
have  agreed  to  apply  the  provisions  of  Articles 91,  92  and 
93  within  a  zone  extending  from  the  20°  north  latitude  to 
the  22°  south  latitude,  and  bounded  by  the  Atlantic  Ocean 
on  the  west  and  by  the  Indian  Ocean  on  the  east,  with  its 
dependencies,  comprising  the  islands  adjacent  to  the 
mainland,  up  to  100  sea  miles  from  the  shore. 

"Article  91.— In  the  districts  of  this  zone  where  it  shall 
be  ascertained  that,  either  on  account  of  religions  lielief 
or  from  other  motives,  the  use  of  distilled  liquors  does  not 
exist  or  has  not  been  developed,  the  Powers  shall  i)rohibit 
their  importation.  The  manufacture  of  distilled  liquors 
there  shall  be  equally  prohibited. 

"  Each  Power  shall  determine  the  limits  of  the  zone  of 
prohibition  of  alcoholic  liquors  in  its  possessions  or  pro- 
te(-torates,  and  shall  be  bound  to  notify  the  limits  thereof 
U)  the  other  Powers  within  the  space  of  six  months.  The 
above  prohibition  can  only  be  suspended  in  the  case  of 
limited  quantities  destined  for  the  consumption  of  the 
non-r.ative  population  and  imported  under  the  regime 
and  conditions  determined  by  each  Government. 

'' Article  92.— The  Powers  having  possessions  or  exer- 
cising protectorates  in  the  regions  of  the  zone  which  are 
not  placed  under  the  action  of  the  prohibition,  and  into 
which  alcoholic  liquors  are  at  present  either  freely  im- 
ported or  pay  an  import  duty  of  less  than  15  francs  per 
hectoliter  at  50°  centigrade,  undertake  to  levy  on  these 
alcoholic  liquors  an  import  duty  of  15  francs  per  hectoliter 
at  50°  centigrade  for  three  years  after  the  present  gen- 
eral act  comes  into  force.  At  the  expiration  of  this  period 
the  dutv  may  be  increased  to  25  francs  during  a  fresh 
period  of  three  years.  At  the  end  of  the  sixth  year  it  shall 
be  submitted  to  revision,  taking  as  a  basis  the  average  re- 
sults produced  by  these  tarifls,  for  the  purpose  of  then 
fixing,  if  possible,  a  minimum  duty  throughout  the  whole 
extent  of  the  zone  where  the  prohibition  referred  to  in 
Article  91  is  not  in  force. 

"The  Powers  have  the  right  of  maintaining  and  in- 
creasing the  duties  beyond  the  minimum  fixed  by  the 
present  Article  in  those  regions  where  they  already 
possess  that  right. 

"  Article  93.— The  distilled  liquors  manufactured  in  the 
regions  referred  to  in  Article  92  and  intended  for  in- 
land consumption,  shall  be  subject  to  an  Excise  duty. 

"This  Excise  duty,  the  collection  of  which  the  Powers 
undertake  to  insure  as  far  as  possible,  shall  not  be  lower 
than  the  minimum  import  duly  fixed  by  Article!  92. 

"Article  94.— Signatory  Powers  havingin  Africa  posses- 
sions contiguous  to  the  zone  specified  in  Article  90  under- 
take to  adopt  the  necessary  measures  for  preventing  the 
introduction  of  spirituous  liquors  within  the  territories  of 
the  said  zone  by  their  inland  frontiers. 

"  Article  95.— TliL'  Powers  stiall  communicate  to  each 
other,  througli  the  office  at  Brussels,  and  according  to 
the  terms  of  Chapter  V.,  information  relating  to  the 
traflic  in  alcoholic  liquors  within  their  respective  terri- 
tories." 

The  object  of  these  provisions  is,  briefly,  to  prevent  the 
extension  of  tne  liquor  traffic  in  Africa.  The  zone  re- 
ferred to  includes  the  Soudan,  (iuinea,  Ashantee,  Sene- 
gambia,  Liberia,  Bafur,  Abyssinia,  Somali,  the  Coii<ro 
Free  State,  the  great  lakes,  the  Zanzibar  coast.  Angola, 


The  principle,  compactly  put,  is,  that 
the  weak  have  no  protection  against  the 
strong.  Man,  endowed  with  appetites  ten- 
fold more  cruel  and  widely  destructive 
than  those  of  the  animal,  sinks  down  to 
the  same  basis  of  rapine.  The  temper 
which  expresses  itself  in  Asia,  Africa  and 
the  isles  of  the  sea  will  confront  the  na- 
tions of  Europe  in  their  intercourse  with 
each  other  and  compel  them  to  devote 
the  energies  of  life  to  a  fearful  strain  in 
a  limitless  effort  to  outstrip  each  other  in 
the  race  of  physical  force.  "  How  truly 
terrible  and  tragic  the  actual  situation 
of  Europe  is  !  JSiever  was  there  anything 
similar  in  preceding  centuries.  Every 
one  is  convinced  tliat  at  any  moment  so 
horrible  a  war  may  break  out  that  all 
other  wars,  even  that  of  secession  in 
America,  will  be  but  child's  play  in  com- 
parison." Seven  millions  of  men,  backed 
by  a  reserve  of  ten  millions  more,  stand 
ready  to  be  precipitated  on  each  other. 
It  is  wholly  in  harmony  with  the  relations 
of  the  moral  world  to  assert  that  this 
avalanche,  ready  to  fall,  may  indirectly 
be  brought  down  by  the  moral  jar  atten- 
dant on  the  unscrupulous  counsel  by 
which  the  outlying  world  of  barbarism  is 
subjected  to  the  avarice  of  the  worst 
agents  of  civilized  life.  It  is  precisely 
this  spirit  and  no  other  which  these 
Christian  nations  have  to  fear.  It  is  this 
temper  which  begets  conditions  ready, 
with  fatal  force,  to  sweep  down  and  over 
all  justice,  all  liumanity  and  every  divine 
impulse.  More  than  ten  millions  of  gal- 
lons of  liquor  are  annually  sent  to  West 
Africa,  where  it  is  known  to  work  mis- 
chief of  the  most  unqualified,  speedy  and 
unprovoked  kind.  Germany,  the  Nether- 
lands, the  United  States,  France  and 
Great  Britain  are  engaged  in  the  traflic, 

Benguela,  Damaraland,  Mozambique,  most  of  Madagas- 
car and  vast  regions  of  the  unexplored  territory  of  cen- 
tral Africa.  The  prohibition  does  not  contemplate  the 
abandonment  of  the  present  destructive  rum  traffic  in  many 
portions  of  this  great  domain,  and  the  provisions  made 
an;  therefore  seriously  defective.  But  a  progressive  spirit 
is  indicated,  and  if  the  legislation  of  the  Conference  is 
approved  and  goes  into  effect  and  is  enforced,  the  cor- 
ruption of  many  millions  of  the  natives  of  Africa  will  be 
prevented.  Especial  credit  has  been  given  to  England 
and  the  United  States  for  the  adoption  of  these  provis- 
ions. 

At  the  time  that  this  is  written  (December,  1800)  it  is 
uncertain  whether  the  Brussels  legislation  will  take  ef- 
fect. To  be  valid  it  must  be  endorsed  by  the  Govern- 
ments of  the  Powers  represented  in  the  Conference  (Eng- 
land, F'rance,  (.ierinany,  Holland,  the  United  States,  Por- 
tugal, Austria-Hungary,  Denmark,  Spain,  the  Congo  Free 
State,  Italy,  Persia,  Russia,  Sweden-Norway  and  Turkey). 
Holland  has  manifested  a  strong  disposition  to  repudiate 
it,  because  the  customs  duties  on  certain  articles,  as  de- 
termined in  the  general  act,  are  regarded  with  disfavor  by 
Hollandish  merchants. 


I 

Prohibition.]                                       499  [Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 

Germany  well  in  the  lead.     It  is  as  im-  precisely  those  which  first   spring  np  he- 
possible   that  such   clear,  self-conscious  tween  man  and  man  in  the  community 
international  sin  should  not  help  to  break  and  in  the  nation.     No  wine-producing 
down  international  morality  as  it  is  that  country  can  confine  its  evils  to  its  own 
drunkenness    should  not  penetrate  and  soil.     That  which  debauches  it  will  de- 
overthrow     intellectual     and     spiritual  bauch    all    who    traffic    with    it.     The 
power.  strongholds  of  evil  are  always  found  witli 
International  law  has  gained  a  footing  the  relatively  good.     There  are  its  im- 
among  the  nations  of  Europe  largely  be-  pregnable  posts.     A  use  of  wines  by  a 
cause   they   profess   one  religious  faith,  comparatively  temperate  nation,  that  has 
This  victory  of  retison  and  righteousness  much  to   commend    it   in   social   inter- 
must  owe  its  completion,  if  it  is  to  be  course  and  commerce,  drags  the  lengthen- 
completed,   to   a   purified    moral   sense,  ing  chain  of  vice  and  misery  to  the  last 
Such  an   institution  as   the  slave  trade  link  that  runs  along  the  gutter, 
checked  progress  everywhere  because  it  The   world    has    done    something    to 
depressed  the   standard   of  duty   under  shake    off    the    literature    of    debauch, 
which  that  advance  was  to  be  made.  The  Manly,  pure,  spiritual  quality  gains  in- 
traffic  in  rum  to-day  takes  its  place  in  its  ci easing  hold  on  the  imagination.     Ani- 
wide-reaching  and  malign  influence.     It  mal  impulses  are    felt  to  be  hostile  to 
constitutes  the  present  dark  spot  in  the  wholesome,   exhilarating   virtues  in  the 
history   of   a  dark   world.     The    world  soul    of    man.     But    this  purifying    of 
brings  to  Christian  nations,  seeking  their  fancy  is  a  slow  process.     It  is  the  wash- 
own  development,  one  after  another  of  ing  of  the  spirit  itself.     It  is  lifting  life 
the  practical  problems  of  duty,  and  each  to  a  higher  plane  in  its  unfolding.     It  is 
for   the   moment   becomes  the  turning-  disentangling  the  fibers  of  decay  and  cor- 
point  of  truth.  ruption  from   those   of    sweetness    and 
There    is    no     complete     redemption  strength.     This  movement  of  the  spirit 
within  the  nation  unless  there  is  redemp-  of  man  toward  its  own   by  Avhich  it  sub- 
tion  beyond  it.     One  reason  Avhy  Massa-  dues  the  world  without  being  subdued  by 
chusetts  is  not  ready  for  Prohibition  in  it,  or  rather  by  which  it  and  the  world 
her  own  borders  is  the  profit  attendant  spring  up    together  toward  new,  purer 
on  the  extended  and  thriving  trade  of  and  more  vital  things, — this  process  can 
Boston  in  New  England  rum.     It  is  not  go  forward  only  by  a  verdict  of  the  race 
possible  that  a  State  which  is  not  pre-  against  drunkenness — the   footprints  of 
])ared  to  protect  its  own  feebler  citizens  the  demon  of  debauch.     It  is  time  that 
from  the  extreme  danger  of  this  traffic  we     look    for    world-wide    Prohibition, 
should  be   ready  to   shield  savage   life,  which  shall  set  every  human  eye  to  watch 
liidden  away   in   the    dark    recesses    of  for,  and  make  every  human  hand  ready  to 
Africa,  from  greater  disorder.     Nor  is  it  pluck  up,  the  secret  and  insidious  roots  of 
any   more   possible   that  a  temper,  un-  an  evil  widely  fastened  on  our  physical 
scrupulous  in  places  remote  and  secret,  and  social  constitution, 
should  become  tender  and  conscientious  John  Bascom. 
at  home. 

The  traffic  in  liquors  between  civilized  Prohibition,    Benefits    of.  —  The 

nations  is  instituted  and  carried  on  with  practical  trial  of  the  Prohibition  policy 

the   same   indifference   to   human  well-  in  the  United  States  has  been  interfered 

being  which  characterizes  it  in  our  own  with   by   many  and   serious  difficulties, 

cities  and  towns.    If  the  sense  of  personal  Great  as  is  the  extent  of  territory,  in  the 

relation  and  personal  responsibility  are  aggregate,  where  experiments  have  been 

more  obscure  in  this  wider  field,  never-  made  since  the  agitation  began,  this  pol- 

theless,  more  comprehensive,  more  deli-  icy   has   never  had  the  advantage  of  a 

cate  and  more  difficult  conditions  of  the  systematic  introduction  and  broad  foun- 

general      prosperity     are     there    being  dation.  The  National  Congress  has  never 

settled.  enacted  general  Prohibitory   legislation 

The  earth  is  the  Lord's  and  the  ful-  and  has  never  given  support  to  or  even 

ness  thereof  ;  but  the  methods  of  con-  recognized     the    Prohibitory     measures 

ciliation,  counsel  and  good-will  by  which  adopted  in  States  and  localities :  indeed, 

these  results  are  to  be  brought  about  are  the  attitude  of  the  Federal  Government 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


500 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


for  nearly  30  years  has  been  in  formal 
antagonism  to  Prohibition.^  The  States, 
with  very  few  exceptions,  have  uniformly 
(or  with  but  brief  intervals  of  Prohibi- 
tion) permitted  license  under  certain  con- 
ditions— conditions  that,  in  practice, 
have  effectually  excluded  Prohibitory 
law  from  most  of  the  chief  centers  of 
population.  Thus,  in  New  England, 
while  two  States  (Maine  and  Vermont) 
have  been  constantly  under  complete 
Prohibition  for  a  long  term  of  years,  the 
other  four  States  (Massachusetts,  New 
Hampshire,  Connecticut  and  Rhode  Is- 
land), though  nominally  prohibiting  the 
traffic  at  times  in  that  period,  have  so 
far  inclined  to  license  as  to  give  continu- 
ance to  liquor  manufacture  and  com- 
merce in  such  cities  as  Boston,  Ports- 
mouth, New  Haven,  Hartford  and 
Providence.  Kansas  and  her  comple- 
mentary Prohibition  State  of  Iowa  have 
for  years  stood  alone  at  the  West ;  mean- 
time the  neighboring  license  States  of 
Nebraska,  Minnesota,  Illinois  and  Mis- 
souri, with  their  great  cities— Omaha, 
St.  Paul,  Minneapolfs,  Chicago,  Peoria, 
Kansas  City  and  St.  Louis — have  been 
aggressively  hostile  to  Prohibitory  laws 
and  diligently  sought  to  flood  the  Pro- 
hibition districts  with  liquor.  There  is 
QO  Prohibition  State  or  county,  city, 
village  or  township  where  the  success  of 
the  policy  is  not  or  may  not  be  at  any 
time  endangered  by  the  interference  of 
the  liquor  trade  in  license  States,  coun- 
ties or  localities  close  at  hand. 

The  police  power,  which  is  every- 
where vested  in  the  local  governments 
and  can  always  be  supplemented  and 
made  more  effective  by  co-operation  from 
county  and  State  authorities,  is  theoreti- 
cally sufficient  for  the  upholding  of 
Prohibitory  as  well  as  all  other  laws 
a7id  for  the  correction  of  offenses  com- 
mitted by  unscrupulous  outsiders;  in- 
deed, there  has  been  no  serious  limita- 
tion of  the  right  of  each  political  division 


■  Prohibitions  of  the  liquor  traffic  in  the  Indian,  Okla- 
homa and  Alaska  Territories,  and  similar  steps  taken  by 
the  United  States  Government,  have  been  inaus;nrated  for 
special  purposes  and  are  of  little  present  significance. 
The  enactment  by  Congress  in  1890  of  the  law  permitting 
States  to  deal  at  jjleasure  with  liquors  brought  into  them 
from  other  States  may  perhaps  be  regarded  as  providing 
an  exception  to  the  above  statement  that  Congress  has 
never  sustained  or  recognized  State  Prohibition;  but  this 
law  was  granted  sim])ly  in  compliance  with  an  intimation 
from  the  Supremo  Court,  as  an  act  of  justice  if  not  of 
necessity,  and  moreover  was  intended  as  much  for  the 
protection  of  those  States  in  which  High  License  pre- 
vails as  for  the  benefit  of  the  Prohibition  States. 


having  Prohibitory  law  to  fully  enforce 
the  law,  except  during  the  few  months  of 
1890  in  which  the  "  Original  Packasfe  " 
decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  caused 
confusion — and  the  disturbance  result- 
ing from  this  decision  was  soon  brought 
to  an  end  by  Congressional  legislation. 
But  though  theoretically  sufficient,  the 
local  police  power  is  inadequate  practi- 
cally so  long  as  liquor  is  produced  and 
is  a  legitimate  article  of  commerce  in 
other  communities,  counties  and  States. 
All  the  conditions  for  a  troublesome  con- 
traband traffic  exist.  Under  the  most 
stringent  Prohibition  there  will  always 
be  some  and  oftentimes  there  will  be 
many  persons  desiring  drink  or  ready  to 
purchase  it  if  opportunity  offers. 
Liquor  is  an  article  easily  concealed, 
and  the  tricks  and  devices  by 
which  it  can  be  peddled  are  num- 
berless. The  profits  promised  by 
illicit  enterprise  are  large  and  are  quickly 
won.  Individual  citizens  who  are  not 
under  suspicion  may  ship  in  supplies 
without  very  great  risk,  for  the  search 
and  seizure  clauses  of  Prohibitory  stat- 
utes, for  manifest  reasons,  are  not  vigor- 
ously applied  until  there  is  good  ground 
for  believing  that  a  particular  person  is 
actually  disposing  or  preparing  to  dis- 
pose of  liquor  in  violation  of  law. 
Above  all,  the  highwavs  of  inter-State 
commerce  are  everywhere  open  to  the 
smugglers.  By  a  decision  of  the  United 
States  Supreme  Court"  no  Prohibition 
State  can,  without  the  consent  of  Con- 
gress (not  yet  granted),  prevent  an  inter- 
State  railway  or  express  company  from 
carrying  to  any  point  within  its  borders 
liquor  brought  from  another  State.  Ship- 
ments of  liquor  from  Boston  to  Portland, 
for  example,  are  held  to  be  valid  ship- 
ments by  the  Courts,  and  if  the  shippers 
use  careful  disguises  the  "goods"  may 
escape  detection  by  the  police  officers  of 
Portland  and  be  delivered  to  citizens  of 
that  town.  Once  delivered  they  may  be 
surreptitiously  sold  or  given  away,  and 
have  a  more  or  less  potent  effect  for  neu- 
tralizing the  law  of  Maine,  in  accordance 
with  the  shrewdness  of  the  men  into 
whose  hands  they  come,  and  with  various 
local  conditions. 

Unfavorable  local  conditions  constitute 


2  The  famous  decision,  rendered  in  1888,  which  became 
the  foundation  for  the  "  Original  Package "  decision. 
Bowman  v.  Chicago  &  N.  W.'TRy.  Co.,  125  U.  S.,  465.) 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


501 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


the  next  great  impediment  to  the  success 
of  Prohibition.    Under  this  head,  indeed, 
all  the  secondary  difficulties  fall :  for  all 
difficulties  are  secondary  in  comparison 
with  the  one  already  noticed — the  pres- 
ence of  a  legalized  traffic  in  neighboring 
States  and  places.     The  chief  of  the  local 
difficulties  undoubtedly  arises  from  the 
failure  of  the  controlling  political  parties 
to  earnestly  identify  themselves  with  the 
cause  of  Prohibition.     This  is  not  at  all 
equivalent  to  saying  that  the  people,  as 
the  source  of  parties  and  of  government, 
are  fundamentally  responsible  in  cases  of 
neglect  or  opposition;  for  the  existence 
of  Prohibition  implies  that  poj^ular  con- 
sent  and   approval    have   already   been 
granted.     An    indifferent    or   a   hostile 
partisan  attitude  is  frequently  if  not  al- 
ways taken  without   regard   to  genuine 
public  sentiment — at  least  without  regard 
to   the   sentiment  of  tlie  best  citizens; 
party  action  is  controlled   by  designing 
leaders,  and  leaders  are  readilv  influenced 
against    Prohibition    by   aggressive   de- 
mands, bribes,  threats  and  promises  of 
support  from  the  liquor  element.     Thus 
it  has  happened  nearly  everywhere  that 
Prohibition  has  not  enjoyed  the  cordial 
political   support   necessary   to   its   full 
success.  Statutory  provisions  for  enforce- 
ment  have   been  lamentably  defective; 
penalties  have  been  inadequate  and  so 
adjusted,  at  times,  as  to   render  illicit 
trade  scarcely  more  perilous  than  licensed 
trade  would  be  under  a  stringent  license 
system;  men  personally  opposed  to  Pro- 
hibition, or  deliberately  pledged  to  its 
organized  foes,  have  been  chosen  to  fill 
the  offices   most    intimately    connected 
with    the    administration    of    law- — as 
Judges,  Prosecuting  Attorneys,  Mayors, 
Sheriffs,   Aldermen,    police    authorities, 
etc. ;  juries  have  been  packed  with  saloon 
adherents — in  short,  it  has  often  seemed 
that  the  entire  machinery  of  government 
has   been   given    over   to  the   outlawed 
traffic.     The  tireless  persistence  of  all  the 
violators  of  law,  the  encouragement  shown 
them  by  an  insinuating  and  sometimes 
incendiary  press,  the  timidity  of  many 
friends  of  the  law,  the  lack  of  determined 
leadership  and  the  coldness  or  reaction- 
ary tendencies  of  numerous  good  citizens 
(not  excepting  an  element  of  the  clergy) 
are  other   local  impediments  to  the  en- 
forcement of  Prohibition  that  are  repeat- 
edly encountered. 


No  study  of  the  results  of  this  policy 
can  be  intelligently  undertaken  without 
frankly  recognizing  the  difficulties  under 
which  all  experiments  have  been  con- 
ducted, and  the  conscientious  student 
will  not  make  the  mistake  of  judging 
the  fruits  of  Prohibition  by  the  "results 
in  States  or  communities  where  for 
various  reasons  there  has  been  only 
an  unfair  or  imperfect  trial.  The  truly 
dispassionate  observer  must  desire,  be- 
yond all,  to  know  what  the  conse- 
quences of  Prohibitory  law  are  when 
working  under  conditions  favorable  to 
its  success. 

The  admission  that  there  have  been 
partial  or  complete  failures  does  not 
affect  the  vital  question.  Would  thor- 
oughly enforced  Prohibition  be  bene- 
ficial ?  But  this  admission  suggests  a 
practical  question  that  cannot  be  ignored 
— In  view  of  the  many  acknowledged  dis- 
appointments, and  of  the  above-con- 
sidered difficulties,  is  the  effort  for 
thorough  Prohibition  practicable,  and  if 
not,  are  the  benefits  of  partial  Prohibi- 
tion such  as  to  justify  enacting  a  Pro- 
hibitory law  that  may  be  only  partially 
effective  ?  However  artfully  the  issue 
may  be  disguised,  however  strenuously 
it  may  be  maintained  that  of  necessity 
Prohibition  "don't"  and  cannot  be  made 
to  prohibit,  fair  men  will  concede  that 
assumption  is  out  of  place  in  dealing  with 
such  questions,  and  that  they  can  be 
answered  only  by  evidence  adduced  with 
impartiality  but  with  proper  discrimina- 
tion. 

In  sifting  the  great  mass  of  testimony 
that  every  patient  inquirer  may  easily 
gather,  it  is  difficult  to  adopt  an  entirely 
satisfactory  method  of  classification.  It  is 
desirable,  for  instance,  to  make  a  sepa- 
rate and  detailed  comparison  of  results 
obtained  under  State  laws  with  those 
secured  under  Local  Option,  High 
License  and  low  license  systems  ; 
again,  the  reader  will  wish  to  have  a 
separate  and  comprehensive  analysis  of 
the  effects  of  Prohibition  upon  arrests 
for  crime,  and  other  distinct  and  equally 
extended  exhibits  of  the  influence  that 
it  exerts  as  a  corrective  of  pauperism, 
etc.;  again,  it  is  proper  to  show  sepa- 
rately how  Prohibition  has  affected  com- 
mercial prosperity,  taxation,  the  inter- 
ests of  education,  etc.  But  the  results  of 
Prohibition  in  one  direction  are  closely 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


503 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


associated  with  its  results  in  all  other 
directions,  and  a  formal  classification 
would  involve  endless  repetitions.  For 
the  purposes  of  this  article  the  testi- 
mony will  be  presented  under  two  heads: 
(1)  Diminution  of  the  Consumption  of 
Drink,  and  Effects  upon  Crime  and 
Kindred  Evils;  (2)  Economic  and  Other 
Effects. 

DIMINUTIOlSr  OF  THE  CONSUMPTION  OF 
DRINK,  AND  EFFECTS  UPON  CRIME 
AND  KINDRED  EVILS. 

In  beginning  an  examination  into  the 
strictly  temperance  results  of  Prohibitory 
laws  nothing  is  more  suggestive  than 
the  unanimity  and  the  vigor  with  which 
such  laws  are  opposed  by  all  engaged  in 
the  liquor  traffic.  "  Resolved,  That  we 
are  unalterably  opposed  to  Prohibition, 
general  or  local,"  said  the  National  Pro- 
tective Association  at  its  first  convention. 
(See  p.  388.)  "  Resolved,  That  we  are 
an  anti-Prohibition  Association,  pure  and 
simple,"  declared  the  New  York  State 
Brewers'  and  Maltsters'  Association  in 
1883.  (See  p.  488.)  "  We  have  had  a  great 
deal  of  business  iti  the  State  of  Iowa, 
both  before  it  was  Prohi])ition  and 
since,"  wrote  the  chief  distiller  of  Ne- 
braska in  1888,  "  and  we  can  say  posi- 
tively there  is  very  little  satisfaction  in 
doing  business  in  that  State  now.  Ever 
so  often  the  goods  are  seized,  and  it 
causes  a  great  deal  of  delay  and  trouble 
to  get  them  released ;  and  there  is  a  fear  of 
not  getting  money  for  the  goods,  and  all 
the  forms  we  have  to  go  through  make 
it  very  annoying  business.  It  is  like 
running  a  railroad  imder  ground.  You 
don't  know  where  you  are  going  or  what 
is  ahead."  (See  p.  219.)  Few  will  deny 
that  the  policy  which  is  most  hurtful  to 
the  liquor  trade  must  be  most  instru- 
mental in  modifying  the  evils  of  intem- 
perance. In  the  uncompromising  hos- 
tility with  which  the  "trade"  meets 
every  attempt  to  establish  Prohibition 
lies  a  strong  indication  of  Prohibition's 
effectiveness  as  a  temperance  measure. 

Maine. 
Neal  Dow,  the  "  Father  of  the  Maine 
law,"  in  an  article  in  this  work 
(see  pp.  411-12)  describes  the  woe- 
ful conditions  prevailing  in  that  State 
before  the  enactment  of  Prohibition. 
He  says  that  immense  quantities  of  rum 
were  distilled  and  consumed  there,  and 


that  the  large  home  supply  was  sujiple- 
mented  by  a  great  deal  of  rum  imported 
from  the  West  India  Islands.  In  another 
place  he  has  made  this  declaration :  "  I 
think  I  have  seen  nearly  an  acre  of  pun- 
cheons of  West  India  rum  at  one  time 
on  our  wharves.  Just  landed  from  ships. 
All  this  time  seven  distilleries  [in  Port- 
land] running  day  and  night  !  Now  I 
will  venture  to  say  that  we  have  not  had 
a  puncheon  of  West  India  rum  imj)orted 
here  in  five  years — yes,  I  will  say  10 
years,  and  there  is  but  one  distillery  in 
the  State,  and  that  not  running,  I  think ; 
but  if  it  runs  it  is  laid  under  |3,000 
bonds  to  sell  no  spirit  except  for  medic- 
inal or  mechanical  purposes,  or  for  ex- 
portation." 1 

These  statements  are  confirmed  with 
the  strongest  emphasis  by  well-nigh  all 
the  eminent  men  of  Maine.  It  is  impos- 
sible in  this  article  to  make  even  a  sum- 
mary of  all  the  important  testimony. 
Only  a  few  of  the  most  conspicuous  fea- 
tures of  the  evidence  will  be  given. 

The  Voice  for  Oct.  9,  1890,  printed 
letters  from  the  two  United  States  Sena- 
tors from  Maine  and  other  distinguished 
citizens.  Senator  William  P.  Frye  wrote, 
in  part: 

"  I  can  remember  the  time  when  in  the  State 
of  Maine  there  was  a  grocery  store  at  nearly 
every  four-corners  in  certain  portions  of  the 
State,  whose  principal  business  was  in  the  sale 
of  New  England  rum;  when  the  jails  were 
crowded  and  poverty  prevailed.  To-day  the 
country  portions  of  the  State  are  absolutely  free 
from  the  sale  of  liquor;  poverty  is  compara- 
tively unknown,  and  in  some  of  the  counties 
the  Jails  have  been  without  occupants  for  years 
at  a  time.  Wherever  the  laws  have  been  rigidly 
enforced  this  condition  of  things  has  been  the 
invariable  result.  The  people  who  have  tried 
and  witnessed  the  result  of  these  Prohibitory 
laws  adopted  a  few  years  since  a  Constitutional 
Amendment,  prohibiting  the  sale  or  manufac- 
ture of  liquor,  by  an  overwhelming  majority. 

"  The  Democratic  party  for  many  years  after 
Prohibition  was  adopted  denounced  it  in  every 
party  platform,  but  for  the  last  12  or  15  years — 
such  has  been  the  progress  of  the  temperance 
sentiment  under  the  law — they  have  not 
dared  to  do  so.  This  year  they  made  a  feeble 
attempt  in  that  direction  and  were  completely 
snowed  under.  .  .  . 

"The  law  is  not  a  failure:  it  has  been,  on  the 
other  Jiand,  a  wonderful  success.  I  do  not 
mean  to  assert,  of  course,  that  there  is  no  liquor 
sold  in  our  large  cities  where  evasions  of  law 
are  so  much  more  easily  found  than  in  the 
country.  We  have  laws  against  murder  and 
theft,   but  no  man  is  so  insane  as  to  suppose 

>  Alcohol  and  the  State,  p.  352. 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


503 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of- 


that  under  their  influence  there  will  be  no  mur- 
der or  stealing." 

Senator  Eugene  Hale  wrote : 

"Throughout  the  State  generally  the  Pro- 
hibitory law  has  driven  out  the  grogshop,  and 
while  "liquor  is  undoubtedly  sold  in  the  larger 
towns  and  cities  it  is  not  done  in  an  open  way, 
and  the  amount  of  liquor-selling  is  smaller  even 
in  these  larger  towns  and  cities  than  in  corre- 
sponding places  elsewhere.  Maine  people  be- 
lieve in  Prohibition  because  they  are  every-day 
witnesses  to  its  good  effect." 

William  De  W.  Hyde,  President  of  Bow- 

doin  College,  wrote  : 

"The  manufacture  and  open  sale  are  pre- 
vented ;  temptation  is  to  a  great  degree  removed 
from  the  young;  the  business  is  made  disrepu- 
table; liqilor-dealers  are  disqualified  for  political 
otHce  and  positions  of  social  influence  which  they 
would  hold  if  their  business  were  not  made 
ciiininal  by  the  law  of  the  State;  and  thus  the 
law  is  slowly  educating  the  people  and  develop- 
ing a  temperance  sentiment  which  in  time  will 
be  strong  enough  to  give  the  law  all  the  support 
it  needs.  In  the  meantime  Prohibition,  even  in 
its  imperfect  working,  has  been  a  great  benelit 
to  tlie  moral,  social  and  economic  interests  of 
the  State.  We  believe  in  it  for  ourselves,  and 
we  wish  that  wherever  conditions  similar  to 
those  of  our  State  exist  other  States  may  expe- 
rience its  benefits." 

V).  T.    Sanborn,  Superintendent   of   the 

Maine  Insane  Hospital,  wrote: 

' '  The  Prohibitory  law  of  Maine  has  in  my 
opinion  operated  very  favorably  in  lessening  the 
>ise  of  intoxicating  liquors,  and  thereby  remov- 
ing one  of  the  prominent  causes  of  mental 
derangement.  I  have  no  question  but  that  a 
smaller  number  in  this  State  are  becoming  insane 
from  alcoholic  stimulants  in  consequence  of  Pro- 
hibition." 

These  are  merely  a  few  of  the  latest 
representative  expressions.  Others  even 
more  notable  have  been  presented  from 
time  to  time.  May  31,  1872,  William  P. 
Frye,  then  a  Member  of  Congress  from 
Maine,  sent  the  following  letter  to  Gen. 
Neal  Uow : 

"Your  favor  of  the  26th  inst.,  containing  an 
inquiry  as  to  the  effect  of  the  Maine  liquor  law 
in  restraining  the  sale  of  liquors  in  our  State, 
etc.,  is  before  me  ;  and  in  reply,  while  I  am 
unable  to  state  any  exact  percentage  of  decrease 
in  the  business,  I  can  and  do,  from  my  own  per- 
sonal observation,  unhesitatingly  aflirm  that  the 
consumption  of  intoxicating  liquors  in  Maine  is 
not  to-day  one-fourth  so  great  as  it  was  30  years 
ago;  that  in  the  country  portions  of  the  State 
the  sale  and  use  have  almost  entirely  ceased; 
that  the  law  of  itself,  under  a  vigorous  enforce- 
ment of  its  provision.3,  has  created  a  temperance 
sentiment  which  is  marvellous  and  to  which 
opposition  is  powerless.  In  my  opinion  our 
remarkable  temperance  reform  of  to-day  is  the 
legitimate  child  of  the  law. 

' '  With  profound  gratitude  for  your  earnest 


and  persistent  efforts  in  the  promotion  of  this 
cause,  I  am,  very  respectfully,  your  obedient 
servant,  William  P.  Frye."  ' 

The  interest  of  this  letter  was  increased 
by  the  fact  that  it  received  the  unquali- 
fied endorsements  of  all  the  other  Mem- 
bers of  Congress  from  Maine,  of  the  two 
United  States  Senators,  and  of  the  Hon. 
James  G.  Blaine,  as  follows : 

James  G.  Blaine  :  "  I  concur  in  the  foregoing 
statement ;  and  on  the  point  of  the  relative 
amount  of  the  liquors  sold  at  present  in  Maine 
and  in  those  States  where  a  system  of  license 
prevails,  I  am  sure,  from  personal  knowledge 
and  observation,  that  the  sales  are  immeasurably 
less  in  Maine." '^ 

Hannibal  Hamlin,  United  States  Senator  from 
Maine  and  formerly  Vice-President  of  the 
United  States :  "I  concur  in  the  statements 
made  by  Mr.  Frye.  In  the  great  good  pro- 
duced by  the  Prohibitory  liquor  law  of  Maine 
no  man  can  doubt  who  has  seen  its  results.  It 
has  been  of  immense  value." 

Lot  M.  Morrill,  United  States  Senator  from 
Maine:  "I  have  the  honor  unhesitatingly  to 
concur  in  the  opinions  expressed  in  the  forego- 
ing by  my  colleague,  Hon.  Mr.  Frye." 

John  Lynch,  Member  of  Congress  from 
Maine  :  "I  fully  conciu-  in  the  statement  of  my 
colleague,  Mr.  Frye,  in  regard  to  the  effect  of 
the  enforcement  of  the  liquor  law  in  the  State 
of  Maine." 

John  A.  Peters  and  Eugene  Hale,  Members 
of  Congress  from  Maine:  "We  are  satisfied 
that  there  is  much  less  intemperance  in  Maine 
than  formerly,  and  that  the  result  is  largely 
produced  by  what  is  termed  Prohibitory  legis- 
lation." 

In  1874  the  Governor-General  of  Can- 
ada, in  accordance  with  a  request  from 
the  Dominion  Parliament,  appointed  a 
Special  Commission  "  to  inquire  into  the 
working  of  Prohibitory  liquor  laws." 
This  Commission  devoted  much  attention 
to  the  results  in  Maine,  and  the  follow- 
ing questions  were  submitted  by  it  to 
many  citizens  of  that  State,  including 
both  friends  and  opponents  of  the  law: 
"  Is  the  liquor  law  enforced,  and  if  not 
what  is  the  hinderance  to  its  working  ?  " 
"  What  have  been  the  results  of  a  change 
from  Prohibition  to  license,  or  vice 
verm  ?  "  Mr.  E.  J.  Wheeler,  in  his  "  Pro- 
hibition" (p.  Ill)  says:  "In  the  replies 
received  to  these  two  questions  one  thing 
is    especially    noticeable,    namely,   that 

>  Alcohol  and  the  State,  pp.  161-2. 

2  In  1883  Mr.  Blaine  added  this  declaration:  "Intem- 
perance has  steadily  decreased  in  Maine  since  the  first  en- 
actment of  the  Prohiljitory  law.  nntil  now  it  can  be  said 
witli  truth  that  there  is  no  equal  number  of  people  in  th(i 
Anglo-Saxon  world  amonc;  whom  so  small  an  amount  of 
intoxicatini:  liquor  is  consumed  as  amont;  the  G.50.000  in- 
habitants of  Maine."'  (For  the  opinion  of  Mr.  Blaine  aa 
to  the  effects  of  Prohibition  on  the  material  interests  of 
the  State,  see  p.  538.) 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


504 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


while  many,  especially  those  resident  in 
Portland  and  Bangor,  admit  that  there  is 
a  lax  enforcement  of  the  law,  yet  all, 
without  exception,  testify  to  the  good  re- 
sults of  the  law  even  when  it  is  poorly 
enforced/' 

In  18S9  the  Voice  made  a  systematic 
canvass  of  the  opinions  of  representative 
citizens  throughout  the  State.  Questions 
were  sent  to  the  most  prominent  men  in 
every  county — politicians,  Judges,  Super- 
intendents of  Schools,  Congressmen, 
Clergymen,  Overseers  of  the  Poor,  farm- 
ers, business  men.  Sheriffs,  Selectmen, 
postmasters.  Mayors,  manufacturers, 
physicians,  lawyers.  County  Commission- 
ers, State  legislators,  journalists,  etc. — 
140  in  all.  Among  the  questions  asked 
were :  "  How  successfully  does  the  Maine 
law  prohibit  the  open  liquor-saloon  in 
your  section  of  the  State  ?  "  and  "  Do  you 
believe  there  would  be  more  or  less 
pauperism  and  crime  in  Maine  should 
the  saloons  be  again  opened  and  sustained 
by  law  ? "  The  answers  to  the  first  of 
these  questions  thoroughly  supported  the 
radical  statements  made  above.  "  Abso- 
lutely;" "Not  a  single  saloon  in  this 
city  ; "  "'  Highly  successful  in  this 
county ; "  "  No  open  saloons  in  Portland, 
but  liquor  smuggled  in  and  sold  to  a 
limited  degree; "  "In  21  of  24  towns  no 
liquor  sold;"  "Substantially  sup- 
pressed;" "Closed  nineteen-twentieths," 
and  "  Not  one-fiftieth  as  much  sold  as  30 
years  ago  "  were  some  of  the  replies.  In 
response  to  the  second  question  only  eight 
of  the  140  failed  to  express  the  convic- 
tion that  both  pauperism  and  crime 
would  be  increased  if  the  Prohibitory 
law  should  be  abandoned.  And  the 
names  of  the  persons  to  whom  the  ques- 
tions were  sent  were  all  chosen  imparti- 
ally, without  previous  knowledge  of  the 
views  of  the  individuals  addressed. 
Many  who  answered  were  old  residents, 
men  who,  with  Senator  Frye  and  Mr. 
Blaine,  remembered  the  condition  of  the 
State  in  the  days  of  the  license  law ;  and 
they  appended  such  assertions  as  these : 
"  Pauperism  has  decreased  75  per  cent, 
in  this  county  under  Prohibition  ; "  "Pov- 
erty and  crime  received  a  check  from 
Prohibition; "  "  If  saloons  were  reopened 
pauperism  and  crime  would  increase 
tenfold." ' 

The  Governors  of  Maine  for  a  quarter 

'  1  The  Voice,  July  11  and  18, 1889. 


of  a  century,  without  exception,  have 
borne  witness  to  the  great  decrease  in  the 
consumption  of  liquor  and  the  diminu- 
tion of  crime  and  other  evils  flowing  from 
drink,  as  well  as  to  the  material  improve- 
ment under  Prohibition,  The  following 
are  specimens  of  the  testimony  submitted 
by  the  Governors : 

Governor  Chamberlain  (1872):  "The  law  is  as 
well  executed  generally  in  the  State  as  other 
criminal  laws." 

Governor  Perham  (1872):  "  I  think  it  safe  to 
say  that  it  [the  volume  of  the  liquor  trade]  is 
very  much  less  than  before  the  enactment  of  the 
law— probably  not  one-tenth  as  large." 

Governor  Dingley  (1874):  "In  more  than 
three-fourths  of  the  State,  particularly  in  the 
nn-al  sections,  open  dramshops  are  almost  un- 
known and  secret  sales  are  comparatively  rare. " 

Governor  Connor  (1876):  "Maine  has  a  fixed 
conclusion  upon  this  subject.  It  is  that  the  sale 
of  intoxicating  liquors  is  an  evil  of  such  magni- 
tude that  the  well-being  of  the  State  demands 
and  the  conditions  of  the  social  compact  war- 
rant its  suppression." 

Governor  Robie  (1885):  "Criminal  statistics 
show  that  the  law  has  been  beneficial  in  restrain- 
ing crime,  and  the  number  of  indictments  found 
against  the  violators  of  the  law  in  all  our  Courts 
and  the  fines  and  costs  or  sentences  of  imprison- 
ment imposed  prove  the  general  willingness  of 
the  people  to  assist  in  its  enforcement." 

Governor  Bodwell  (1887):  "In  from  three- 
fourths  to  four-fifths  of  the  towns  of  the  State 
the  law  is  well  enforced  and  has  practically 
abolished  the  sale  of  spirituous  and  malt  liquors 
as  beverages.  In  the  larger  cities  and  towns, 
on  the  seaboard  and  at  railway  centers,  it  has 
been  found  more  difiicult  to  secure  perfect  com- 
pliance with  the  law,  but  it  can  still  be  said  that 
at  very  few  points  in  the  State  is  liquor  openly 
sold." 

Governor  Marble  (1888):  "  Prohibition  has 
closed  every  distillery  and  brewery  in  Maine. 
The  law  has  greatly  diminished  the  sale  and  use 
of  intoxicating  liquors  and  increased  sobriety  and 
morality  among  the  people,  especially  outside 
of  the  cities.  It  is  certainly  the  best  law  of 
which  I  have  any  knowledge,  and  wherever 
public  sentiment  favors  its  enforcement  it 
works  perfectly." 

The  United  States  Internal  Kevenue 
returns  corroborate  the  often-repeated 
claim  that  the  Maine  law  has  entirely 
suppressed  the  manufacture  of  liquor. 
Since  1887  Maine  has  been  classed  as  a 
portion  of  the  Internal  Revenue  collec- 
tion district  of  New  Hampshire,  and  it 
is  impossible  to  give  statistics  for  Maine 
separately  for  any  year  since  1887.  But 
the  Internal  Revenue  report  for  1887 
(the  last  year  in  which  Maine  consti- 
tuted a  distinct  district)  shows  that  not 
a  gallon  of  distilled  or  fermented  liquor 
was  produced  iu  the  State  in  that  year. 


I 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


505 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


The  Internal  Revenue  records  of  "  liquor- 
dealers,''  as  has  been  pointed  out  (see  pp. 
257,  331),  are  misleading,  and  they  are 
especially  misleading  for  the  Prohibi- 
tion States.  Anyone  may  become  a 
"  liquor-dealer "  within  the  meaning  of 
the  United  States  revenue  laws  who  pays 
the  Federal  tax-fee  provided  for  a  retail 
or  a  wholesale  dealer  in  distilled  or  malt 
liquors.  Each  payer  of  the  fee  is  counted 
in  the  Internal  Revenue  records  as  a 
"  liquor-dealer."  But  many  payers  are 
druggists ;  many  others  are  Town  Agents 
selling  for  the  excepted  purposes ;  many 
are  petty  individuals  illicitly  selling  or  in- 
tending to  illicitly  sell  secretly  on  a  small 
scale  as  occasion  may  enable  them  to  do, 
and  many  are  speedily  apprehended  by  the 
local  authorities,  forced  to  discontinue 
selling  after  a  few  weeks  or  months,  and 
thrown  into  jail.' 

Therefore  the  Internal  Revenue  sta- 
tistics showing  that  in  1887  there  were 
in  Maine  919  "retail  [distilled]  liquor- 
dealers,"  93  "  retail  dealers  in  malt 
liquors,"  8  "  wholesale  [distilled]  liquor- 
dealers  "  and  9  "  wholesale  dealers  in 
malt  liquors  "  cannot  be  accepted  as  in- 
dicating the  true  proportions  of  the  illicit 
liquor  trade  in  Maine.  Even  if  they  are 
so  accepted,  and  the  figures  for  the  four 
preceding  years  (1883,  1884,  1885  and 
188G)  are  also  taken  into  consideration, 
it  api)ears  that  during  the  five  years 
1883-7  there  was  only  one  retail  liquor- 
dealer  for  each  GIO  of  the  population  in 
Maine,  while  in  the  same  period  there 
was  in  the  neighboring  license  State  of 
Massachusetts  one  retail  liquor-dealer  for 
each  242  of  the  population. 

Maine  has  had  Prohibition  continuously 
for  so  long  a  time  that  it  is  impossible  to 
find  any  recent  basis  for  comparisons  of 
criminal  statistics  under  Prohibition  with 
criminal  statistics  under  license.  It  is 
necessary  to  go  back  to  the  earliest  years 
of  the  Prohibitory  act.  The  report  of 
the  Canadian  Commission  above  alluded 
to   has   put  on  record  some  interesting 


'  If  after  the  payment  of  this  [Federal]  tax  the  officers 
of  thj  State  discover  that  John  Smith  is  selling  liquor 
contrary  to  the  law  of  the  State,  and  place  him  in  the  jail 
and  his  stock  of  liquors  in  the  sewer,  the  payment  of  the 
Ffideral  tax  does  not  save  him.  But,  just  the  same,  though 
he  may  have  been  selling  only  a  week,  the  Internal  Rev- 
enue report  includes  him  of  course  in  the  list  of  special 
tax-payers  for  Maine.  Neal  Dow  is  authority  for  the 
statement  that  at  one  time,  a  few  years  ago,  there  were  in 
the  Portland  jail  40  of  these  special  tax-payers. — Prohibi- 
liun:  The  Frinviple,  the  Policy  and  the  Party, 
p.  117. 


(though  meagre)  comparative  figures." 
The  original  Maine  huv  (with  search 
and  seizure  clauses)  was  enacted  in  1851. 
In  1856  it  was  repealed  and  a  license  law 
was  substituted,  which  continued  in  force 
during  the  years  1857-8;  and  in  1859 
Prohibition  was  readopted.  The  report 
of  the  Canadian  Commission  includes 
figures  from  the  Warden  of  the  State 
Prison  showing  the  numbers  of  commit- 
ments to  the  prison  during  1855-6  (Pro- 
hibition), 1857-8  (license)  and  1859-60 
(Prohibition),  as  follows : 


Years.  Commitments. 

29 


36 
53 
69 
48 
41 


Totals. 
65 
121 

89 


||5^  Prohibition     ] 
lis  \  Li<=en8e  -j 

Jl^Q  [  Prohibition     ] 

The  same  document  quotes  the  follow- 
ing from  the  report  of  tiie  City  Marshal 
of  "Bangor  for  1857  (the  year  after  the 
law  was  repealed) : 

"  In  my  report  relating  to  matters  connected 
with  the  Police  Department  of  the  city,  at  the 
close  of  the  municipal  year  1851-2,  I  stated  that 
the  city  had  been  freer  from  crime  and  distur- 
bance than  during  the  year  previous  or  any  year 
since  I  had  been  connec-ted  with  the  affairs  of 
the  city.  This  I  attributed  to  tlie  stringent  law 
passed  in  1851  for  the  suppression  of  drinking- 
houses  and  tippliug-shops.  This  year  [1857, 
under  license]  I  have  to  report  that  never  since  I 
have  had  any  acquaintance  with  the  Police  De- 
partment of  this  city  have  there  been  so  many 
commitments  for  offenses  as  during  the  year 
now  closed." 

And  in  the  city  of  Portland  Prohibition 
had  the  effect  of  immediately  reducing 
commitments  for  crime,  drunkenness, 
pauperism,  etc.,  fully  60  per  cent.  The 
following  returns  for  Cumberland  County 
(in  which  Portland  is  located)  were 
quoted  by  the  Canadian  Commission  from 
a  book  entitled  "The  Maine  Law:  Its 
Origin,  History  and  Results,"  written  by 
H.  S.  Chubbs,  Secretary  of  the  Maine  Law 
Statistical  Society : 


Commitments. 


No.  of  Commitments  to  County  Jail, 
exclusive  of  those  for  violating 
the  liquor  law 

Commitments  to  Watch-house 


For  9  Months 

Prkceding 

Prohibition. 

For  9  Months 

UNDKR 

Prohibition. 

Decrease 

UNDER 

Prohibition. 

279 
431 

63 
180 

216 
251 

2  Our  summary  of  the  data  presented  in  the  Canadian 
Commissiou''s  report  under  this  head  is  obtained  from 
Mr.  Wheeler's  "  Prohibition,"  pp.  113-15. 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


506 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


Commitments 
{Concluded). 


Commitments  to  Almshouse 

Commitments  for  Drunkenness    to 
the  flouse  of  Correction 

Totals 


m 

K 

K  H  Z 

E    Z 

^ 

i-ro 

c-    C 

a   0 

zir: 

5«f: 

S^H 

g^3 

;?«s 

?;  "  S 

1  ^ 

(1( 

353 

146 

100 

341 

82 

26 

990 

397 

599 

1  For  five  months.    ^  For  seven  months. 

The  early  history  of  the  Maine  law  in 
Portland  and  Bangor  therefore  proves 
that  it  caused  a  marked  change  for  the 
better  in  those  cities.  Whenever  it  has 
been  rigidly  enforced  the  result  has  been 
no  less  wholesome.  But  it  is  recognized 
by  the  Prohibitionists  that  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  law  for  some  time  has 
been  unsatisfactory  in  Portland,  Bangor 
and  (in  a  less  degree)  a  few  other  towns. 
For  these  imperfections  of  execution  the 
political  managers  are  chiefly  to  blame : 
they  find  it  profitable  to  permit  rumsell- 
ing  to  a  certain  extent,  since  the  illicit 
dealers  are  men  of  influence  with  a  large 
element  of  the  city  voters,  and  as  men 
who  stand  constantly  in  danger  of  arrest 
and  punishment  they  are  subservient 
and  most  active  supporters  of  the  politi- 
cians upon  whom  they  rely  for  protec- 
tion. 

Kansas. 

The  results  of  State  Prohibition  in 
Kansas  have  been  no  less  instruc- 
tive and  important  than  those  in 
Maine.    Kansas  formerly  contained  some 


jority  in  Kansas  was  wiped  out,  Governor 
John  P.  St.  John,  the  man  most  promi- 
nently identified  with  the  cause  of  Pro- 
hibition in  the  State,  was  defeated  in  his 
candidacy  for  re-election,  and  a  recog- 
nized whiskey  advocate  (Glick)  was 
chosen  in  his  stead. 

All  these  circumstances  render  the 
ultimate  success  of  the  Prohibitory  law 
the  more  significant.  Despite  the  seeming 
reaction  and  the  continued  efforts  of  a 
desperate  and  powerful  rum  element,  the 
measure  was  steadily  winning  its  way  to 
popularity  because  of  the  beneficial  re- 
sults that  attended  every  honest  attempt 
at  enforcement.  Previously  to  1885  the 
legislation  enacted  was  comparatively 
weak ;  but  in  that  year  stronger  provisions 
were  added,  including  injunction  and 
nuisance  clauses.  In  1887  the  celebrated 
Murray  act  was  passed,  prescribing  severe 
penalties,  with  radical  restrictions  for 
the  drug-store  traffic.  In  the  same  year 
a  law  granting  full  municipal  suffrage 
to  women  was  secured.  A  Metropolitan 
Police  law  was  another  helpful  measure. 
The  Kansas  legislation  of  1885-9  consti- 
tutes, indeed,  the  most  remarkable  series 
of  Prohibitory  statutes  ever  adopted,  far 
outstripping  the  legislation  of  Maine. 
Meanwhile  the  State  Courts  had  thor- 
oughly sustained  every  act.  Some  em- 
barrassment was  occasioned  by  the  mani- 
fest hostility  of  the  Federal  Judges  having 
jurisdiction  in  Kansas,  especially  by  Cir- 
cuit Judge  Brewer's  famous  decision 
(188G)  in  favor  of  compensation  to  liquor- 
manufacturers  ;  but  the  friends  of  the  law 
felt  confident  that  every  disputed  point 


of  the  most  notorious  towns  of  the  West,      would  ultimately  be  decided  against  the 


in  which  life  was  held  at  a  very  cheap 
rate  and  wild  disorder  was  a  character- 
istic condition.  Vile  saloons  abounded 
in  these  places,  and  the  consumption  of 
liquor  was  appalling.  In  1880  the  Pro- 
hibitory Constitutional  Amendment  was 
adopted  by  a  majority  of  less  than  8,000 
in  a  total  of  175,000  votes.  This  small 
majority  gave  no  assurance  of  the  suc- 
cessful enforcement  of  the  policy,  and 
the  cities  refused  to  regard  it  as  binding 
and  iDroceeded  to  treat  the  laAV  with  sys- 
tematic defiance.  An  agitation  for  re- 
})eal  immediately  sprang  up  and  it  seem- 
ed to  have  reached  a  triumphant  cul- 
mination when  in  1883,  chiefly  on  the 
(juestion  of  the  resubmission  of  the 
Amendment,  the  large  Kepublican  ma- 


traffic,  and  the  general  interests  of  en- 
forcement did  not  suffer.  Local  Judges 
in  some  of  the  worst  rum  cities,  like 
Leavenworth,  placed  obstacles  in  the  way 
of  the  cause  locally ;  but  even  these  excep- 
tional difficulties  were  overcome  in  most 
instances.  It  was  not  until  the  "  original 
package "  trade  of  1890  was  developed 
that  the  enemies  of  the  law  enjoyed  a 
general  success  ;  yet  this  success  was 
short-lived. 

There  can  be  no  better  demonstration 
of  Prohibition's  good  work  in  Kansas 
than  the  increasing  stringency  of  the 
statutes  and  the  growing  cordiality  of 
popular  attitude.  Against  all  the  disad- 
vantages to  which  we  have  alluded  and 
despite  a  reaction  that  appeared  to  be 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


50< 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


overwhelming;  against  the  bitter  opposi- 
tion of  the  saloon  peo})le  and  the  most 
j)ersistent  efforts  at  nullitication — efforts 
in  which  the  liquor  power  of  the  whole 
country  and  especially  the  dealers  of 
neighboring  States  joined,  the  law  has  not 
only  been  maintained  but  has  been 
steadily  strengthened.  Moreover  the 
benefits  of  the  law  have  changed  former 
foes  into  warmest  friends:  men  of  the 
highest  position.  Governors,  Senators, 
Mayors  and  leading  citizens  of  every 
class,  who  were  intensely  hostile  or 
profoundly  distrustful,  have  been  con- 
strained to  testify  in  unequivocal  and 
even  enthusiastic  language  to  the  great 
good  done  by  Prohibition. 

The  abundance  of  proof  is  bewilder- 
ing, and  only  a  small  portion  of  it  can 
be  given  in  this  article.  Endeavor  will 
be  made  to  atone  by  careful  selection 
for  necessary  faults  of  omission. 

Bearinsf  in  mind  the  untrustworthi- 
ness  of  the  United  States  Internal  Ilev- 
onue  statistics  of  "  liquor-dealers "  for 
Prohibition  States  (see  p.  505),  the  fol- 
lowing table,  showing  the  numbers  of 
persons  paying  United  States  retail  and 
wholesale  special  liquor  taxes,  with 
the  numbers  of  distilleries  operating 
and  brewers  in  Kansas  for  each  vear 
from  1880  to  1889,  inclusive  (compiled 
from  official  data),  is  instructive : 


have  taught  that  the  number  of  liquor 
establishments  may  be  very  materially 
diminished  without  disturbing  the  sup- 
ply or  the  consumption. 

From  the  Federal  returns  of  the  quan- 
tities of  liquor  manufactured, ^  the  fol- 
lowing table  for  the  State  of  Kansas  has 
been  prepared : 


Years. 

Distilled  Li- 
quors Produced. 

Malt  Liquors 
Produced. 

1880 

Galls. 

42,779 

65,086 

25,786 

2,8.59 

5,107 

6,730 

37,613 

9,1*3 

1,090 

751 

Barrels. 

32,370 
35,872 
34,281 
35,103 
35,437 
19,274 
17,369 
16.4.58 
14,170 
8.290 

1881» 

1883 

1883 

1884 

18S5 

1886 

1887 

1888 

1889 

Years. 

Retail 
Deal- 
ers.' 

Whole- 
sale 
Deal- 
ers.'-^ 

Distill- 
eries 
Operat- 
ing. 

Brew- 
ers. 

To- 
tals. 

1880 

18813 

1882 

1883 

1884 

1885 

1886 

1887 

1888 

1889 

1,907 
1,188 
1,.512 
1,949 
2,025 
2,1.51 
2,401 
2,183 
1,.396 
1,350 

56 
39 
34 

49 
46 
57 
46 
59 
34 
28 

4 

8 
2 
2 
4 
4 
2 

3 

1 

1 

39 

25 

22 

9 

17 

11 

8 

5 

4 

3 

2,006 
1.260 
1..570 
2,009 
2,092 
2.223 
3.4.57 
2.249 
1,435 
1,382 

'  Including  "retail  liquor-deaiers  [distilled]  "  and  "re- 
tail dealers  in  niaU,  liquois." 

2  Includiii!:;  ••wholesale  liquor-dealers  [distilled]  "  and 
•-wholesale  dealers  in  malt  liquors." 

■''Including  Indian  Territory  for  this  year  and  subse- 
quent ones. 

Population  of  Kansas  in  1880,  996,096/  ratio  betiveen 
the  number  of  "  iiquor-dealersC^  etc.,  and  the  total 
population ,  1  to  496.  Population  of  Kansas  in,  1890, 
1,427,096/  ratio  betiveen  number  of  "  liquor-dealers,'''' 
etc.,  in  1889  a«6i  total  itopulation  in  1890,  1  to  1,033. 

It  is  not,  however,  by  showing  a  pro- 
portionate reduction  in  the  number  of 
persons  connected  (or  nominally  con- 
nected) with  the  traffic  that  the  effects  of 
Prohibition  upon  the  liquor  trade  are  to  be 
demonstrated.  High  License  experiments 


'  Including  Indian  Territory  for  this  year  and  subse- 
quent ones. 

Production  of  sp'irits  i>er  capita  in  Kansas  in  1880, 
0.043  gallon;  in  1889  (on  the  basis  of  the  Census  o/1890), 
0.0005  gallon.  Production  of  beer  per  capita  {reckoning 
31  gallons  to  the  barrel),  in  1880,  1.004  gallon;  in  1889 
(Census  o/'1890),  0.18  gallon. 

From  these  returns  it  is  not  possible  to 
doubt  that  the  manufacturing  branch  of 
the  liquor  trade  (which  is  always  the 
chief  bulwark  of  the  whole  traffic)  has 
been  fearfully  crippled.  Whiskey  pro- 
duction seems  to  have  all  but  ceased,  and 
the  brewing  business,  in  the  words  of  the 
Breivers'  Journal  for  March,  1889,  is 
evidently  destined  to  "  soon  be  among  the 
industries  of  the  past  "  in  Kansas.^  Mean- 
while the  number  of  persons  paying 
wholesalers'  taxes  to  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment has  been  reduced  from  56  in  1880 
to  28  in  1889 — exactly  one-half,  despite 
the  increase  of  more  than  40  per  cent,  in 
the  population.  Therefore  all  the  local 
sources  of  supply  are  being  drained 
rapidly. 

The  most  competent  observers  have 
added  specific  evidence  of  the  practical 
ruin  of  the  retail  business  throughout 
the  State.  Surely  no  individuals  are 
better  qualified  to  speak  concerning  the 
extent  of  the  traffic  than  the  Probate 
Judges  of  the  vai'ious  counties.  With 
them  rests  the  responsibility  for  hearing 
and  granting  applications  to  sell  liquor 

'  Internal  Revenue  Report  for  1889,  pp.  366-9. 

2  In  the  fiscal  year  ending  in  1890  there  was  a  still  fur- 
ther reduction  of  the  quantity  of  malt  liquois  jjro- 
duced— in  fact,  a  reduction  of  two-thirds  as  compared 
with  1889.  The  Western  Brewer  for  June  15,  1890, 
printed  a  table  showing  "  sales  of  malt  liquors  "  in  all  the 
States,  and  in  this  table  the  "sales"  accredited  to  Kan- 
sas aggregated  only  2,700  barrels.  This  indicates  a  de- 
crease of  more  than  90  per  cent,  in  the  quantity  of  beer 
produced  in  Kansas  since  the  passage  of  the  Amendment 
in  1880.    (See  the  Voice,  July  3, 1890.) 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


508 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


for  the  excepted  purposes ;  and  they  are 
charged  also  with  the  duty  of  receiving 
and  inspecting  the  returns  of  sales  made 
by  all  lawful  vendors.  (See  pp.  299-300.) 
In  1889  the  Voice  applied  to  the  Probate 
Judges  of  all  the  106  counties  of  Kansas 
for  information  as  to  the  effects  of  the 
law ;  and  among  other  questions  the  fol- 
lowing were  asked:  "How  successfully 
has  Prohibition  closed  the  saloons  in 
your  part  of  the  State  ?  "  and  "  To  what 
extent,  in  your  judgment,  has  it  dimin- 
ished drunkenness  and  the  consumption 
of  intoxicants  for  beverage  purposes  ?  " 
There  were  replies  from  97  counties;  for 
75  of  the  counties  the  answers  were  writ- 
ten by  the  Probate  Judges  personally,  and 
for  the  other  23  counties  by  County 
Treasurers  or  other  officials  or  "by  promi- 
nent private  citizens.  Every  reply, 
whether  favorable  or  unfavorable  to  Pro- 
hibition, was  summarized  by  the  Voice. 
Ninety-four  of  the  writers  declared  posi- 
tively that  there  were  no  open  saloons, 
while  the  other  three  made  qualified  re- 
ports. Ninety-two  stated  that  drunken- 
ness and  the  consumption  of  drink  had 
been  greatly  diminished.  A  majority,  in 
estimating  the  extent  of  the  diminution, 
placed  it  at  from  75  to  90  per  cent. ;  others 
said  that  drunkenness  and  drink  had 
been  "  entirely  eradicated  "  in  their  parts 
of  the  State,  or  "almost  totally,"  or  were 
"  too  small  to  estimate,"  etc.^ 

Coming  now  to  inquire  how  far  the 
law  has  had  a  repressive  effect  upon 
crime,  pauperism  and  the  like  evils,  we 
find  that  the  Probate  Judges  speak  with 
equal  positiveness  of  this  phase  of  its 
beneficent  action.  The  question  sub- 
mitted to  them  by  the  Voice  touching 
the  law^s  relations  to  pauperism  and 
crime  was  intended  to  ascertain  not 
merely  whether  there  had  been  an  im- 
provement, but  also  whether  the  improve- 
ment had  been  great  enough  to  compen- 
sate the  Kansas  communities,  pecuniaril}^, 
for  the  loss  of  license  revenues.  It  was 
worded  as  follows:  "In  your  judgment 
has  not  the  loss  of  the  revenue  from 
former  saloon  licenses  been  more  than 
made  good  by  the  decreasing  burdens  of 
pauperism  and  crime  resulting  from  Pro- 
hibition, and  by  the  directing  of  the 
money  formerly  spent  in  the  saloons  now 
into  legitimate  channels  of  trade?" 
Clearly  a  fair  percentage  of  affirmative 

»  The  Voice,  June  13,  im 


answers  to  so  sweeping  a  query  would 
have  gone  far  toward  vindicating  the 
Prohibitory  law  against  all  ordinary  crit- 
icisms. But  the  replies  showed  "^much 
more  than  a  fair  percentage  of  favorable 
ones:  indeed,  there  were  very  few 
who  did  not  respond  emphatically  in  the 
affirmative.  No  less  than  90  of  the  97 
counties  reported  a  decrease  in  crime 
and  pauperism  so  marked  as  to  more 
than  offset  the  loss  of  revenue.  The  fol- 
lowing are  sjDecimen  answers : 

Barton  County:  "It  has;  our  jails  empty; 
crime  largely  reduced." 

Bourbon  County:  "It  has.  Under  Prohibi- 
tion our  city  has  prospered  as  never  before." 

Chase  County:  "Pauperism  and  crime  re- 
duced at  least  50  per  cent. " 

Cloud  County:  "  Yes,  sir.  Expense  of  run- 
ning Criminal  Courts  of  the  county  is  less  than 
one-tenth  what  it  was  under  license." 

Dickinson  County:  "Loss  of  revenue  not 
more  than  $3,000;  saving  to  families  at  least 
$50,000." 

Edwards  County:  "Not  a  pauper  in  the 
county." 

Finney  County:  "Our  city  and  county  jails 
empty." 

Ford  County:  "Crime  diminished  wonder- 
fully. This  city  (Dodge  City),  from  having  a 
most  unsavory  reputation  has  become  exceed- 
ingly quiet." 

Gove  County  :  "  It  has.  Many  former  habit- 
ual drunkards  now  sober  and  industrious." 

Greenwood  County:  "  Yes,  more  than  a  hun- 
dred times." 

Jefferson  County:  "  IVIost  assuredly.  The 
only  occupant  of  our  jail  in  the  last  18  months 
was  a  '  bootlegger. ' "  - 

La  Bette  County:  "The  revenue  from  the 
saloons  never  paid.  The  decrease  of  pauperism 
and  crime  from  Prohibition  beyond  conception. " 

Marion  County:  "Yes,  several  times  over. 
A  great  many  poor  men  now  own  homes." 

Mitchell  County:  "Crime  diminished  three- 
fourths  by  Police  Judge's  docket  ;  jails  empty." 

Norton  County:  "More  than  made  good  ; 
Court  and  poorhouse  expenses  greatly  tk-- 
duced." 

Osborne  County:  "Much  more  than  made 
good:  crime,  pauperism  and  taxes  less." 

Phillips  County:  "More  than  twofold  made 
good  b3'  decreased  crime." 

Pottawatomie  County:  "Revenue  from  the 
saloons  amounted  to  nothing  compared  with 
decreased  cost  of  crime." 

Pratt  County:  "Not  a  criminal  case  or  pau- 
per in  county." 

Kawlins  County:  "  Thousands  saved  to  poor 
families." 

Riley  County:  "Undoubtedly;  legitimate 
business  increased;  crime  and  pauperism  de- 
creased." 


-  "  Bootlei^s^er  "  is  a  Kansas  name  for  the  sneakin<^  itin- 
erant peddler  of  illicit  whiskey.  U  i.s  tlie  practice  of  these 
contemptible  wretclies  to  cany  Hasks  concealed  about  the 
perBOu,  frequently  iu  the  bootleg — heuce  the  name. 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


509 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


Sheridan  County:  "  Yes,  sir  ;  no  pauperism 
here." 

Sumner  County:  "Prior  to  Prohibition  we 
had  15  saloons  and  15  policemen  ;  now  only  one 
marshal,  wlio  has  little  to  do." 

Wasliington  County:   "Yes,  tenfold." 

Wilson  County:  "Taxes  ligliter  ;  fewer  pros- 
ecutions of  criminals;  decreased  pauperism." 

Woodson  County:  "Yes;  inmates  of  the  poor- 
houses,  asylums,  jails  and  penitentiaries  de- 
creasing ;  popidatiou  increasing. " 

Hamilton  County:  "Naturally;  our  jail 
empty. " 

Harper  County  :  "  Pauperism  decreased  ; 
only  two  prisoners  in  jail  in  12  months." 

Hodgman  County:  "Yes;  decreases  taxes 
and  diminishes  pauperism  and  crime." 

Jackson  County:  "Yes;  crime  less  each 
year  ;  pauperism  at  low  ebb." 

Jasper  County  :  "Taxes  decreased  for  police 
puiposes  ;  less  crime  ;  pauperism  decreased  75 
per  cent,  in  i)rop()rtion  to  population. " 

McPherson  County  ;  "  Yes  ;  crime  decidedly 
decreased." 

Pawnee  County  :  ' '  Yes  ;  taxation  and  crime 
decreased  ;  business  benefited." 

The  (State  officers  of  Kansas  in  1889, 
in  co-operation  with  tlie  ofiicers  of  the 
State  Temperance  Union,  issued  a  formal 
declaratiou  ^  concernins:  the  re.siilts  of  the 
Prohibitory  law,  in  which  the  following 
was  said  in  regard  to  the  consumption  of 
drink,  etc.  : 

"  The  law  is  efficiently  and  successfully  en- 
forced. The  diri'ct  results  of  its  enforcement 
are  plain  and  unmistakable.  We  believe  that 
not  one-tenth  of  the  amount  of  liquor  is  now 
used  that  was  used  before  the  adoption  of  the 
Prohibition  law. 

"Our  citizens  fully  realize  the  happy  results 
of  the  prohibtion  of  "the  manufacture  and  sale  of 
liquor,  as  these  results  are  seen  in  the  decrease 
of  poveity  and  wretchedness  and  crime,  and  in 
the  promotion  of  domestic  peace  and  social 
order — in  the  advancement  of  general  enterpri.se 
and  thrift.  In  our  opinion  the  Prohibition  law 
is  now  stronger  with  the  people  than  it  was 
when  adopted.  It  has  more  than  met  the  ex- 
pectations of  its  warmest  friends.  It  is  stead- 
ily winning  the  confidence  and  support  of  thou- 
sands Vviio  were  its  bitterest  enemies." 

An  equally  impressive  declaration  (also 
issued  in  1889)  was  signed  by  153  of  the 
most  distinguished  public  and  private 
citizens  of  the  State,  including  officials, 
ex-Governors,  telegraph,  railroad  and 
bank  officers,  newspaper  editors,  profes- 
sors, etc.  "  These  laws,"  it  said,  "  are  as 
well  enforced,  and   in  many  portions  of 

»  Signed  by  Lyman  IT.  Humphrey  (Governor),  William 

Higgius  (Secretary  of  State),  Timothv  McCarthy  (Auditor 
of  State),  J.  W.  'Hamilton  (Treasurer  of  State),  G.  W. 
Winans  (Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction),  L.  B. 
Kellogg  (Attorney-General),  Albert  H.  Horton  (Chief- 
Jufitice  of  the  Sujireme  Court),  D.  M.  Valentine  (Associate- 
Justice)  and  W.  A.  Johnston  (Associate-Justice). 

For  the  full  text  of  this  declaratiou  see  the  Voice, 
Oct.  9,  1890. 


the  State  even  better  enforced,  than 
other  criminal  laws.  There  has  been  an 
enormous  decrease  in  the  consumption 
of  liquors  and  in  the  amount  of  drunk- 
enness. During  the  eight  years  since 
Prohibition  was  enacted  our  population 
has  greatly  increased,  business  has  pros- 
pered, poverty  and  crime  have  diminished 
and  the  open  saloon  has  disappeared."  * 
This  evidence  will  be  concluded  with 
a  few  citations  from  memorable  state- 
ments coming  from  individuals  of  dis- 
tinction: 

"United  States  Senator  John  J.  Ingalls, 
(never  regarded  as  a  warm  supporter  of  the 
principle  of  Prohibition,  and  certainly  never 
numbered  among  its  active  partisans),  in  a  con- 
tribution to  the  Foium  magazine,  August, 
1889  :  "  Kansas  has  abolished  the  saloon.  "The 
open  dramshop  traffic  is  as  extinct  as  the  sale  of 
indulgences.  A  dnuikard  is  a  phencjmenon. 
The  barkeeper  has  joined  the  troubadour,  the 
cru.sader  and  the  mound-builder.  The  brewery, 
the  distillery  and  the  bonded  warehouse  are 
known  only  to  the  archaeologist.  .  .  .  Tempta- 
tion being  removed  from  the  young  and  the  in- 
firm, they  have  been  fortified  and  redeemed. 
The  liquor-seller  being  proscribed  is  an  out- 
law and  his  vocation  is  disreputable.  Drinking 
being  stigmatized  is  out  of  fashion,  and  the 
consumption  of  intoxicants  has  enormously  de- 
creased. Intelligent  and  conservative  observers 
estimate  the  reduction  at  90  jier  cent. ;  it  can- 
not be  less  than  75.  The  increase  in  the  num- 
ber of  Internal  Revenue  stamps  sold  by  the  Col- 
lector from  year  to  year  is  explained  by  the  fact 
that  they  are  required  by  all  druggists,  and 
many  of  them  are  repetitions  and  renewals  for 
short  terms.  .  .  .  One  of  the  most  significant 
and  extraordinary  results  is  the  diminution  of 
crime  in  the  State.  At  the  January  [1889] 
term  of  the  District  Court  of  the  county  in 
which  the  capital  is  situated,  there  was  not  a 
single  criminal  case  on  the  docket.  ]\Iany  city 
and  county  prisons  are  without  a  tenant.  The 
number  and  percentage  of  the  convicts 
in  the  State  Penitentiary  have  been  re- 
markably diminished.  Upon  the  first  day  of 
January,  1870,  the  prisoners,  not  including 
those  of  the  United  States,  numbered  218,  or 
one  for  every  1,071  inhabitants;  ;it  the  same 
date  in  1875  they  numbered  4:^5,  or  one  to  every 
1,214  inliabitants.  In  1880  the  mmiber  was 
633,  or  one  to  every  1,573  inhabitants;  in  1885 
it  was  673,  or  one  to  every  1,885  inhabitants  ; 
on  the  first  day  of  January,  1889,  it  was  861,  or 
one  to  every  1,921  inhabitants.  ^  On  the  first 
day  of  January,  1887,  thei-e  were  895  State 
prisoners  in  the  Penitentiary  ;  on  the  first  day 
of  January,  1888,  there  were  898,  and  in  the 


2  The  Voice,  May  30,  1889. 

3  Since  Senator  Ingalls  wrote  before  the  United  States 
Census  of  1890  was  taken,  these  figures  were  based  on  es- 
timates of  the  Kansas  population  believed  at  that  time  to 
be  reliable,  but  not  sustained  by  the  Federal  Census  re- 
turns. The  population  of  the  State  in  1890  (as  given  by 
those  returns)  was  1,427,096,  and  this  would  make  the 
ratio  for  1889  1  to  1,657  inhabitants  instead  of  1  to  1,931. 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


510 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


following  year  there  was  a  reduction  of  37  in 
number,  althounjh  the  population  of  the  State 
had  largelji  increased.  In  the  various  prisons 
lliroughout  the  United  States  about  60,00(» 
criminals  are  serving  sentence's  for  felonies, 
being  about  one  prisoner  for  every  1,000  inhabi- 
tants ;  the  same  ratio  in  Kansas  would  give  a 
total  of  1,651,  which  is  50  per  cent,  more 
than  the  number  actually  confined.  In  the 
United  States  at  large  there  is  one  pauper  to  750 
inhabitants  ;  carefully  compiled  statistics  show 
that  Kansas  has  but  one  to  about  1,300  of  its 
population." 

Governor  John  A.  Martin  (a  vigorous  oppo- 
nent of  the  Prohibitory  Amendment  when  it  was 
first  agitated,  converted  to  the  cause  of  Prohibi- 
tion by  the  results  of  the  law),  in  his  farewell 
message  to  the  State  Legislature,  January,  1889  : 
"Fully  nine-tenths  of  the  drinking  and  drunken- 
ness prevalent  in  Kansas  eight  years  ago  has 
been  abolished.  .  .  .  Notwithstanding  the  fact 
that  the  population  of  the  State  is  steadily  in- 
creasing, the  munber  of  criminals  confined  in 
our  Penitentiary  is  steadily  decreasing.  Many 
of  our  jails  are  empty,  and  all  show  a  marked 
falling  olf  in  the  ninn])er  of  prisoners  confined. 
The  dockets  of  our  Courts  are  no  longer  bur- 
dened with  long  lists  of  criminal  cases.  In  the 
capital  district,  containing  a  population  of 
nearly  60,000,  not  a  single  criminal  case  was  on 
the  docket  when  the  present  term  began.  The 
business  of  the  Police  Courts  of  our  larger 
cities  has  dwindled  to  one-fourth  of  its  former 
proportions,  while  in  cities  of  the  second  and 
tiiird  class  the  occupation  of  police  authorities 
is  practically  gone.  These  suggestive  and  con- 
vincing facts  appeal  alike  to  the  reason  and  the 
conscience  of  the  people.  They  have  recon- 
ciled those  who  doubted  the  success  and  silenced 
those  who  opposed  the  policy  of  prohibiting  the 
liquor  traffic." 

United  States  Senator  P,  B.  Plumb  (always 
known  as  very  conservative  on  the  Prohibition 
question),  Oct.  23,  1889,  as  quoted  ^n  the  Voice 
for  Sept.  25,  1890:  "That  there  has  been  a 
great  diminution  in  the  consumption  of  liquor 
and  in  the  consequent  drunkenness  and  crime  in 
the  State,  as  the  result  of  the  exclusion  of  the 
saloon,  is  everywhere  noted  and  confessed.  In 
fact,  no  evidence  on  this  point  is  more  conclu- 
sive than  that  the  brewers  and  distillers  are  so 
urgent  to  have  saloons  re-established.  They 
are  not  spending  large  sums  of  money  in  this 
matter  for  fiui." 

J.  W.  Hamilton,  State  Treasurer,  Nov.  24, 
1889,  as  quoted  in  the  I'oice  for  Sept.  25,  1890  : 
"  It  is  well  known  to  my  friends  that  when  the 
Prohibition  question  was  first  agitated  I  was  an 
anti-Prohibitionist.  I  did  all  in  my  power  to 
defeat  the  Amendment.  I  was  what  they 
called  a  Glick  Resubmissionist.  But  I  was 
mistaken  then.  The  Prohibitory  law  has  my 
endorsement,  not  alone  becmise  it  is  the  doctrine 
of  my  party  but  because  I  believe  it  is  right. 
I  do  not  see  how  any  fair-minded  man  who  has 
lived  in  Kansas  for  the  past  five  years  can  be 
otherwise  than  in  favor  of  the  law." 

Judge  W.  C.  Webb,  April  4,  1890,  as  quoted 
in  the 'Voice  for  Sept.  25.  1890:  "I  voted  in 
1880  against  the  Prohibitory  Amendment.  For 
four  or  five  years  afterward  I  thought  my  opin- 


ion as  to  probable  results  was  likely  to  be  vin- 
dicated. But  it  is  not  so  now.  Prohibition  has 
driven  out  of  Kansas  the  open  saloon,  and  has 
accomj)lished  a  vast  deal  of  good — a  thou.sand- 
fold  more  than  any  license  law  ever  did  or  ever 
could.  A  return  to  whiskey'  and  saloon  rule 
would  not  bring  an  additional  dollar  to  the 
State,  nor  grow  an  additional  bushel  of  corn, 
nor  give  a  single  ounce  of  bread  to  the  hungry, 
nor  clothe  the  nakedness  of  a  single  beggar." 

Harrison  Kelley,  3Iember  of  Congress  from 
Kansas,  in  a  letter  to  the  Voice,  Oct.  9,  1890  : 
"No  law  on  our  statute-books  is  better  enforced, 
and  no  law  ever  placed  there  ever  produced 
such  beneficent  results.  .  .  .  The  authorities  of 
the  State  Penitentiary  having  made  a  contract 
some  years  ago  to  furnish  prison  labor,  based 
upon  the  then  increase,  are  embarrassed  to-day 
because  the  contract  cannot  be  filled,  owing  to 
the  decrease  instead  of  increase,  as  was  antici- 
pated. This  is  the  only  inconvenience  the  State 
has  been  put  to  on  account  of  Prohibition." 

S.  B.  Bradford,  formerly  Attorney-General 
of  Kansas,  is  authority  for  the  statement  that 
in  four  years  of  enforced  Prohibition  the  cases 
of  grand  larceny  decreased  15  per  cent,  and  of 
crimes  against  persons  25  per  cent.' 

Below  are  detailed  police  statistics  for 
particular  cities. 

The  following  table  "^  shows  the  numbers  of 
cases  of  drunkenness  for  the  year  ended  April  1, 
1889,  that  came  before  the  Police  Judges  of  61 
cities  and  towns  of  Kansas  having  an  aggregate 
population  (1888,  State  Census)  of  172,250  : 


Cities. 

Is 

c 

o 

Pi 

Cases  from 
April  1,  '88 
TO  Ap.  1,  89. 

Cities. 

c 

O 

Cases  from 
April  1,  '88, 
to  Ap.  1,  '89. 

Williamsburg 
Hiawatha. . .  . 

Virgil 

Girard 

Oswego 

Salina 

Saratoga 

Caldwell 

Kichfield 

Independence 

Larned 

South  Haven. 

Mankato 

Beloit 

850 
2,500 

400 
2,.500 
4,000 
9,000 

600 
3,000 
1,000 
5,500 
4,000 

850 
1,200 
3,6Ca 
],.50O 
1.200 
1,000 
4,:300 
2.000 
L.oOO 
4,000 
1,200 
2,.500 
1,300 
2,000 
1,000 
2,500 

900 

3,.500 

18,000 

2,300 

3 

X'  ^' 
None 

2 

10 

35 

None 

5 

1 

6 

10 

3 

12 

37 

None 

1 

1 

22 

None 

1 

8 

None 

20 

3 

None 

None 

5 

1 

22 

74 

12 

Osage  City... 
Burlingame  . . 

Tola 

Havs  City 

El  "Dorado. . . . 
Junction  City 

Russell 

Enterprise  . . . 
Concordia. .. . 
Pleasanton . . . 

Enreka 

Burlington. . . 
Mound  City. . 
Cherokee  .'. . . 

St.  John 

Leon 

4.500 

1,800 
1,650 
1.700 
6.000 
4,700 
1.700 
1.000 
5,100 
1.700 
3.000 
3,000 
1..500 
2.000 

35 

11 

None 

9 

33 

29 

None 

None 

12 

i 

1 
None 
None 

3 

Douglas 

Meade  Center 
Belle  Plaine.. 
(ireat  Bend. .. 
Osage  Mission 

Howard 

Chanute 

Cimarron 

Holton 

Kirwin 

Oskaloosa 

Lyndon 

Washington. . 
Cedar  Vale.. . 
Manhattan. . . 
Lawrence .... 
Garnett 

1..500  None 
1,200  Kone 

Lincoln 

Hartland 

Lvons 

2.000 
1,000 
3,000 
15,000 
l.,500 
2.000 

900 
l.iiOO 
1,000 
2,100 
9,000 

600 
3,000 

5 

None 

6 

130 

1 

None 

6 

4 

None 

13 

57 

None 

_3 
679 

Ft.  Scott 

Halstead 

Kinsley 

Leroy." 

Med.  Lodge. . 
(,)oldwater. .. . 
Neodesha .... 

Winlield 

.\rgoiiia 

Ness  City 

Totals 

172,250 

Thus  the  total  apprehensions  for  drunken- 


■  Political  Prohibitionist  for  1889,  p.  51. 
2  The  returns  w^ere   specially   gathered  in   1889  by  tho 
Kansas  City  (Mo.)  Globe.  (See  the  Voice,  June  6,  1889.) 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


511 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


ness  aggregated  only  679  for  a  population  of 
178,2.50,  or  one  for  eacli  254  inhabitants.  In 
18  places,  with  an  aggregate  population  of 
24,850,  there  was  not  a  single  case  of  drunk- 
enness that  came  within  the  cognizance  of  the 
police.  It  is  .safe  to  say  that  such  a  record  as 
is  made  by  these  61  communities  cannot  be  par- 
alleled in  any  series  of  license  towns  of  equiva- 
lent population.  An  idea  of  the  comparative 
insignificance  of  the  total  offenses  of  drunken- 
ness in  the  Kansas  towns  may  be  obtained  by 
contrasting  the  above  tlgures  with  the  ones  for 
High  License  and  low  license  cities  on  p.  211. 

(Jity  of  I'opeka. — This  is  the  capital  of  the 
State,  and  the  remarkable  fact  that  there  was 
not  a  criminal  case  on  the  docket  at  the  January 
term  of  1889  is  alluded  to  above  by  Senator 
Ingalls  and  Governor  Martin.  This  fact  is 
really  astonishing  when  comparisons  are  made 
with  former  years.  Enforcement  of  the  law 
began  in  Topeka  in  1885.  According  to  the 
Topeka  Daily  Capital  for  Jan.  1,  1889,  the 
dockets  of  the  District  Court  of  Shawnee 
County  show  that  there  were  222  criminal  cases 
in  1884,  60  in  1885,  30  in  1886,  16  in  1887  and 
21  in  1888;  that  there  were  only  three  prisoners 
in  the  County  Jail  at  the  beginning  of  1889  and 
that  only  six  prisoners  were  sent  from  the 
county  to  the  State  Penitentiary  in  1888  as 
against  34  in  1884.  "At  one  time,"  said 
County  Attorney  Curtis  in  1889,  "  there  were 
140  saloons  open  in  Topeka;  their  average  sales 
per  day  were  not  less  than  $30  each,  which 
would  make  $5,200  spent  daily  for  liquor.  This 
amount  came  largely  from  the  working  people; 
to-day  there  is  not  $1  of  that  amount  spent  for 
whiskey.  Where  does  it  go?  It  goes  for  food 
and  clothing,  children  and  wife.  I  know  of 
scores  of  instances  where  families  were  suffer- 
ing for  food  because  their  father  gave  his 
wages  to  the  saloon-keeper.  Now  they  are 
living  in  a  cozy  home  of  their  own;  they  have 
all  the  necessities  of  life,  and  indeed  a  few  of 
the  luxuries  ;  the  children,  who  were  once 
poverty-stricken  and  living  in  rags,  are  now 
attending  public  schools,  and  the  father  will  tell 
you  he  was  saved  by  Prohibition."  ' 

Durinc:  the  Eastern  Amenilment  campaigns 
of  1889  'iMr.  W.  P.  Tomliii.son,  editor  of  the 
Daily  Democrat  of  Topeka,  was  induced  to 
make  .speeches  against  Prohibition.  He  ven- 
tured to  assert  that  Prohibition  was  a  failui'e, 
and  w^as  quoted  as  saying  that  "dives  and 
joints  "  nourished  in  Topeka,  and  that  "  all  the 
iniquities  of  secret  selling"  were  "added  to 
the  lesser  evils  of  the  open  traffic."  Upon  his 
return  to  Topeka  Mr.  Tomlinson  was  put  under 
oath  by  the  County  Attorney,  and  the  following 
testimony  was  taken: 

'•  Q.  Do  you  know  of  the  existence  of  an  open  saloon  in 
Sliawnee  Counly  at  tlie  present  time  '!~A.  1  do  not. 

'■  Q.  Do  you  Iciiow  of  any  open  saloon  in  fShawnee 
County  within  the  past  two  years  ? — A.  No,  I  do  not 

•'  Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  secret  place  in  Shawnee 
County  where  hquor  can  be  bought  by  the  drink  ?  -A.  I 
do  not."  2 

City  of  Emporia. — The  following  statistics 
were  made  public  in  1889  by  G.  W.  Paxton, 
City  Marshal  of  Emporia:  ^ 

•  Political  Prohibitionist  for  188D,  pp.  52-3. 

"'  The  Voice,  May  23,  1889. 

s  Political  Prohibitionist  for  ISSn,  p.  53. 


Years. 


1883. 

1884. 
188.5. 
1886. 
1887. 
1888. 


Arrests 

Arrests 

FOR 

Drunk- 

FOR Dis- 
orderly 

Totals. 

enness. 

Conduct. 

77 

53 

130 

78 

57 

135 

30 

69 

99 

40 

26 

60 

16 

15 

31 

15 

12 

27 

City  of  Leavenworth. — Leavenworth  for  years 
defied  the  Prohibitory  law.  This  city  and 
Atchison  were  the  headquarters  of  the  "  border 
ruffians  "  in  the  memorable  Free  State  contest. 
It  had  always  been  cursed  with  a  large  element 
of  rough  citizens.  With  its  county  it  voted 
against  the  Prohibitory  Amendment  in  1880  by 
more  than  two  and  one-haJf  to  one.  There  was 
practically  no  interference  with  the  saloons  until 
1886.  Since  that  year  the  law  has  been  enforced 
with  increasing  success.  The  re-sults  are  shown 
in  the  following  table,  taken  from  the  Leaven- 
worth Daily  Times  (a  journal  that  steadily 
opposed  Prohibition  during  the  first  five  years  of 
the  law^):* 


Years. 

Popula- 
tion.' 

Total 
Arrests. 

Arrests    | 
for  drunk- 
ENNESS. 

1882 

18,766 
19.644 
22.155 

2!).2(i8 
2l),l.-i0 
31.220 
35,227 

2.340 
2,110 
2.400 
2.469 
2,110 
2,066 
1,710 

464 
543 

452 
562 
418 
3,57 
225 

1883        

1884 

1885       

1886 

1887 

1888     

'  'I'heee  are  local  population  figures.  According  to  the 
United  States  Census,  Leavenworth  had  16,546  inhabi- 
tants in  1880. 

The  editor  of  this  work  has  received  a  special 
report  from  Leavenworth  for  the  year  1889, 
showing  that  the  total  arrests  were  1,800  and 
the  arrests  for  drunkenness  only  120.  Thus 
notwithstanding  an  increased  population  the 
arrests  for  drunkenness  have  decreased  442  or 
nearly  80  per  cent,  since  the  enforcement  of  the 
law  began.  And  conditions  are  peculiarly  un- 
favorable. Near  the  city  is  a  Soldiers'  Home, 
with  2,000  inmates;  in  fact,  two-thirds  of  those 
arraigned  for  drunkenness  in  the  Police  Courr 
are  soldiers  from  the  Home.  Besides,  Leaven- 
worth is  a  "river"  city,  and  is  connected  with 
the  licen.se  State  of  Missouri  by  a  pontoon 
bridge.  The  diminution  of  crime  in  Leavenworth 
as  distinguished  from  mere  drunkenness  is  indi- 
cated by  the  fact  that  while  36  persons  were 
sent  to  the  State  Penitentiary  from  the  county 
in  1886,  only  13  were  sent  in  1887  and  5  in  the 
first  half  of  1888.'* 

City  of  Atchison. — From  the  county  in  which 
Atchison  is  located  there  were  23  commitments 
to  the  Penitentiary  in  1885,  13  in  1886,  6  in  1887 
and  1  in  the  first  "half  of  1888.  (The  .saloon.s — 
60  in  number — were  closed  in  January,  1886.)^' 
George  Tofte,  Chief  of  Police,  says  in  his  report 
for  1890:  "Vice  has  been  suppressed  and  thi' 
lawbreakers  made  to  feel  the  penalty  of  the  law 
without  creating  any  feeling  of  hostility  among 
our  citizens,  without  anj^  fuss  or  noise  or  undue 
excitement.     We    have  enforced  the  laws  and 


4  Ibid,    sibid,  p.  51.    nbid. 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


513 


[Prohibition.  Benefits  of. 


compelled  the  closing  of  places  where  for  years 
the  law  had  been  systematically  violated.  To- 
day there  is  not  a  '  joint '  within  the  limits  of  the 
city  of  Atchison,  and  it  is  safe  to  say  there  is 
not  within  our  Union  a  city  of  equal  size  whose 
laws  are  more  strictly  enforced  or  whose  citizens 
are  more  peaceful  and  sober  and  where  life  and 
property  are  more  secure."  (In  1880  Atchison 
with  its' county  opposed  the  Prohibitory  Amend- 
ment by  y,147  votes  to  1,343.) 

Dodge  CUi/.—Thc  county  of  Ford  (including 
Dodge  City)  contributed  14  convicts  to  the  Peni- 
tentiary in"  1886,  6  in  1887  and  2  in  the  first  half 
of  1888.  (The  saloons  were  closed  in  the  fall  of 
1886.) 

In  striking  contrast  with  the  foregoing 
figures  are  the  records  of  Kansas  towns 
for  the  period  of  1890  in  which  liquors 
were  sold  under  the  United  States 
Supreme  Court's  ''Original  Package" 
decision.  This  decision  was  handed  down 
April  28,  1890.  It  denied  the  right  of 
State  or  local  authorities  to  seize  liquors 
brought  in  from  another  State  and 
offered  for  sale  in  the  "  original  pack- 
ages." Immediately  "  original  package  " 
houses  sprang  up  in  many  places  of 
Kansas,  and  they  were  to  all  intents  and 
purposes  ordinary  saloons  operating  un- 
der Federal  jirotection.  They  continued 
until  August,  when  by  act  of  Congress 
the  Proliibition  States  were  permitted  to 
suppress  the  sale  of  liquors  imported  the 
same  as  of  liquors  manufactured  within 
their  borders.  The  strong  local  senti- 
ment against  all  forms  of  liquor-selling 
acted  as  a  check  upon  the  "original 
package"  vendors,  and  since  this  era 
covered  a  period  of  less  than  four  months 
the  traffic  did  not  have  time  to  reach 
formidable  proportions.  But  the  stimulus 
imparted  to  drunkenness  and  disorder 
was  instantaneous  and  marked,  showing 
that  under  Prohil)ition  these  evils  had 
been  confined  within  narrow  bounds. 
The  Voice  lias  gatliered  official  informa- 
tion for  a  number  of  the  Kansas  towns, 
which  is  summarized  below. 

CJianute. — One  "original  package"  saloon 
was  opened,  running  during  the  months  of  May, 
June,  July  and  August.  Arrests  for  drunken- 
ness and  disorderly  conduct  during  these  four 
months,  26;  during  the  corresponding  months  of 
1889,  19;  during" January,  February,  March 
and  April  of  1890,  26. 

Fort  Scott.  —  Twelve  "original  package" 
houses  running  throughout  June  and  July. 
Arrests  for  drunkenness  and  disorderly  conduct 
during  these  two  niontlis,  73;  during  the  corre- 
sponding months  of  1889,  58;  during  April  and 
May  of  1890,  56. 

ilbid. 


(Jarneit. — Two  "  original  package  "  establish- 
ments ;  one  ran  from  July  5  to  Aug.  11,  the 
other  from  July  10  to  Aug.  8.  Arrests  for 
"  drunk  and  disorderly"  in  July  and  August, 
24;  in  the  corresponding  months  of  1889,  10:  in 
May  and  June,  1890,  14. 

Ooodland. — Three  "original  package"  con- 
cerns, running  in  July  and  August.  "Drunks 
and  disorderlies "  in  those  months,  7 ;  corre- 
sponding months  of  1889,  5;  May  and  June  of 
1890,  3. 

Independence. — One  "  original  package  "  shop, 
running  from  June  21  to  Aug.  9.  "Drunks 
and  disorderlies  "  in  June,  Jidy  t'nd  August,  19; 
same  months  of  1889,  6;  March,  April  and  May 
of  1890,  3. 

Manhattan. — One  "original  package"  grog- 
shoi5,  running  in  June  and  July.  Arrests  for 
drunkenness  and  disorderly  conduct  in  these  two 
months,  13;  same  months  of  1889,  5;  April  and 
May  of  1890,  1. 

Leavenworth. — It  was  impossible  to  estimate 
the  number  of  "original  package"  places  in 
this  city.  But  the  Chief  of  Police  reports  that 
many  persons  who  formerly  sold  with  great 
caution  and  in  insignificant  quantities  began 
operations  boldly  after  the  Supreme  Court  decis- 
ion. "  Dnmks  and  disorderlies  "  in  May,  June, 
July  and  August  of  1890,  363;  same  months  of 
1889,  289;  January,  February,  March  and  April 
of  1890,  227. 

Summary  for  the  seven  towns:  Arrests  for 
dnmkeuness  and  disorderly  conduct  in  the 
"original  package"  months,  525;  corresponding 
months  of  1889,  392;  same  mnnber  of  months  of 
1890  immediately  preceding  the  "  original  pack- 
age "  era,  330. 

As  we  have  already  indicated,  Prohibi- 
tion's success  in  Kansas  is  qualified  as  in 
Maine,  but  the  degree  of  qualification, 
looking  at  the  State  as  a  whole,  dees  not 
seem  to  be  important  when  the  wretched 
failure  of  High  License  legislation  is  con- 
sidered. Cities  that  were  in  open  rebel- 
lion and  in  which  it  seemed  absolutely 
hopeless  to  look  for  a  quelling  of  the 
liquor  traffic  have  accepted  the  situation 
and  have  magnificently  vindicated  the 
law  by  their  police  statistics.  A  very  few 
other  cities  are  more  or  less  persistent  in 
defiance,  but  they  teach,  by  contrast,  not 
that  Prohibition  is  undesirable  but  that 
resistance  to  it  deprives  a  community  of 
much  attainable  good.  In  the  last  year 
a  renewed  demand  for  the  repeal  of  the 
laAV  has  been  fomented,  but  the  persons 
most  actively  engaged  in  the  movement, 
with  few  exceptions,  are  not  representa- 
tive and  disinterested  citizens  of  Kansas 
but  the  less  reputable  politicians  and 
the  criminal  element  of  that  State,  and 
the  liquor-producers  and  wholesalers  of 
Missouri  and  other  States.     Kansas  City 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


513 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


(Mo.)  has  always  been  the  center  of  the 
illicit  liquor  trade  with  Kansas;  and  the 
pure  selfishness  and  unscrupulousness 
underlying  the  whole  agitation  were  well 
indicated  by  the  Kansas  City  Journal 
when  it  said  in  its  trade  report  for  the 
year  188T : 

"Wholesale  liquor- dealers  say  they  have 
withdrawn  their  travelling  men  from  Kansas 
within  the  last  six  months,  and  that  they  are 
making  no  effort  whatever  to  do  business  in  that 
State.  This,  of  course,  is  on  account  of  the 
enforcement  of  the  Prohibition  law,  which  has 
been  more  rigid  during  the  last  year  than  ever 
before.  For  a  time  after  the  adoption  of  Prohi- 
bition in  Kansas  liquor-dealers  in  Kansas  City 
did  a  large  business  with  the  drug-stores,  but 
since  the}'  have  been  stopped  from  retailing 
liquor  the  trade  has  dwindled  to  almost  nothing. 
Still  so.ae  bu.siuess  is  done  m  Kansas,  but  it 
consists  entirely  of  private  orders  by  mail."  ' 

loiLHi. 

The  original  Prohibitory  law  of  Iowa 
(1855)  was  speedily  modified  so  as  to 
practically  permit  the  manufacture  of 
all  kinds  of  liquor  and  the  sale  of  beer 
and  wine,  though  the  sale  was  made 
subject  to  Local  Option.  Special  en- 
couragement seems  to  have  been  given 
in  Iowa  to  the  manufacturers  of  liquor, 
especially  beer.  Many  G-ermans  were 
attracted  to  the  State,  and  the  brewing 
businooS  steadily  expanded  until  in  188"i 
more  than  286,000  barrels  was  pro- 
duced. The  distilling  trade  also  ac- 
quired much  importance  ;  one  of  the 
greatest  distilleries  in  the  Avorld  was 
built  at  Des  Moines,  and  in  1883  (the 
year  of  the  adoption  of  the  Prohibitory 
Amendment)  more  than  four  and  one- 
half  million  gallons  of  spirits  was  dis- 
tilled in  Iowa.  Under  such  circum- 
stances the  majority  of  nearly  30,000 
given  by  the  people  for  Constitutional 
Prohibition  was  a  great  victory  for  the 
principle.  It  was  followed  up  by  so 
vigorous  a  display  of  strength  that  al- 
though the  State  Supreme  Court  de- 
clared the  Amendment  invalid  on  techni- 
cal grounds  the  Legislature  promptly 
enacted  enforcement  legislation  which 
was  subseqtiently  improved.  The  Clark 
law  with  its  nuisance  and  injunction 
features,  and  the  Pharmacy  law,  take 
rank  with  the  most  rigid  acts  of  Kansas. 
These  measures  have  been  retained  in- 
tact, and  during  the  largest  part  of  the 
period  since  1885  have  had  the  moral 
supportof  the  State  Government.-    Tlicro 

>  Political  Prohibitionist  for  1888,  p.  14. 


has  never  been  a  reasonable  doubt  that 
an  overwhelming  majority  of  the  people 
have  fully  sustained  Prohibition  in 
Iowa  and  desired  its  complete  enforce- 
ment ;  and  the  pressure  brought  by 
them  has  been  so  powerful  that  in  most 
of  the  cities  a  marked  progress  toward 
the  extermination  of  the  traffic  has  been 
observable.  But  political  complications 
and  the  artful  schemings  of  influential 
men  have  had  much  more  serious  effect 
in  Iowa  than  in  Kansas.  The  distillery 
at  Des  Moines  for  four  vears  after  the 
Amendment  was  adopted  went  on  pro- 
ducing its  millions  of  gallons.  In  1889 
the  Republican  candidate  for  Governor 
suffered  defeat,  and  in  1890  the  success 
of  the  Democrats  in  the  Congressional 
elections  caused  a  general  belief  that 
Iowa  had  passed  into  the  list  of  doubtful 
States.  These  reverses  of  the  long- 
dominant  Republican  party  were  not 
materially  caused  by  the  Prohibition 
issue,*  but  the  politicians  who  were 
committed  to  partisan  policies  and 
methods  that  had  brought  disaster 
deemed  it  most  convenient  to  seek 
restoration  to  power  by  cultivating  the 
favor  of  the  low  classes.  Consequently 
an  outcry  has  been  raised  recently 
against  the  Prohibitory  law,  and  a 
strong  combination  to  secure  its  repeal 
or  modification  seems  to  have  been 
organized. 

The  United  States  Internal  Revenue 
statistics  for  Iowa  for  the  years  since  the 
adoption  of  the  Prohibitory  Amendment 
(including  1883)  are  summarized  in  the 
following  table  :^ 


Years. 

Retail 
Deal- 
ers.' 

Whole- 
sale 
Deal- 

ER^<.!' 

Distill- 
eries 
Oper- 
ated. 

Brew- 
ers. 

To-     • 

TALS.    1 

1883 

5.284 
4,205 
3,778 
3,921 
3,867 
3,177 
2,981 

1.53 
117 

iia 

121 
120 

84 
85 

8 
3 
7 
7 
8 
5 
3 

117 
86 

100 
98 
78 
74 
50 

5,568  • 

4,411  , 

3,997 

4,147 

4,OT3 

3,340 

3,119 

1884 

1885 

1886 

1887 

1888 

1889 

'  Tnclndina;  "retail  Hqiior-dealers  [distilled]  "  and  "re- 
tail dealers  in  malt  litiuors."  2  Includins;  "wholesale 
liquor-dealers  [distilledj  "  and  "  wholesale  dealers  in  malt 
liquors." 

Populafion  of  loiva  in  1880,  1.624.615/  ratio  between 
total  number  of  persons  nominal'y  engaged  in  the 
liquor  business  i«  1883  (as  shown  by  Federal  reports) 
and  total  population  (on  the  basis  of  the  Census  of 
1880),  1  ^0  292.  Poimlation  in  \e,<M,  1,911,896;  ra^io  »/). 
188J  {on  the  basis  of  the  Census  of  1890),  1  to  613. 


»  See  the  Voice.  Nov.  21,  1889  and  April  10,  IS'K). 

3  As  in  the  cases  of  Kansas,  Maine  and  other  Prohibi- 
tion States,  the  Federal  returns  of  so-caJled  "liquor- 
dealers  "  are  not  reliable.    See  explanations  on  p.  505. 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


514 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


The  most  striking  facts  shown  by 
these  figures  are  that  the  number  of 
wholesale  dealers  has  been  reduced  nearly 
one-half,  distilleries  operating  about  two- 
thirds  and  brewers  more  than  one-half. 
That  the  reduction  signifies  not  a  mere 
consolidation  or  merging  of  establish- 
ments but  widespread  destruction  is 
demonstrated  by  the  Federal  records  of 
liquor  production  in  Iowa  for  the  same 
years,  as  follows:^ 


Yeabs. 

Distilled 

Liquors 

Produced. 

Malt 

Liquors 

Produced.' 

Barrels. 

267,390 
2.57,986 
169,446 
195,4.57 
188,149 
160,272 
103,400 

1883 

Galls. 

4,285,162 
3,.501,.'529 
3,993,738 
2,396,007 
2,036.774 
706 
575 

1884 

1885       

1886 

1887 

1888 

1883 

'  There  was  another  large  decrease  in  1890.  According 
to  the  Western  Breiver  for  June  15,  1890,  the  sales  of  malt 
liquors  in  Iowa  for  the  year  ending  May,  1890,  aggre- 
gated 88,266  barrels— a  decrease  of  nearly  15  per  cent,  as 
compared  with  the  production  in  1889.  (.See  the  Voice, 
July  3,  1890.) 

Decrease  in  actual  quantity  of  distilled  liquors  pro- 
duced, 99.99  per  cent.;  malt  liquors,  61.33  per  rent.  Per 
capita  production  of  distilled  liqnors  in  1883  (on  the 
basis  of  the  Census  of  1880),  2.64  gallons;  1889,  infinites- 
imal;  per  capita  production  of  malt  liquors  in  1883 
(Census  of  li^i),  reckoning  31  gallons  to  the  barrel  of 
beer,  5.10  gallons;  1889  (Census  of  1890),  1.68  gallon. 

Testimony  bearing  upon  the  consump- 
tion of  liquor,  drunkenness,  crime,  etc., 
is  quite  as  exhaustive  as  that  from  which 
we  have  quoted  for  the  State  of  Kansas. 

The  Iowa  State  Temperance  Alliance 
in  1889  secured  official  reports  from 
Sheriffs  and  others  for  nearly  all  the  99 
counties.  The  following  is  an  analysis 
of  these  reports : 

' '  Number  of  countie.s  reporting  this  law  a 
succes.s  and  beneficial  to  the  people,  83. 

"  Number  of  counties  reporting  a  decrease  in 
crime  and  criminal  xiroceediugs,  73;  decrease 
varying  from  30  to  60  per  cent. 

"'Number  of  counties  reporting  decrease  in 
consumption  of  liquors,  75;  decrease  varying 
from  25  to  70  per  cent. 

"The  Sheriff's  office,  from  being  the  best- 
paying  county  othce,  has  in  many  places  become 
the  poorest-paid  office. 

"  In  over  one-half  of  the  counties  the  jails 
have  stood  empty  during  the  past  year.  Peace 
and  happiness  abound  in  hundreds  of  homes, 
"where,  in  the  days  of  the  saloon,  poverty,  want 
and  crime  prevailed." 

In  the  same  connection  the  State 
Temperance  Alliance  published  the  sig- 
nificant statement  that  "a  prominent 
railroad  oflicial  of  one  of  the  trunk  lines 
crossing  Iowa  declares  that  'there  is  not 
one  barrel  of  whiskey  now  carried  where 

'  Internal  Revenue  report  for  1889,  pp.  366-9. 


there  was  a  car-load,  and  not  one  keg  of 
beer  where  there  was  a  train-load  four 
years  ago.' " " 

The  representative  judicial  officers  of 
Iowa  are  the  District  Court  Judges,  who 
are  chosen  by  the  people  and  have  juris- 
diction over  considerable  territory.  In 
1888  Governor  Larrabee  applied  to  them 
for  opinions  as  to  the  effects  of  Prohibi- 
tion and  received  replies  from  a  number. 
His  inquiries  were  supplemented  in  1889 
by  the  Voicf,  which  obtained  reports 
from  13  of  the  Judges  and  oneex-Jud^e. 
Although  not  all  the  districts  were  repre- 
sented, either  in  Governor  Larrabee's  or 
the  Voice's  list,  the  answers  fairly  reflect 
conditions  throughout  the  State;  and  in 
view  of  the  prominence  of  the  writers 
we  condense  below  the  testimony  from 
each  District  replying  :  ^ 

2d  District  (Judge  Traverse). — "No  saloons 
except  in  one  of  the  eight  counties  ;  crime 
diminished." 

3d  District  (.Judge  Harvey). — "  Law  well  en- 
forced ;  no  saloons  ;  reduced  crime  and  crimi- 
nal expenses  one-half." 

4th  District  (.Judge  Ladd). — "Enforced  as 
well  as  most  laws  ;  no  saloons  here  ;  drunken- 
ness remarkably  reduced  ;  criminal  (jtt'enses  of 
the  lower  grade  decreased  ;  pauperism  de- 
creased ;  the  law  clears  the  State  of  criminals 
and  'bummers.'" 

4th  District  (Judge  Lewis). — "Enforced  al- 
most absolutely  universally  ;  no  saloons  in  this 
district  of  nine  counties ;  drunkenness  very 
largely  reduced,  drinking  more  than  one-half  ; 
crime  decreased  more  than  one-half  ;  pauper- 
ism decreased." 

4th  District  (Jud^e  Wakefield).— "Enforced 
about  as  other  criminal  statutes  ;  saloons  closed; 
drunkenness  and  the  use  of  intoxicants  dimin- 
ished ;  fewer  arrests  ;  pauperism  probably  com- 
paratively decreased." 

5th  District  (Judge  Avers). — "Saloons  stay 
closed  ;  not  a  saloon  in  this  district  of  six  coun- 
ties ;  drunkenness  and  drinking  largely  de- 
creased ;  crime  decreased  fully  one-half  ;  pau- 
perism largely  decreased  ;  criminal  and  poor 
expeoses  largely  decreased." 

5th  District  (Judge  Henderson). — "Enforced 
well  as  other  criminal  statutes  ;  not  a  saloon  iu 
district ;  intoxication  and  drinking  very  much 
reduced  ;  a  very  marked  decrease  in  crime  ; 
pauperism  decreased. " 

Gth I^istrict  (Judge  Johnson). — "Enforced  well 
as  other  criminal  statutes;  closed  all  the  saloons 
in  our  six  counties;  intemperance  and  consump- 
tion very  largely  decreased;  the  decrease  in  Court 
and  criminal  expenses  compensates  for  loss  of 
license  fees  ;  crime  decreased  three-fourths  in 
four  years;  pauperism  materially  decreased." 

6th  District  (Judge  Ryan). — "  I^aw  generally 
enforced;  drunkenness  much  less  frequent;  de- 


»  Political  Prohibitionist  for  1889,  p.  54. 
»  See  the  Voice,  April  11,  1889. 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


T'  1  K 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


crease  of  crime  over  one-balf  in  these  six 
counties;  cjmuot,  say  whether  pauperism  has 
decreased." 

7lh  District  (ex-Judge  Hayes). — "Practically 
not  at  all  euforced;  saloons  temporarily  closed, 
but  begin  again;  drunkenness  and  drinking  not 
at  all  decreased ;  no  distinct  effect  upon  crime; 
some  increase  in  pauperism,  but  not  due  to 
Prohibition."  ' 

9th  District  (Judge  Kavanagh).  —  "Crime 
decreased  over  50  per  cent. ;  Prohibition  added 
largely  to  individual  happiness." 

9ih  District  (Judge  Conrad). — "Crime  largely 
diminished;  cost  of  Courts  very  much  lessened." 

11th  District  (Judge  Weaver). — "Enforced 
thoroughly;  no  saloons  in  this  district  of  eight 
large  central  counties;  drunkenness  decreased 
three-fourths;  crime  lessened  and  jail  population 
less  than  for  many  years;  pauperism  certainly 
not  increased." 

12th  District  (Judge  Ruddick).—"  Enforced 
well  as  other  laws  for  preventing  crime;  saloons 
closed  except  in  large  cities;  drunkenness  dim- 
inished three- fourtus;  crime  much  reduced; 
pauperism  decreased." 

12th  District  (Judge  Sweeney).—"  In  85  of  90 
counties  of  the  State  the  law  is  enforced  as  well 
as  other  criminal  laws;  closed  saloons  in  nearly 
all  parts  of  St  ite;  drunkenness  decreased  more 
than  90  per  cent.;  little  criminal  business;  mo.st 
jails  em])ty  for  months;  pauperism  very  materi- 
ally decreased." 

13th  District  (Judge  Hatch). — "No  open 
saloons  in  this  district  of  six  counties;  social 
drinking  is  still  very  common,  but  a  few  drunk- 
ards have  sobered  up ;  no  change  as  to  crime  per 
se." 

14th  District  (Judge  Thomas). — "Reducing 
crime  and  criminal  expenses;  as  well  enforced 
as  other  criminal  laws." 

15th  District  (Judge  Deemer). — "Well  en- 
forced except  in  one  coimty  adjoining  Omaha 
(Neb.);  diminished  drunkenness  at  least  75  per 
cent. ;  decreased  crime  50  per  cent. ;  many  jails 
untenanted;  pauperism  decreased  quite  per- 
ceptibly; bummers  gone;  fewer  rogues." 

16th  District  (Judge  Macomber). — "Fairly 
well  euforced  in  more  than  three-fourths  of 
State  ;  drunkenness  and  use  of  drink  decreased 
a  great  deal;  crime  decreased;  pauperism  de- 
creased. " 

18th  District  (Judge  Giffen). — "  Law  seems  to 
work  well  in  this  district." 

From  a  Supeiior  Court  Justice  (Judge  Bank). 
— "At  the  September  term,  1887,  of  the  Dis- 
trict Court  of  Keokuk,  for  the  lirst  time  there 
was  not  a  criminal  case  before  the  Couit." 

An  even  more  valuable  series  of  re- 
ports was  obtained  by  the  Voice  at  about 

1  Althou2;h  this  reply  seems  to  be  wholly  unencoiirag- 
ing,  the  inferences  to  be  drawn  from  it  are  not  unfavora- 
ble to  Prohibition.  Judge  Hayes's  statement  that  drunk- 
enness, pauperism  and  crime  had  not  decreased  is  a 
suggestive  corollary  to  his  declaration  that  the  law  had 
been  "  practically  not  at  all  enforced."  And  much  of  the 
responsibilitv  for  non-enforcement  in  that  particular  dis- 
trict for  several  years  rested  upon  Judge  Uayes,    whose 

hostility  to  the  act  was  so  offensive  to  conscientious  citi- 
zens that  impeachment  proceedings  were  brought  against 
him  in  the  State  Legislature.    Indeed,  there  is  scarcely 

any  part  of  the  history  of  Prohibition  in  Iowa  that  pro- 
vides so  lucid  an  explanation  of  certain  local  failures  as 
the  history  of  Judge  Hayes's  administration. 


the  same  time.  Specific  questions  were 
sent  to  the  County  Prosecuting  At- 
torneys, and  answers  were  received  from 
58  counties.  Every  reply,  favorable  or 
unfavorable,  was  included  in  the  de- 
tailed exhibit  of  responses  printed  in  the 
Voice  for  June  G,  1889.  The  following 
are  three  of  the  questions  submitted, 
with  an  analysis  of  the  replies  made  by 
the  Prosecuting  Attorneys  to  each : 

"How  successfully  has  Prohibition  closed 
the  saloons  in  your  part  of  the  State  ?  "  Of  the 
58  replying,  54  stated  positively  that  there  were 
no  open  saloons,  2  that  tiie  law  was  not  at  all 
enforced,  1  that  open  saloons  were  few,  and  1 
that  the  old  and  well-regulated  saloons  had 
been  closed  but  that  the  smaller  ones  had  con- 
tinued because  of  the  difficulty  of  huding  and 
convicting  the  owners. 

"  To  what  extent  has  Prohibition  diminished 
drunkenness  and  the  consumption  of  intoxicants 
for  beverage  purposes?"  Of  the  58  replying, 
50  said  there  had  been  a  diminution,  explicit 
estimates  ranging  from  40  to  99  per  cent. ;  2  said, 
"  Very  little;"  8  said,  "Not  at  all;"  1  stated  that 
be_'r-drinkinghad  been  diminished  and  whiskey- 
drinking  increased;  1  said,  "Increased,"  and  1 
said,  "  I  don't  believe  diminished." 

"  Has  not  the  loss  of  revenue  from  former 
saloon  licenses  been  made  good  by  the  decreas- 
ing burdens  of  pauperism  and  crime,  and  the 
directing  of  money  formerly  spent  in  the  saloons 
into  legitimate  channels  of  trade  ? "  To  this 
question  49  answered  in  the  affirmative,  7  in  the 
negative  and  2  said  they  could  not  tell. 

E.  II.  Ilutchins,  State   Commissioner 

of  Labor,  in  1889  made  this  summary  of 

criminal  statistics:  '^ 

"Take,  for  instance,  from  the  records  of  the 
Courts  the  numbers  of  those  convicted  of  crim- 
inal offenses  in  Iowa  in  the  order  of  the  years: 

"  In  1884,  Criminal  Convictions 1,592 

"  1885,        "  "  1,339 

"  1886,        "  "  1,645 

"  1887,        "  *'  1,520 

"  1688,        "  "  838 

"In  1883,  as  shown  by  the  Governor's  rec- 
ords, Iowa  sent  to  the  States  125  requisitions 
for  criminals  from  justice  that  had  tied  from 
Iowa.  Two  years  later  they  had  run  up  to  167 
in  a  single  year,  costing  $17,193.  In  1887  they 
fell  to  112,  and  in  1888  but  68  calls  were  made 
upon  the  Governors  of  other  States  for  the 
return  of  Iowa  fugitives,  and  at  a  cost  of  less 
than  .$4,000. 

"  In  1885  52  criminals  were  given  over  to  the 
authorities  of  other  States  upon  the  extradition 
papers  of  their  Governors,  and  in  1888  but  36 
criminals  were  requested  from  the  State  of 
Iowa,  showing  that  even  the  hiding-places  of 
criminals  on  Prohibition  soil  are  broken  up. 

"Noteworthy  evidence  of  the  beneficent 
workings  of  Prohibition  is  afforded  in  the  fact 
that  while  from  year  to  year  the  population  of 
Iowa  is  largely  increased,  the  population  of  her 
State  Penitentiaries  is  gradually  diminishing. 

2  The  Voice,  Jan.  2,  1S90. 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


516 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


"  In  ]8a5,  Inmates  of  the  Penitentiaries,  634 

'•  18K6,  '•  653 

"  1887,  "  615 

"  1888,  "  632 

"The  number  of  commitments  to  penal  in- 
stitutions and  tlieir  cost  to  the  (State  eacli  year 
tell  a  story  also  that  is  woi-th  heeding: 

Commitmenrs.  Cost  to  State, 

"  In  1885,                      332  $413.0tX) 

"   1886,                      298  421, iXK) 

"    1887.                      278  282.0(X) 

"    1888,                      260  300,000" 

The  following  are  extracts  from  some 
of  the  most  noteworthy  statements  that 
have  been  made  by  individuals: 

Governor  William  Larrabee  (a  sturdy  oppon- 
ent of  Prohibition  before  its  enactment,  but 
converted  into  a  most  ardent  supporter  after 
due  observation  of  the  workings  of  the  law),  in  a 
letter  to  Rev.  William  Fuller  of  Aberdeen, 
S.  D.,  Feb.  16,  1889:  "  I  think  more  than  half 
of  the  jails  in  the  State  are  entirely  empty  at  the 
pre.sent  time.  There  are  98  less  convicts"  in  our 
penitentiaries  than  there  were  three  years  ago, 
notwithstanding  the  growth  of  the  population. 
Expenses  in  Criminal  Courts  have  decreased 
very  largely  during  the  last  few  years.  Tramps 
are  very  scarce  in  Iowa.  There  are  evidently 
very  few  attractions  for  them  here.  Probably 
more  than  3,000  of  their  recruiting  stations  have 
been  closed  in  Iowa  during  the  last  tive  years. 
The  wives  and  mothers  of  the  State,  and  especi- 
ally those  of  small  means,  are  almost  unani- 
mously in  favor  of  the  law.  The  families  of 
laboring  men  now  leceive  the  benefits  of  the 
earnings  tliat  formerly  went  to  the  saloons. 
There  is  no  question  in  my  mind  ))ut  what  the 
law  is  doing  good  for  the  people.  My  views 
heretofore  advanced  in  favor  of  the  "law  are 
strengthened  and  confirmed  by  added  experi- 
ence. Our  people  are  more  determined  than 
over  to  make  no  compromise  with  the  saloons. 
The  law  has  more  friends  in  the  State  than  it 
ever  had  before,  and  I  am  satisfied  that  no  State 
can  show  results  more  gratifying."' 

United  States  Senator  James  F.  Wilson,  in  a 
letter  to  the  Voice  for  Oct.  9,  1890:  '•  It  gives  me 
pleasure  to  be  able  to  say  that  in  every  desirable 
aspect  of  the  case  Prohibition  has  been  bene- 
ficial to  Iowa.  I  have  a  pretty  accurate  know- 
ledge of  the  conditions  existing  in  Iowa,  as 
induced  by  Prohibition,  and  I  do  not  hesitate  to 
say  that  they  are  all  better  on  account  of  its 
presence  than  they  would  have  been  without  it. 
In  the  several  features  of  the  case  as  respects 
business,  value  of  property,  moral  and  educa- 
tional conditions,  diminution  of  crime  and 
criminal  expenses,  social  and  domestic  phases  of 
society,  Iowa  is  ready  to  stand  in  a  row  of  the 
States  for  examination  with  no  fear  that  any  of 
her  sisters  will,  at  the  conclu.sion,  stand  nearer 
the  head  of  the  line  than  will  she." 

J.  F.  Kennedy,  M.D.,  Secretary  of  the  Iowa 
•  State  Board  of  Health,  in  a  letter  to  the  Voice 
for  Oct.  9,  1890:  "In  all  respects  our  people 
have  been  greatly  benefited.  Crime  and  im- 
morality have  greatly  decreased;  social  condi- 
tions have  improved;  homes  have  become  more 
home-like,  and  thrift  and  the  angels  of  hope 
have  gone  into  many  homes  where  the  blight 

'  I'olitital  I'roliibitioiiist  lor  ItibO.  pp.  h^-4. 


of  poverty  and  the  demon  of  despair  had  taken 
their  abode." 

Gershom  H.  Hill,  Superintendent  of  the  Iowa 
State  Hospital  for  the  Insane,  in  a  letter  to  the 
Voice  for  Oct.  9,  1890:  "The  Prohibitory  law 
...  has  proved  to  be  a  great  blessing  to  the 
citizens  of  our  commonwealth.  Criminal  stat- 
istics and  various  other  kinds  of  statistics,  some 
of  which  C(  uld  be  furnished  from  this  in.stitu- 
tion,  show  that  the  physical,  mental  and  social 
condition  of  the  people  in  Iowa  has  improved 
since  this  law  was  enacted." 

C.  F.  Williams.  Chaplain  of  the  State  Peni- 
tentiary at  Fort  Madison,  in  a  letter  to  the  Voice 
for  Oct.  9,  1890:  "The  tu.siness  of  making 
criminals  fell  off  at  a  remarkably  rapid  rate 
immediately  following  the  passage  of  the  Clark 
law.  Within  18  months  the  convict  population 
of  the  State  ran  down  from  about  650  to  600. 
We  have  two  prisons  in  Iowa,  one  at  Anamosa, 
the  other  here.  Our  Fort  Madison  prison  has 
the  contract  labor  system.  Our  '  lock-up  '  was 
over  400  when  the  Clark  law  pas.sed.  The 
number  ran  down  so  rapidly  that  the  Governor 
was  compelled  to  transfer  convicts  from  An- 
amosa to  this  prison  to  keep  the  contracts  going 
here.  By  the  redistricting  of  the  State,  then  in 
force,  43  counties  sent  prisoners  to  us  and  57 
counties  sent  to  Anamosa.  The  transfer  of  pris- 
oners being  both  inconvenient  and  inadequate 
the  State  Avas  redistricted,  giving  48  counties  to 
us  and  51  to  Anamosa.  But  this  readjustment 
was  soon  found  to  be  inadequate.  The  State 
was  again  redi.stricted,  six  more  counties  being 
transferred  to  us,  giving  us  54  counties  and 
Anamosa  45.  Within  a  year  the  history  of 
shrinkage  and  consequent  crippling  of  contracts 
repeated  itself,  and  a  third  time  the  State  had 
to  be  redistricted.  This  time  23  counties  were 
transferred,  giving  us  now  76  counties  and  leav- 
ing Anamo.sa  23.  And  this  total  transfer  of  34 
counties  from  the  territory  tributary  to  Anamosa 
to  our  territory  barely  sutfices  to  keep  our  prison 
population  up  to  what  it  averaged,  from  four 
more  than  half  the  number  of  counties,  before 
the  passage  of  the  Clark  law.  Or,  in  other 
words,  76  counties  do  no  better  business  in  the 
line  of  making  criminals  under  Prohibition 
partially  enforced  than  43  counties  did  before 
the  Clark  law  was  enacted.  And  this  is  only 
one  phase  of  the  situation.  The  truth  as  to  the 
reduction  of  crime  is  a  many-sided  truth,  every- 
where and  always  maintaining  the  unity  of 
fact  amid  the  diversity  of  aspect,  as  viewed 
from  different  standpoints.  Ninety-nine  county 
jails,  the  majority  of  them  empty  more  than 
half  the  time,  idle  Courts  and  reduced  expenses 
are  only  a  few  of  the  many  results  of  Prohibi- 
tion in  '  depressing  business '  of  this  particular  j 
kind  in  Iowa."  I 

W.  W.  Field,  Director  of  the  State  Agricul- 
tural Society,  in  a  letter  to  the  Voice  for  Oct. 
9,  1890  :  "  I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  no  liquor 
is  sold  and  used  in  the  State,  but  I  do  say  that 
the  quantity  is  small  compared  with  saloon 
times,  and  that  our  yoimg  men  are  not  tempted 
as  formerly,  and  are"  being  taught  that  to  drink 
is  to  lower"  themselves  in  "the  estimation  of  the 
best  society.  It  is  rare  now  to  see  a  drunken 
man  upon  our  streets,  and  at  oiu-  recent  State 
Fair,  where  there  were  upon  our  grounds  on«       , 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.J 


51^ 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


day  50,000  people,  not  a  man  was  seen  under 
Ibc  influence  of  liquor." 

James  P.  Flick,  Member  of  Congress  from 
Iowa,  in  a  letter  to  the  Voice  for  Oct.  9,  1890  : 
"I  was  Prosecuting  Attorney,  both  before 
and  several  years  after  the  enactment  of  the 
Prohibitory  law  in  Iowa.  There  were  eight 
counties  in  my  district,  and  I  know  that  after 
the  enactment  of  the  Prohibitory  law  crime  de- 
creased there  more  than  50  per  cent.  I  know 
this  to  be  a  fact,  for  the  fees  of  my  office  and 
the  Court  expenses  diminished  at  least  50  per 
cent." 

The  facts  for  particular  localities  are 
so  abundant  and  convincing  in  the  pre- 
ceding testimony  that  it  may  be  thought 
unnecessary  to  devote  any  more  space  to 
details.  But  the  results  in  several  charac- 
teristic cities  deserve  closer  inspection. 

Generally  speaking  the  law  has  been  best 
enforced  in  the  country  towns,  well  enforced  in 
the  interior  cities  and  least  acceptably  enforced 
in  those  cities  that  lie  on  the  Missouri  and 
Mississippi  rivers. 

Bes  Moines,  the  State  capital,  is  an  interior 
city,  in  which  the  saloons  were  numerous 
and  crime  was  rampant  and  costly  in  the  license 
days.  In  1887  the  Prohibitory  act  was  openly  de- 
fied, but  in  1888  it  was  fairly  executed.  There 
was  an  immediate  decrease  in  crime  and  the 
cost  of  public  administration.  The  expenses  of 
the  county,  which  were  above  $100,000  in  1887, 
fell  to  $30,000  in  1888.  '  In  the  county  as  a 
whole  the  criminal  expenses  failed  to  keep  pace 
with  the  growth  of  the  city  of  Des  Moines  ; 
while  in  the  other  counties  embraced  in  the 
same  Congressional  District  the  criminal  ex- 
penses dropped  from  an  average  of  $27,000  in 
1881  and  1883  to  $11,000  in  1888  and  1889.^^ 

Sioux  City  is  a  prominent  river  city  and  was 
formerly  one  of  the  most  notorious  communi- 
ties of  the  West.  It  was  dominated  by  the 
rum  influence  and  greeted  the  Prohibitory  law 
with  utter  scorn.  From  the  beginning  it  was 
understood  that  any  attempt  to  enforce  the  act 
there  would  imperil  both  the  interests  and  the 
life  of  the  person  undertaking  it;  and  no  one 
dared  attack  the  lawless  traffic  until  Rev. 
George  C.  Haddock  and  Mr.  D.  W.  Wood 
began  their  memorable  work  in  1886.  After 
the  assas.sination  of  Haddock  (August,  1886) 
there  began  a  change  for  the  better.  The  re- 
sults of  enforcement  were  thus  described  in  a 
report  from  Sioux  City  printed  in  the  loira 
State  RecjiHter  for  IMarch  22,  1889:  "The  re- 
port of  the  Grand  Jury,  made  last  evening, 
showed  only  two  indictments,  and  one  of  these 
was  against  a  young  man  named  Petty  for  se- 
duction. This  is  the  smallest  number  of  in- 
dictmer.ts  returned  by  any  Grand  Jury  in 
Woodbury  County  in  10  years,  and  may  be 
taken  as  an  index  of  the  results  of  the  workings 
of  the  Prohiliitory  law.  Two  j-ears  ago  the 
County  Jail  was  crowded  to  overflowing  and 
the  criminal  docket  lumbered  up  with  untried 
cases.     Now  the  jail  is  almost  vacant  and  the 

>  Political  Prohibitionist  for  1839,  p.  55. 
2  On  the  authority  of  Richard  Price,  State  Senator  from 
the  ItJth  District,  in  a  letter  in  the  Voice,  Oct.  9, 1890. 


Sheriff's  deputies  are  idle.  There  has  not  been 
a  murder  in  the  city  since  Dr.  Haddock  was 
killed  on  the  night  of  Aug.  3,  1886.'"  The 
liquor-sellers  and  desperate  characters  were 
forced  to  leave  Sioux  City.  They  took  refuge 
in  Nebraska,  on  the  opposite  side  of  the  Mis- 
souri river,  and  built  up  there  two  hamlets, 
Covington  and  Stanton.  Unable  to  longer  ply 
their  trade  safely  in  the  city  that  they  had 
absolutely  ruled  they  sought  the  protection  of 
the  neighboring  High  License  State  (to  which 
each  of  them  paid  a  yearly  license  fee  of  $800), 
surrounded  themselves  with  a  choice  company 
of  prostitutes,  gamblers,  thieves  and  other  in- 
dispensable wretches,  connected  their  towns 
with  Sioux  City  by  a  pontoon  bridge  and  con- 
tinued to  prey  upon  the  morals  and  substance 
of  that  community.* 

In  Keokuk,  also  a  river  city,  the  law  has  been 
enforced  at  times  and  at  times  ignored.  For 
example,  in  July  and  August  of  1886  and  1887, 
the  saloons  were  unmolested,  and  the  arrests  for 
drunkenness  in  those  months  were,  respectively: 
1886,  92;  1887,  120.  But  in  July  and  August  of 
1888  the  grogshops  were  closed  and  the  arrests 
for  drunkenness  dropped  to  28.  (See  the  Voice, 
Oct.  18,  1888.) 

Davenport  is  a  city  in  which  violators  have 
been  most  persistent  and  successful.  It  will  be 
seen,  however,  from  the  record  of  arrests  for 
drunkenness  and  disorderly  conduct  there  dur- 
ing the  "original  package"  months  of  1890, 
that  even  poorly  enforced  Prohibition  bears 
favorable  comparison  with  any  system  of  liquor 
legalization.  In  those  months  (May,  June,  July 
and  August)  it  was  lawful  to  sell  liquor  under 
the  pretense  that  it  had  been  brought  from 
another  State  and  was  offered  in  the  original 
packages,  and  the  arrests  for  "  drunk  and  dis- 
orderly "  numbered  131 ;  arrests  for  same  offenses 
in  same  months  of  1889,  104;  in  January, 
February,  March  and  April  of  1890,  68.* 

Most  of  the  other  large  towns  of  Iowa,  if  the 
facts  could  be  procured,  would  afford  com- 
parisons quite  as  instructive  as  those  for  Daven- 
port. Osage  is  one  of  the  places  for  which  in- 
formation has  been  secured  :  four  "original 
package  "  houses  were  started  there  in  June  and 
ran  until  Aug.  12;  arrests  for  "drunk  and  dis- 
orderly" in  the  three  months,  23;  same  mouths 
of  1889,  9  ;  March,  April  and  May  of  1890,  2, 
Vinton  had  six  "original  package"  saloons, 
two  of  which  began  selling  in  May  and  the 
others  later,  and  on  Aug.  8  all  were  shut ; 
"drunks  and  disorderlies"  in  the  four  months, 
40;  same  months  of  1889,  4;  January,  February 
March  and  April  of  1890,  6.  In'  Lyons  the 
Prohibitory  law,  as  in  Davenport,  had  not  been 
enforced,  and  for  some  time  there  had  been  open 
saloons.  These  places,  under  the  quasi-legal- 
ization  given  by  the  Supreme  Court  decision, 
sold  without  caution  from  May  to  August  of 
1890,  and  the  consequence  was  65  arrests  for 
drunkenness  and  disorderly  conduct  in  these 
months ;  arrests  for  the  same  offenses  in  Janu- 


s' Political  Prohibitioniet  for  1889,  p.  55. 

*  At  the  beginning  of  1890  there  were  31  houses  in  the 
town  of  Stanton,  Neb.,  of  which  16  were  liquor-saloons. 
(See  the  Voice,  Jan.  30,  1890.) 

6  See  the  Voice,  Oct.  16, 1890. 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


518 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


ary,  February,  March  and  April  of  the  same 
year,  32.  In  Osceola  there  were  16  "drunks 
and  disorderlies"  in  the  "original  package" 
months,  7  in  the  same  months  of  1889  and  9 
in  the  four  preceding  mouths  of  1890." 

Kansas   and   Iowa  Covipared   nn'ih   No- 
hrasha,  Missouri  and  Minnesota. 

The  opponents  of  State  Prohibition 
have  so  sturdily  declared  that  it  is 
a  comparative  failure,  and  that  High 
License  and  Local  Option  act  more 
beneficially,  that  it  is  important, 
wherever  possible,  to  contrast  the 
practical  workings  of  these  policies. 
Conditions  in  the  West  supply  a  basis 
of  comparison  as  satisfactory  as  can 
be  desired.  Kansas,  Iowa,  Nebraska, 
Missouri  and  Minnesota  are  sister  States ; 
all  of  them  are  thriving  commonwealths, 
with  rapidly  increasing  populations, 
growing  cities  and  a  predominating  agri- 
cultural interest.  The  first  two  have 
been  under  complete  Prohibition  for  a 
number  of  years— Kansas  since  1881  and 
Iowa  since  1885 ;  the  last  three  have  had 
rigid  High  License  and  Local  Option 
laws — Nebraska  since  1881  (minimum 
fee  for  the  larger  cities,  -$1,000),  Mis- 
souri since  1881  (fees  ranging  from  $550 
up)  and  Minnesota  since  1887  (minimum 
fee  for  the  large  cities,  $1,000). 

The  following  tables  for  the  throe 
High  License  States  are  compiled  from 
the  United  States  Internal  Eeveiiue 
reports. 

State  of  Nebraska: 


Years. 

Retail 
Deal- 
ers.' 

Whole- 
sale 
Deal- 

ERS.2 

Distil- 
leries 
Oper- 
ated. 

Brew- 
ers. 

To- 

TAXS. 

1881 

1882 

1883 

1884 

18858 

1886 

1387 

1888 

18S9 

9(53 
1,026 
1,047 
1,5.56 
2,393 
3,035 
3,423 
2.833 
3,534 

27 

48 

47 

83 

111 

148 

156 

183 

173 

o 

1 
1 
1 

o 
o 

6 
3 
1 

25 
29 
39 

m 

30 
54 
45 
46 
59 

1,016 
1,104 
1,134 
1,675 
2..536 
3.239 
3,630 
3,065 
3,767 

'Including  "retail  liquor-dealers  [distilled]"  and 
"  retail  dealers'  in  malt  liquors."  "^  Including  "  wholesale 
liquDv-dealers  [distilled!  "  and  "  wholesale  dealers  in  malt 
liquors."  =  Including  Dakota  Territory  for  this  and  suc- 
ceeding years. 

Since  the  addition  of  Dakota  Territory  to  the  Nebraska 
Internal  Revenue  district  in  18S"i  cauijed  an  increase  in 
the  number  of  "  liquor-dealers,"  etc.,  for  which  Nebraska 
was  not  wholly  responsible,  comparisons  will  be  made 
between  1885  and  1889. 

Population  of  Nebraska  in  1885  {Sfate  Censvs),  740,- 
645,'  population  of  Dakota  Territory  in  WSfi  (Territorial 
Census),  ■il5,G10—a(fgregafe  for  Nebraska  and  Dakota, 
1,156,255/  ratio  between  total  number  of  llquor-dtalers 

1  The  Voice,  Oct.  16, 1390. 


etc.,  and  aggregate  vopiilation,  in  1885, 1  to  456.  Popvla- 
tiu/i.  of  Nebraska  i/f  1890,  1,058.910;  Dakota  (including 
North  and  South  Dakota),  511,627— aggregate  for  Ne- 
braska and  Dakota,  1,570,437;  ratio  between  total 
'■'■liquor-dealers,^''  etc.,  and  aggregate  population  in 
18ci9  (Census  O/1890).  1  to  417. 

N.  B.— Nebraska'' s  share  of  this  ratio  should  un- 
doubtedly be  larger  than  1  to  417  in  1890,  because  Da- 
kota since  1885  has  shown  a  much  ^tro7iger  tendency 
toward  re}rressing  lirjuor-selling  than  Nebraska  has 
manifested.  There  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  that 
the  number  of  liquor-dealers,  etc..  in  Nebraska  in  ratio 
to  the  total  ■population  sliowed  an  actual  increase  since 
the  High  License  law  took  effect. 


Years. 


1881 
1882 
1883 
1884 
1885 
1886 
1887 
1888 
1889 


Distilled 

Malt 

Liquors 

LiCJUORS 

Produced. 

Produced. 

Galls. 

Barrels. 

1,817,091 

46,105 

1,226,382 

54,053 

1,246.447 

56,361 

1,469,643 

94,811 

2,153.357 

108,445 

1,607.244 

133,315 

2,298,260 

163.474 

2,897  239 

168,379 

2,174-137 

174,649 

>  Including  Dakota  Territory  since  Aug.  20,  1883. 

Per  capita  production  of  distilled  spirits  i7i  Nebraska 
and  Dakota  in  1883  (on  the  basis  of  the  State  and  Ter- 
ritorial Censuses  of  1885),  1.08  gallon  ;  in  1889  (Census  of 
1890),  1.39  gallon.  Per  capita  jrroduction  of  malt 
liquors  in  Nebraska,  and  Dakota  in  1883  (Census  of 
1^5),  reckoning  Zl  gallons  to  the  barrel  of  beer,l.h\ 
gallon;  in.  188'J  (Census  0/1890),  3.45  gallons. 

N.  B. —  The  increase  in  the  produci'wn  of  liquors  icas 
almost  entirely  in  the  State  of  Neljraska.'  In,facr,  Da- 
kota did  not  distill  a  gallon  of  spirits  in  1883  and  has 
not  distilled  any  since  then. 

State  of  Missonri: 


Years. 


1881 . . 
1882.. 
1883.. 
1884.. 
1885.. 
1886.. 
1887.. 
1888.. 
1889.. 


Retail   i 
Deal- 
ers.' 


6,583 
7,116 

7,179 
6,283 
6,976 
6,517 
6,9,52 
5,741 
5,709 


Whole- 
sale 
Deal- 
ers.2 


253 

423 
323 
268 
322 
280 
330 
332 
271 


Distill- 
eries Op- 
erated. 


135 

73 
1^.3 
86 
71 
68 
02 
64 
79 


Brew- 

To- 

ers. 

tals. 

66 

7,036 

59 

7.669 

74 

7,998 

57 

6,694 

54 

7,423 

59 

6,930 

66 

7,410 

57 

6.194 

62 

6,121 

'  Including  "retail  liquor-dealers  [distilled]  "  and  " re- 
tail dealers  in  malt  liquors."  -Including  "wholesale 
liquor-dealers  [distilled]  "  and  "wholesale  dealers  in  malt 
li(ju()rs." 

Population  in  1880,  3,168,-380;  ratio  between  total 
9iu'mber  of  liquor-dealers,  etc.,  in  18't'il  and  popiilution 
(Census  r'>'18S0),  1  to  308.  Population  in  1890,  2,679,184; 
ratio  in  1889  (Census  O/1890),  1  to  438. 


Years. 

Distilled 

Liquors 

Produced. 

Malt 

Liquors 

I'roduced. 

Barrels. 

838.764 
1,019.873 
l,(r0.446 
1,116.829 
1.144.325 
1.203.243 
1.420,314 
l,.-62..528 
1,669,304 

1881 

Galls. 

3.381.719 

2.7.-)6.346 
3,21 0.8W 
3.289.313 
2,912.840 
3,310.277 
3,4.39.366 
3,1.53.896 
3,459,855 

1882 

1883.. 

18.S4 

1885 

1S8(!..    .    . 

1887 

1888 

1889 

Per  capita  production  of  distilled  Hnuors  in  1881 
(Cen.ms  o/' 1880),  1.1  gallon;  in  1889  (Census  o./'1890), 
O.'.yZ  gallon.  Per  capita  jiroduction  of  malt  liquors  in 
18.81  (Census  o/"]880),  reckoning  .31  gallons  to  the  barrel 
of  beer,  11.95  gallons;  in  1889  (Census  of  18'M),n.W 
gallons. 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


519 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


State  of  Minnesota ; 


Years. 

Retail 
Deal- 
ers. 1 

Whole- 
sale 
Deal- 

ERS.- 

Distill- 
eries Op- 
erated. 

Brew- 
ers. 

To- 
tals. 

1887.. 
1888.. 
1889.. 

4.28G 
3,264 
2,749 

149 
170 
140 

"s 

146 
111 

lie 

4,581 
3,551 
3,007 

1  Inclurtina:  "retail  liquor-dealers  [flistiTed]  "  and  "re- 
tail dealers  in  malt  liquors."  2  ineludinc;  "wliolesale 
liquor-dealers  [distilled]  "  and  "wliolesale  dealers  iu  malt 
liquors." 

Population  in  1885  (State  Census).  1,117.798 ;  ratio 
between  total  liquor-dealers,  etc..  in  1887  and  population 
(on  the  basis  of  the  Census  r)/"1885),  1  to  244.  Population 
in  1890,  1,301,826,-  ratio  in  1889  (Census  of  1890),  1  to  433. 


Years. 

Distilled 

Liquors 

Produced. 

Malt 

Liquors 

Produced. 

Barrels. 

331,480 
306,473 
314,073 

1887 

Galls. 
1,140,661 

1888 

1889 

Per  capita  production  of  distilled  liquors  in  1887, 
nothing;  in  1889  (Census 'of  'i^^O').  0.87  (/allon.  Per 
capita  production  of  malt  liquors  in  1887  (Census  of 
1885),  reckoning  31  gallons  to  the  barrel  of  beer.  9.19 
gallons;  in  1889  (C««s«/s  0/ 1890),  7.48  gallons. 

Of  course  these  figures  are  not  conclu- 
sive as  to  the  effect  of  the  High  License 
laws  upon  the  extent  of  the  drink  traffic 
and  the  consumption  of  liquors.  But 
they  indicate,  in  each  State,  a  much 
greater  traffic  in  and  consumption  of 
liquors  than  in  either  Kansas  or  Iowa. 
The  following  are  the  comparative 
figures : 


Ratio  between 

Per  Capita 

t-EU  Capita 

'•  Liquor-Deal- 

Produc- 

Produc- 

States. 

ers,"  etc.,  and 

tion  OF 

tion  OP 

Total  Popula- 

Distilled 

Malt 

tion. 

Liquors. 

Liquorh. 
Galls. 

Galls. 

Kansas  : 

1880 

1  to     49fi 

0.043 

1.004 

1889 

1  to  1,033 

0.0005 

0.18 

lo'va  : 

1883 

1  to     292 

2.64 

5.10 

1889 

1  to     613 

Inflnitesim'l 

1.08 

Nebraska:' 

18S3 

1.08 

1 .51 

1885 

1  to     456 

1889 

1  to     417 

1.39 

3.45 

3Ii-ssouri: 

1881 

1  to     308 

1.1 

11.95 

1889 

1  to     438 

0.92 

19.32 

Minnesota: 

lS-i7 

1  to     244 

Nothins 

9.19 

1889 

1  to     433 

0.87 

7.48 

'  Including  Dakota  Territory. 

For  all  the  States  tlie  figures  of  so- 
called  "•  liquor-dealers "  are  of  less  im- 
portance than  those  of  liquors  produced. 
The  number  of  '"  liquor-dealers "  given 
in  the  United  States  Internal  Revenue 
reports,  as  we  have  repeatedly  pointed  out 
(see  especially  p.  505),  include  druggists 
and  others  selling  for  excepted  purposes, 
and  for  other  reasons  are  unreliable.    But 


the  quantity  of  liquor  produced,  in  a 
large  State,  indicates  to  a  considerable 
extent  whether  there  is  a  formidable 
retail  liquor  traffic  in  that  State.  This 
is  particularly  true  for  malt  liquors.  The 
bulkiness  of  beer  renders  its  shipment 
costly,  and  in  a  State  where  there  is  no 
considerable  local  supply  of  this  article 
saloons  will  be  relatively  few  in  number — 
at  least  in  a  country  where  beer  is  a 
popular  beverage,  as  in  the  United 
States.  Comparison  of  the  figures  under 
the  head  "  Per  Capita  Production  of  Malt 
Liquors"  show  that  the  Prohibition 
States  have  an  immense  advantage  over 
the  High  License  States. 

Criminal  and  like  statistics  for  Ne- 
braska, Missouri  and  Minnesota  are  in  all 
respects  infinitely  less  encouraging  than 
those  for  Kansas  and  Iowa.  It  is  true 
the  numerous  towns  and  counties  that 
have  Local  Option  Proliibition  are  toler- 
ably free  from  the  evils  of  drink ;  but 
they  are  side  by  side  with  license  locali- 
ties and  license  territory,  the  good  re- 
sults are  modified  and  the  general  situa- 
tion is  dismal.  Local  Prohibition  is  the 
only  redeeming  feature  in  these  States : 
wherever  High  License  is  the  accepted 
policy  conditions  are  as  bad  as  iu  any  low 
license  State,  and  frequently  are  even 
worse.  Am})le  proof  of  this  assertion 
will  be  found  in  the  article  on  High 
LiCEXSE.  Indeed,  the  facts  given  in 
that  article  for  Nebraska,  Missouri  and 
Minnesota,  when  contrasted  with  the 
Kansas  and  Iowa  facts,  should  be  con- 
vincing. It  will  be  sufficient  to  present 
a  few  additional  particulars  of  the  most 
interesting  character. 

In  1890" the  County  Judges  of  21  of 
the  88  Nebraska  counties  wrote  letters 
to  the  Voice  declaring  that  in  view  of 
the  appalling  ju'evalence  of  crime,  etc., 
caused  by  the  license  system  of  the  State, 
they  would  emphatically  advise  the 
citizens  to  vote  for  the  Prohibitoi'v  Con- 
stitutional Amendment  then  pending.^ 
"  Last  year,"  said  Judge  W.  E.  Goodhue 
of  Thayer  County,  "of  about  11,500  fines 
that  passed  through  my  hands  in  seven 
months  all  but  one  dollar  could  be  traced 
to  the  use  or  sale  of  liquor.  I  think  the 
closing  of  the  saloons  would  tend  materi- 
ally to  diminish  crime  and  to  improve 
the  social  and  financial  condition  of  the 

1  The  Voice,  Sept.  11, 1890. 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


520 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


masses.     I  advise  everybody  to  vote  for 
l^rohibition."     "  It  has  been  my  experi- 
ence,"   Avrote    Judge    J.    G.    Downs  of 
Thurston  County,  "that  at  least  three- 
fourths  of  the  crimes  that  come  before 
the  Nebraska  Courts  may  be  traced  di- 
rectly or   indirectly  to  the  saloons  as  a 
cause."     "After  an  experience   of   four 
years  of  Prohibition  in  Kansas,"  said  F. 
M.    Wolcott,   Judge   of  Cherry  County, 
"I  unhesitatingly  advise  the  citizens  of 
Nebraska    to    support    the    Prohibitory 
Amendment."       Such    testimonies    and 
counsels   as  these,  concurred  in  by  the 
Judges  of  one-fourth  of  the  counties,  and 
collected   without   special   effort   as  the 
result  of  a  casual  and  unofficial  inquiry — 
volunteered  at  a  time  when  political  pas- 
sions ran   high  and  when  men  holding 
elective   offices    and   natui'ally  coveting 
promotion  might  well  iiave  hesitated  to 
respond  to  a  newsj)aper  circular, — must 
disarm    those    who    assert    that     High 
License    has    been    of    general   benefit. 
Besides   the   Judges,   the  County  Prose- 
cuting Attorneys  of  nine  other  counties 
— making   30   counties  in   all,  or  more 
than    one-third — wrote    similar    letters. 
"  I  have  served  in  the  position  of  Prose- 
cuting Attorney  for  six  years  in  Pennsyl- 
vania  and  two   years   in  Nebraska,  and 
was   Mayor  of  a  city  two  years,"  wrote 
M.  B.  Welch,  Prosecuting  Attorney  for 
Blaine  County ;  "  I  have   pi'epared   over 
2,500  indictments  and  am  convinced  that 
nearly  nine-tenths  of  the  criminal   cases 
are   directly   or   indirectly   traceable  to 
strong  drink.     I  advise  citizens   of   Ne- 
braska   to    vote    for  Prohibition    every 
time."     (Compare  these  expressions,  pro- 
cured  under    circumstances   not   at   all 
favorable  to  displaying  in  a  representa- 
tive way  the  opinions  of  the  Judges  and 
Prosecutors,  Avith  the  extraordinary  testi- 
mony already  cited,   from   the   Probate 
Judges  of  Kansas  and  the  District  Judges 
and  County  Attorneys  of  Iowa.) 

An  attempt  has  been  made  to  show, 
from  the  penitentiary  statistics  of  Kan- 
sas and  Nebraska,  that  the  number  of 
graver  crimes  is  proportionately  larger 
under  Prohibition  than  under  High 
License.  The  saloon's  defenders  have 
exhibited  much  recklessness  and  dis- 
honesty in  this  undertaking.  The  fol- 
lowing are  the  official  penitentiary 
figures  for  the  two  States,  as  presented 
in  the  Voice  for  Dec.  26,  18S9 : 


Nebras] 

iA. 

Kansas. 

Prison- 

Prison- 

Years. 

ers  in 
Peni- 
ten- 
tiary. 

Popula- 
tion. 

Years. 

ers  m 
Peni- 
ten- 
tiary. 

Popula- 
tion. 

c 
o 

o  J 

1870 
1875 
1880 
1881 

27 

59 

194 

190 

122,993 
257,747 
452,402 

^     1870 
g  J  1875 

^     1880 

1-1 

218 
633 

364,399 
996,096 

'1882 

222 

Oi 

18S8 

214 

. 

r 

C 

1884 

274 

H 

■n 

1885 

329 

740,645 

1885 

673 

1,268,530 

^ 

lH8(i 

351 

Si  J 

j: 

1887 

332 

-C 

1887 

895 

1888 

345 

s~. 

1888 

898 

S 

1889 

376 

1,058,9101 

u. 

1889 

801 

1,427,096' 

»  Census  of  1890. 

Nebraslca:  Ratio  of  Penitentiary  prisoners  to  popu- 
lation in  1870,  1  to  4,!5.55,-  in  1875,  1  to  4,.369,-  in  1880,  the 
last  Census  year  before  High  License  took  effect,  1  to 
2,.S.32,-  in  1885.  1  to  2,251,-  iw  1889  (o«,  the  basis  of  the 
Census  of  1890),  1  to  2.816. 

Kansas:  Ratio  in  1870,  1  to  1,671,*  in  1880,  the  last 
Census  year  before  Prohibition  took  effect.  1  to  1,574,*  in 
1885,  1  to  1,885  ,•  in,  1889  (on  the  basis  of  the  Census  of 
1890),  1  to  1,657. 

In  Nebraska,  therefore,  the  propor- 
tionate number  of  convicts  in  the  Peni- 
tentiary was  much  greater  under  High 
License  in  1889  than  under  low  license 
in  1870  or  1875,  while  in  Kansas  there 
were  comparatively  fewer  penitentiary 
convicts  under  Prohibition  in  1889  than 
there  were  under  license  in  1880.  Kan- 
sas, under  license,  had  a  far  larger  num- 
ber of  penitentary  convicts  in  ratio  to 
the  population  than  Nebraska  had 
in  the  same  period.  This  was  prob- 
ably due  to  tlie  fact  that  Kansas 
was  filled  with  lawless  people  in  those 
days,  sharing  the  exceedingly  bad  repu- 
tation of  the  States  and  Territories  of  the 
Southwest  and  receiving  many  of  the 
desperate  criminals  of  Texas,  Indian 
Territory,  Missouri  and  Arkansas,  while 
Nebraska  enjoyed  better  conditions.  Re- 
membering the  remarkable  differences  of 
former  years,  it  is  not  strange  if  Kansas 
has  continued  to  show  a  larger  j^ercentage 
of  penitentiary  crime  than  Nebraska. 
Kansas's  bad  neighbors  have  not  im- 
proved in  recent  years.  The  vital  fact 
is  that  in  the  period  in  which  the  Pro- 
hibitory law  has  been  best  enforced  in 
the  large  cities  of  Kansas  (since  188G) 
there  has  been  an  actual  decrease  in  the 
number  of  convicts.  Comparisons  will 
be  very  much  fairer  if  made  between 
Nebraska  and  Iowa,  for  circumstances 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


521 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


in  these  two  commonwealths  were  prac- 
tically the  same  up  to  the  time  of  the 
trial  of  Prohibition  in  the  latter.  Here 
are  official  penitentiary  returns  for  the 
essential  years: 


cities,   printed    since    that    article   was 
completed,  are  worthy  of  reproduction : ' 


Nebkaska. 

Iowa. 

Years. 

Prison- 
ers in 
Peni- 
ten- 
tiary. 

Popula- 
tion. 

Years. 

Prison- 
ers in 
Peni- 
ten- 
tiaries. 

Popula- 
tion. 

1880«. 
1885.. 
1886.. 
1887.. 
1888.. 
1889.. 

194 
329 
351 
332 
345 
376 

452,402 
740,645 

1,058,9102 

18853. 
1886.. 

1887.. 
1888.. 

6;i4 
653 
615 
532 

1,753,980 
1,911,896» 

I  Last  Census  year  before  High  License  took  eflfect. 
*  Census  of  1890.  ^  Year  in  which  Prohibition  took  effect. 

Nebraska:  Ratio  in  1880,  1  to  2,332 ,■  i;i  1885,  1  <o 2,251; 
in  1889  (C«/J.f '/so/ 1890),  1  (lo  2,816. 

Iowa:  Ratio  in  1885,  1  <6i  2,767;  dw  1888  {Cevsui  of 
1890),  1  to  3,594. 

This  subject  of  penitentiary  crime, 
however,  is  the  least  important  thing  to 
be  studied  in  looking  at  the  results  of 
any  system  of  liquor  legislation.  Under 
the  head  of  penitentiary  offenses  fall 
various  forms  of  premeditated  crime — 
like  burglary,  forgery,  etc. — which,  Avhile 
always  fostered  by  the  saloon,  will  not 
necessarily  disappear — or  will  disappear 
only  gradually — with  the  abolition  of  the 
grogshops.  The  ordinary  services  of  the 
liolice  and  the  Courts,  and  by  far  the 
greater  part  of  public  expenditures  for 
corrective  objects,  are  occasioned  by  the 
lower  and  more  frequent  offenses;  and 
these  offenses,  as  we  have  seen,  spring 
almost  entirely  from  the  legalized  drink- 
shops  and  are  as  rare  under  Prohibition 
in  Kansas  and  Iowa  as  they  are  numerous 
wherever  High  License  exists.  We  have 
devoted  considerable  space  to  the  subject 
because  the  comparative  penitentiary 
figures  for  Nebraska  and  Kansas  are 
really  the  only  criminal  statistics  upon 
which  an  argument  in  favor  of  High  Li- 
cense in  the  former  State  and  against 
Prohibition  in  the  latter  has  been 
founded.  It  is  a  dishonest  and  a  child- 
ish argument,  worthy  of  the  bar- 
room ])ut  not  of  any  intelligent  person 
who  seeks  to  convince  a  dispassionate 
public. 

In  addition  to  the  details  given  in 
High  License  for  particular  cities  of 
Nebraska,  Minnesota  and  Missouri,  the 
following  police  returns  for  Minnesota 


Cities  and 
Yeaks. 


Minneapolis: 

1886 

1887 

1888 

1889 

St.  Paul: 

1886 

1887 

1888 

1889 

Stilhvater: 

1886 

1887 

1888 

1889 

Winona: 

1886 

1887 

1888 

1889 : 


Arrests 

License 
Fees. 

Numbers 

OF 

Saloons. 

Total 
Arrests. 

FOR 

Drunk 

AND 

Disor- 
derly. 

$   500 

500 

1.000 

1,000 

.334 
a34 
230 
244 

3.903 
5.463 
6.048 
6,132 

2.333 
3.448 
3,379 
3,398 

%    100 

100 

1,000 

1,000 

700 
400 
386 

4,855 
7.540 
6,802 
6,888 

2,565 
3.976 
3,493 
3,447 

S    500 
1.000 
1,000 
1,000 

43 

48 
30 
34 

683 
541 
576 
615 

2171 
181  1, 

166  r 

214  J 

$    100 

100 

1,000 

1,000 

93 

107 

37 

39 

485 
340 
596 
637 

.354 
213 
372 
303 

'  Arrests  for  drunkenness,  not  including  disorderly  con- 
duct. 

Afinneapolis.— The  police  vear  in  1880,  1887  and  1888 
ended  with  iMarch  31;  inlRSO'with  Dec.  31.  The  license 
year  in  1886  and  1887  ended  with  May  1;  in  1888  and  1889 
with  July  1.  Consequently  the  arrests  under  $.500  license 
cover  27  months  and  under  $1,000  license  18  months. 
Equating  the  total  arrests  we  find  that  there  was  an  an- 
nual average  under  S500  license  of  4,8.35  and  under  |;1.000 
license  of  7,112;  equating  the  arrests  for  "  drunk  and  dis- 
orderly "  these  arrests  averaged  2,945  annually  under  $500 
license  and  3.9.55  under  $1,000  license. 

St.  Pat/L— The  police  year  for  1886  began  with  Oct.  31 
and  for  1887,  1888  and  1889  with  Dec.  31.  The  license  year 
began  with  I)ec.  31  each  year.    Therefore  the  arrests  as 

fiven  in  the  table  are  to  be  distributed  as  follows:  under 
100  license,  26  months;  under  $1,000  license,  24  months. 
Yearly  average  of  total  arrests  under  $100  license.  5,724; 
under  $1,000,  0,875.  Yearly  average  of  "  drunks  and  dis- 
orderlies" under  $100  license,  .3,019;  under  $1,000  license, 
3,470. 

Stillwater. — The  figures  for  this  city  are  of  less  inter-  ■ 
est.    The  change  from  $500  to  $1,000  license  was  followed 
by  a  temporary  decrease  in  the  number  of  arregts  and  then 
a  rising  tendency  was  again  shown. 

Winona. — Police  year  ended  with  Dec.  31  each  year; 
license  3'ear  with  March  31 ;  consequently  the  arrests 
given  in  the  table  include  27  months  under  $100  license 
and  21  months  under  $1,000  license.  Yearly  average  of 
total  arrests  under  $100  license,  ■ViS;  under  $1,000  license, 
619.  Yearly  average  of  "  drunks  and  disorderlie.s,"  293 
under  $100  license  and  330  under  $1,000  license. 

Other  Experiments  in  State  Prohibit io7t. 

The  extended  review  that  has  been 
made  of  the  results  in  Maine,  Kansas 
and  Iowa  is  called  for  by  the  crucial  im- 
portance of  these  three  States.  In  ex- 
isting circumstances  the  decision  of  the 
question  whether  State  Prohibition  has 
Avholesome  practical  effects  if  executed 
with  tolerable  fairness  rests  mainly  upon 
the  conclusions  coming  from  a  thorough 
study  of  Maine,  Kansas  and  Iowa  expe- 
rience; for  these  are  the  only  States  in 


1  See  the  Voice,  Oct.  5,  1890. 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


whicli  there  lias  been  anything  like  an 
adequate  and  a  prolonged  trial  of  the 
policy  throughout  a  broad  extent  of 
territory  embracing  considerable  cities 
and  peopled  by  enterprising  classes  of 
citizens.  In  every  other  State  that  has 
tried  Prohibition  some  or  all  of  tlie 
elements  essential  to  significant  results 
have  been  lacking ;  generally  the  enforce- 
ment legislation  has  been  defective;  in 
most  instances  even  these  feeble  measures 
have  lasced  for  only  two  or  three  years; 
discriminations  have  been  made  per- 
mitting the  sale  of  Avine  and  beer  and 
the  manufacture  of  these  and  other 
liquors;  political  favor  has  rarely  been 
exhibited  and  nearly  always  there  has 
been  a  general  disposition  to  conspire 
for  the  law's  nullification  and  repeal. 
Nevertheless  it  will  be  seen  that  good 
has  been  done  by  even  very  imperfect  and 
transitory  Prohibition  systems  —  good 
proportioned  to  the  degree  of  the  en- 
forcement,— and  that  conditions  under 
the  weakest  Prohibitory  laws  have  been 
decidedly  better,  from  the  temperance 
and  anti-liquor  traffic  point  of  view, 
than  under  any  method  of  license  in  the 
same  States. 

Vermont. — At  first  glance  this  State 
seems  to  fall  in  the  same  class  with  Maine, 
Kansas  and  Iowa.  Its  Prohibitory  law 
was  passed  in  1852  and  has  never  been 
repealed;  therefore  Vermont  has  had 
continuous  Prohibition  longer  than  any 
other  State,  not  excepting  Maine — for  in 
Maine  there  has  been  an  interval  of 
license  (1857-8).  Besides,  the  statute 
has  had  the  general  support  of  the  })eo- 
ple  and  has  encountered  little  opposition 
from  public  men.  But  Vermont  is  not 
one  of  the  representative  States.  Its 
commercial  interests  are  not  in  a  con- 
spicuous way  "  diversified,"  its  towns  are 
relatively  few  and  small,  its  citizens  are 
conservative  and  its  population  does  not 
show  a  characteristic  commingling  of 
the  varied  elements  of  American  life. 
Thus  the  results  of  Prohibition  in  Ver- 
mont are  not  decisive  because  the  cir- 
cumstances do  not  bear  the  tests  that  are 
naturally  applied. 

The  last  year  for  which  Vermont  was 
separately  classified  in  the  Internal 
Revenue  reports  is  1887.  The  following 
table  gives  the  number  of  payers  of 
United  States  special  liquor   taxes   and 


the  quantity   of  liquor   produced   from 
1880  to  1887,  inclusive : 


Years. 

Fktail 

l-i-.U,- 
EUS.' 

Whole- 
sale 
Deal- 

EIIS." 

Distilled 
Liquor 

I'RO- 
DUCEU.S 

Malt  Li- 
quor Pro- 

DUCED.3 

1880 

18.S1 

1882 

1883 

18*1 

1885 

1886 

1887 

595 

473 
476 
516 
486 
485 
.565 
498 

10 

15 

8 

13 

13 

9 

8 

9 

Galls. 

1,400 
2.335 
1.1.52 
602 
937 
322 
597 
863 

Barrels. 
None 

1  IncliidiriEj  "  retail  liquor-dealers  [distilled]  "  and  "  re- 
tail dealers  ill  malt  liquors."  ^lucludinE^  "wjiolesale  liquor- 
dealers  [distilled]"  and  "wholesale  dealers  in  malt 
liquors."  3  See  the  Internal  Revenue  report  for  1889, 
pp.  306-9. 

The  insignificant  production  of 
liquors  proves  that  the  manufacturing 
branch  of  the  traffic  is  unworthy  of 
notice:  probably  all  the  distilled  liquor 
made  in  Vermont  is  for  the  excepted 
purposes.  The  number  of  persons  pay- 
ing retailers'  and  wholesalers'  sj)ecial 
taxes  varies  slightly  from  year  to  year ; 
even  the  Federal  returns  demonstrate 
that  the  traffic  is  not  increasing.  The 
average  number  of  such  payers  for  the 
eight  years  is  522.  The  population  has 
been  practically  unchanged  since  1880, 
and  therefore,  reckoning  on  the  basis  of 
the  population  in  1880,  there  was,  on  the 
average  during  this  period,  one  special 
tax-payer  for  each  G37  of  the  population. 
Vermont's  showing  is  still  more  credit- 
able when  it  is  remembered  that  some  of 
the  so-called  "liquor-dealers"  were 
"Town  j\gents "  selling  for  medicinal 
and  similar  purposes  exclusively,  and 
that  many  of  the  others  were  undoubt- 
edly i)ersons  selling  transiently,  in  a  small 
way,  and  whose  influence  for  evil  in  the 
community  was  not  comparable  with 
that  exerted  by  even  the  petty  dealers  in 
the  license  States. 

Scarcely  any  other  evidence  is  neces- 
sary to  satisfy  the  unprejudiced  reader 
that  Prohibition  is  excellently  enforced 
in  nearly  the  whole  of  Vermont.  But 
there  are  towns  where  violations  are 
winked  at  for  reasons  akin  to  those  that 
have  been  mentioned  in  our  survey  of 
Maine — political  reasons  chiefly.  A 
special  explanation,  however,  is  to  be 
made  in  the  case  of  Vermont  ;  the  pen- 
alties for  infractions  of  the  law  are  very 
light  there — a  fine  of  $10  for  the  first 
offense  of  selling  liquor  in  violation  of 
law,  $20  fine  and  one  to  three  months' 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


523 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


imprisonment  for  the  second  and  120 
line  and  tlaree  to  six  months'  imprison- 
ment for  the  third.     (See  p.  352.) 

Thongh  the  opposition  to  the  law 
rests  upon  the  weakest  foundations  the 
conditions  in  a  few  localities  are  plausi- 
bly alluded  to  as  Justification  for  a  re- 
peal movement  by  the  men  whose  per- 
sonal interests  or  peculiar  opinions  ren- 
der them  anti-Prohibitionists.  High 
License  and  Local  Option  bills  were  in- 
troduced in  the  Le2:islature  in  1888  and 
1890  but  were  rejected  by  large  majori- 
ties. This  advocacy  of  repeal  caused 
prominent  citizens  to  declare  their 
preferences  and  the  results  of  their 
observation.  Frank  Plumley,  United 
States  District  Attorney  for  Vermont, 
wrote  :  ^ 

"  I  am  glarl  as  a  friend  of  Prohibition  that  the 
licen.se  advocates  have  unmasked  and  are  to 
wage  open  warfare.  Their  arguments  cannot 
stand  the  broad  light  of  publicity,  and  are 
easily  punctured  by  the  facts  concerning  the 
beueficeoce  of  Prohibition  exhibited  in  our  own 
State.  Take  the  State  as  a  body,  every  year 
shows  improvement,  both  in  the  vigor  of  en- 
forcement of  the  law  and  the  decreased  intem- 
perance and  resulting  crime." 

The  following  are  other  expressions :  "^ 

George  W.  Hooker,  President  of  the  Vermont 
State  Agricultural  Society  and  member  of  the 
Republican  National  Committee:  "  Prohil)ition 
is  the  best  law  for  Vermont,  and  I  base  my  be- 
lief on  the  almost  entire  absence  of  crime. 
There  is  no  law  better  enforced  in  Vermont, 
and  it  can  be  enforced  everywhere  if  public 
sentiment  so  orders." 

M.  H.  Buckham,  President  of  the  Vermont 
State  University :  "I  wish  I  was  half  as  sure 
of  the  triumph  of  other  good  causes  as  I  am 
that  the  people  of  Vermont  will  maintain  and 
improve,  and  still  more  effectually  carry  out, 
the  present  system  by  which  the  selling  of 
Intoxicating  drink,  if  not  actually  prohibited, 
is  to  a  great  degree  restricted  and  restrained." 

Hon.  H.  G.  Root  of  Bennington:  "Opponents 
of  the  present  law  make  a  mistake  in  saying 
that  the  Prohibitory  law  for  the  past  30  years 
has  failed  to  prohibit.  We  have  had  an  actual 
Prohibitory  law  for  one  year  only,  the  Legis- 
lature of  1838  so  amending  the  existing  law 
that  it  is  now  nearer  absolute  Prohibition  than 
any  State  in  the  Union.  In  Bennington  before 
last  year  there  were  between  60  and  70  saloons. 
Now  there  are  less  than  0,  and  they  are  holes 
that  no  decent  man  would  enter.  They  are 
patronized  by  the  same  men  who  carry  bottles 
around  in  their  pockets,  and  who  would  get 
drunk  anyway." 

Noi'tli  and  South  Dakota. — These 
two   States   rank   next   in    present   im- 

»  The  Voice,  Feb.  6,  1890. 
2  Ibid,  Feb.  13, 1890. 


portance,  for  both  have  complete  Con- 
stitutional Prohibition.  But  the  law 
did  not  go  into  effect  in  either  until 
1890,  and  there  is  no  basis  for  compari- 
sons at  the  time  this  is  written.  Pre- 
viously to  1890  they  were  under  a  system 
of  High  License  and  Local  Option,  and 
in  a  majority  of  the  counties  the  traffic 
was  prohibited.  The  results  of  local 
Prohibition,  compared  with  those  of 
High  License,  were  so  satisfactory  that 
the  farmers  of  South  Dakota  compelled 
the  dominant  party  to  pledge  itself  un- 
equivocally to  State  and  national  Pro- 
hibition and  to  work  for  the  adoption  of 
the  Constitutional  Amendment ;  while  in 
North  Dakota  the  benefits  of  the  policy 
were  so  clearly  recognized  that  a  Pro- 
hibition majority  was  given  in  1889  not- 
withstanding a  general  feeling  among 
the  Prohibitionists  that  it  was  useless  to 
strive  for  victory  against  the  tactics  and 
resources  of  their  opponents. 

There  are  good  indications  of  the 
prospective  success  of  the  Dakota  laws, 
provided  they  are  retained  on  the  statute- 
books  and  carried  out  with  reasonable 
fairness.  Both  these  laws  embrace 
nuisance  and  injunction  measures,  with 
satisfactory  penalties  and  other  valuable 
enforcement  regulations.  And  evidence 
of  their  destructive  effect  upon  the 
liquor  trade  is  not  lacking.  In  1890, 
after  the  passage  of  the  South  Dakota 
statute  but  before  it  took  effect,  an 
advertisement  was  inserted  it^  a  Nebraska 
daily  paper  requesting  correspondence 
with  persons  competent  to  manage  a 
retail  liquor  business.  Many  letters  were 
received  from  South  Dakota  rum- 
sellers,  and  without  an  excej)tion  they 
stated,  as  the  reason  for  seeking  employ- 
ment, that  the  Prohibitory  law  would 
compel  them  to  close.  "  The  only  mo- 
tive for  leaving  is  Prohibition,"  wrote 
one;  "Leave  this  place  on  account  of 
new  law,"  said  another;  "Dakota  has 
gone  Prohibition,  so  that  I  closed  out 
my  business,"  explained  another;  "  Have 
a  saloon  of  my  own  and  have  had  for  the 
last  two  years,  but  as  Prohibition  takes 
effect  May  1,  I  would  like  a  situation," 
answered  another;  "The  Prohibition 
bill  takes  effect  May  1,  so  it  is  a  case  of 
go,"  responded  another.  K  liquor-dealer 
in  Canton,  S.  D.,  gave  this  account  of 
himself:  "I  have  had  Elven  years  ex- 
perienc  in  running  a  first  class  Saloon  of 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


524 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


my  own  and  I  can  say  successfully  nntill 
witliin  the  last  three  years.  Three  years 
ago  they  s])rung  '  Local  Option '  on  us. 
We  have  fought  theih  with  money  and 
everything  else,  but  to  no  avail  for  now 
we  have  Prohibition  good  and  strong  and 
ou  the  1st  May  next  we  must  go."  ^ 

NeiLi  HampsJiire,  permitting  the  man- 
ufacture of  liquor  and  influenced  in 
its  politics  to  a  great  extent  by  wealthy 
brewers,  is  not  strictly  a  Prohibition 
State.  Even  the  prohibition  of  the 
retail  sale  did  not  finally  become 
absolute  until  1881,  when  the  right 
granted  to  towns  to  tolerate  the  traffic 
in  lager  beer  was  withdrawn.  As  a 
matter  of  course  this  partial  Prohibitory 
law  has  not  operated  so  success- 
fully or  beneficially  as  the  measures 
already  noticed.  The  following  are  the 
Federal  statistics  of  the  liquor  business 
for  the  years  1880-7  (inclusive),  1887 
being  the  last  year  for  which  the  New 
Hampshire  figures  are  given  separately 
in  the  Internal  Kevenue   records  : 


Yeaks. 

Retail 
Deal- 
ers.! 

Whole- 
sale 
Deal- 
ers.2 

Distilled 
Liquors 

Pro- 
duced.3 

Malt  Li- 
quors 
Pro- 
duced.3 

1880 

1881 

1882 

1883 

1884 

188.1 

1886 

1887 

987 
1,162 
1,231 
1,288 
1,287 
1,327 
1,298 
1,379 

43 
39 
41 
52 
38 
46 
50 
50 

Galls. 

48,535 
.W,242 
4(i,'.)23 
3'.i,4(;0 
.S!t,478 
3;i009 
25.758 
22,742 

Barrels. 

183,645 
202.552 
252.706 
270,628 
323,449 
320,115 
329.130 
317,685 

•  Includins  "retail  liqnor-dealers  [diptilled]  "  and  "  re- 
tail dealers  in  malt  liquor!^."  2  indufjing  "wholesale 
liquors-dealers  [di.stilled]  "  and  "wholesale  dealers  in 
malt  liquors."  ^  Internal  Kevenue  report  for  1889, 
pp.  366-9. 

The  population  of  Xew  Hampshire  did 
not  increase  materially  between  1880 
(346,991)  and  1887.  On  the  basis  of  the 
Census  of  1880  there  was  in  that  period, 
on  the  average,  one  s^iecial  liquor  tax- 
payer (not  including  brewers  and  dis- 
tillers) for  each  2G9  inhabitants.  The 
average  per  capita  production  of  dis- 
tilled spirits  was  0.11  gallon;  of  malt 
liquor  (reckoning  31  gallons  to  the  barrel 
of  beer),  "2-1. 07  gallons.  The  statistics  of 
liquor  manufacture  explain  the  statistics 
of  "liquor-dealers."  It  is  inevitable  that 
in  a  State  where  the  manufacturing 
interest  is  powerful  there  will  be  made  a 
considerable  wholesale  and  retail  market. 
In   practice   the    New    Hampshire    law 

»  The  Voice,  May  15, 1890. 


operates  more  as  a  Local  Option  than  as 
a  Prohibitory  act,  the  traffic  being  in- 
trenched in  the  important  localities 
because  of  the  legal  standing  that  its 
most  prominent  representatives  enjoy. 
But  well-informed  citizens  of  New  Hamp- 
shire declare  that  the  sale  is  suppressed 
in  by  far  the  greater  number  of  towns 
and  in  practically  all  the  unincorporated 
parts  of  the  State.  And  the  Injunction 
act  of  1887  has  strengthened  the  friends 
of  the  law  in  places  where  enforcement 
was  formerly  difficult.  Successful  cru- 
sades against  the  open  saloon  have  been 
waged  in  the  cities  from  time  to  time 
under  this  act,  and  there  can  be  no  doubt 
that  more  stringent  legislation — especi- 
ally legislation  against  the  manufacture 
— would  render  Prohibition  fully  as  effi- 
cient in  New  Hampshire  as  it  has  been 
in  the  neighboring  States  of  Maine  and 
Vermont.  , 

We  have  now  examined  the  workings 
of  all  the  existing  State  Prohibitory  laws. 
As  for  the  Territorial  laws  of  the  Indian, 
Oklahoma  and  Alaska  Territories,  the 
effects  of  these  measures  have  never  been 
investigated.  In  the  Indian  and  Alaska 
Territories  they  are  intended  chiefly  to 
prevent  the  traffic  with  the  aborigines, 
and,  having  been  established  as  police 
regulations  by  the  United  States  Govern- 
ment (which  certainly  is  not  disposed  to 
resort  to  Prohibition  without  definite 
cause,  or  to  maintain  it  if  ineffectual), 
it  may  be  assumed  that  the  former  license 
measures  were  complete  failures,  and  that 
Prohibition  has  become  recognized  in 
these  Territories  as  the  only  acceptable 
policy  for  restraining  crime,  intemper- 
ance, etc.  Oklahoma  was  erected  out  of 
the  Indian  Territory  in  1889,  and  mul- 
titudes of  adventurers,  eager  to  acquire 
the  rich  lands,  swarmed  into  it  when  the 
President's  proclamation  authorizing  set- 
tlement took  effect.  Cities  were  thrown 
up  in  a  few  days,  personal  selfishness 
was  the  controlling  motive,  desperate 
and  questionable  characters  were  there 
in  large  numbers,  and  serious  conflicts 
Avere  imminent.  The  representatives  of 
the  Federal  Government  were  the  only 
persons  having  police  authority,  and  a 
considerable  time  elapsed  before  system- 
atic administration  of  law  was  possible. 
Throughout  this  period  the  sale  of  liquor 
Avas  prohibited,  and  the  Federal  officers 
had  instructions  to  enforce    the    anti- 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


525 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


liquor  provisions.  Mr.  J.  A.  Pickler, 
Member  of  Congress  from  South  Dakota, 
who  was  in  Oklahoma  for  two  montlis 
as  an  agent  of  the  Interior  Department, 
has  made  the  following  statement : 

"  Fifty  thousand  people  came  into  Oklahoma 
within  24  hours,  all  strangers  to  each  other,  as 
many  as  a  dozen  men  claiming  one  town  lot,  on 
which  they  had  squatted,  and  four  or  live 
claiming  the  same  tract  of  land.  With  no  laws 
to  govern  this  people  except  the  general  laws  of 
the  United  States,  without  a  Governor,  Sheriff 
or  constable,  we  had  perfect  peace  and  order, 
with  no  bloodshed  whatever  for  six  months.  I, 
as  did  all  thinking  men,  attributed  it  to  the  Pro- 
hibition by  the  Government  of  any  liquor  being 
brought  into  the  Territo^}^"  * 

The  more  important  of  the  State  Pro- 
hibitory laws  that  have  been  repealed 
will  be  noticed  next. 

Rltode  Mnnd. — The  history  of  Pro- 
hibition is  of  special  interest  in  this 
State  because  of  the  number  of  changes 
made  from  license  to  Prohibition  and 
from  Prohibition  to  license,  and  be- 
cause this  is  the  only  commonwealth 
in  which  a  Prohibitory  Constitutional 
Amendment  has  been  rescinded  by 
popular  vote.  The  original  act  was 
jjassed  in  1853,  modified  in  1853  be- 
cause of  the  unconstitutionality  of 
certain  features  and  repealed  in  18Go. 
In  1874  another  Prohibitory  law  was 
adopted,  which  gave  way  to  license  the 
next  year.  In  April,  1886,  an  Amend- 
ment prohibiting  the  manufacture  and 
sale  was  inserted  in  the  Constitution,  and 
in  May  the  Legislature  enacted  an  enforce- 
ment statute  ;  the  Amendment  was  de- 
stroyed in  June,  1889,  and  license  was 
restored  the  next  month.  (For  explana- 
tions, etc.,  see  pp.  109-10,  124-5.) 

The  statute  of  1852-G3,  lacking  some 
provisions  essential  to  a  vigorous  ad- 
ministration of  it,  is  hardly  to  be  re- 
garded as  a  Prohibitory  law  proper;  and 
we  have  been  unable  to  obtain  any  satis- 
factory information  touching  its  results. 
The  act  of  1874,  remembering  that  it  was 
in  force  for  only  one  year,  had  excellent 
effects,  effects  so  injurious  to  the  traffic 
that  a  supreme  effort  to  secure  its  repeal 
was  set  on  foot  without  delay.  Governor 
Howard  made  this  declaration  in  October, 
1874:  "Not  from  the  standpoint  of  a 
temperance  man,  but  as  a  public  "man 
with  a  full  sense  of  the  responsibility 
which  attaches  to  me  from  my  represen- 

»  The  Voice,  Dec.  19, 1889. 


tative  position,  I  say  that  to-day  the  Pro- 
hibitory laws  of  this  State,  if  not  a  com- 
plete success,  are  a  success  beyond  the 
fondest  anticipation  of  any  friend  of  tem- 
perance, in  my  opinion.  Prohibitory 
legislation  is  a  success  in  Ehode  Island 
to  a  marvelous  extent.''" 

The  Prohibitory  Amendment  and 
legislation  of  1886-9,  for  reasons  that 
have  been  referred  to  elsewhere  (see  pp. 
124-5),  were  denied  a  decent  trial. 
They  were  borne  down  by  intrigue  and 
conspiracy.  At  the  very  beginning  of 
this  period  the  Board  of  State  Police, 
which  was  specially  created  to  enforce 
the  policy,  was  regarded  with  grave  dis- 
trust, for  the  man  who  was  put  at  its 
head  did  not  have  the  confidence  of  the 
people.  The  Legislature  refused  to  add 
necessary  amendments  to  the  statute, 
and  before  two  years  had  i^assed  it  was 
generally  understood  that  the  managing 
politicians  and  many  of  the  influential 
law  officers  had  no  other  purpose  in  view 
than  to  render  the  law  ridiculous  and 
odious  by  non-enforcement.  In  spite  of 
these  unfavorable  circumstances  it  was 
partially  enforced,  and  witli  uniformly 
wholesome  consequences.  The  number 
of  persons  paying  United  States  special 
taxes  as  retail  and  wholesale  dealers  fell 
from  1,544  in  1886  to  1,241  in  1887. 
(The  numbers  for  subsequent  years  can- 
not be  given,  since  Rhode  Island  was 
consolidated  with  the  Internal  Revenue 
collection  district  of  Connecticut  on  Ju- 
ly 1, 1887.)  In  Providence,  the  principal 
city,  the  arrests  for  crime,  drunkenness 
and  disorderly  conduct  were  greatly 
reduced  in  the  first  year.  The  figures 
are  as  follows : 

Total  Arrests  for  All  Causes  Except  for  Sale  of 
Liquor. — Year  ending  June  30,  1880  (license), 
6.473;  year  ending  June  30,  1887  (Prohibition), 
4,087 — decrease,  37  per  cent. 

Arrests  for  Drunkenness,  Common  Drunkards 
and  Disorderly. — Year  ending  June  30,  1886 
(license),  2,617;  year  ending  June  30,  1887  (Pro- 
hibition), 1,521— decrease,  42  percent.^ 

In  each  of  these  years  Providence  had 
the  same  Chief  of  Police,  and  therefore 
the  decrease  was  not  brought  about  by 
any  change  in  the  Police  Department. 
In  the  next  year  there  was  an  increase, 
not  large  enough,  liowever,  to  bring  the 
total  up  to  the  number  of  arrests  made 
m  the  last  year  of  license.     The  record 

••'Alcohol  and  tlie  State,  p.  :5.35. 

3  Wheeler's  "  Trohibition,"  p.  134. 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


536 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


for  two  and  one-lialf  years  of  Prohibition 
(ending  with  Jan.  1,  1889)  showed  9,923 
arrests  for  drunkenness  and  disorderly 
conduct  in  Providence  in  that  period,  as 
against  11,304  in  the  last  two  and  one- 
half  years  of  license  —  a  decrease  of 
about  2,000.1 

In  the  closing  year  of  the  Prohibitory 
law,  beginning  with  the  summer  of  1889, 
the  newly-elected  Attorney-General  of 
the  State,  Horatio  Rogers,  contrary  to 
expectation,  entered  upon  a  fearless  en- 
forcement crusade,  bringing  cases  to 
trial  and  laying  foundations  for  com- 
plete extermination  of  the  open  trade. 
This  work,  however,  only  hastened  the 
repeal,  for  it  taught  the  rumsellers  and 
their  political  allies  that  the  traffic  could 
be  saved  only  by  prompt  action. 

With  the  return  of  licensed  saloons 
crime  and  intemperance  were  imme- 
diately stimulated.  In  the  latter  part  of 
1889  the  criminal  docket  of  the  Court  of 
Common  Pleas  of  Providence  County 
was  the  largest  in  the  history  of  that 
Court.  The  Providence  Journal,  which 
had  clamored  for  the  repeal  of  Prohi- 
bition and  had  predicted  that  High 
License  would  reduce  the  evils  of  the 
business,  said,  Jan.  30,  1890  : 

"During  the  period  of  Prohibition  in  this 
State  and  tlie  discussions  of  reform  incident 
thereto  it  was  promised  by  the  advocates  of 
High  License,  as  one  of  the  chief  inducements 
to  change  to  their  system,  that  a  good  High 
License  law,  properly  enforced,  would  mate- 
rially reduce  the  number  of  places  maintained 
for  the  selling  of  liquor,  thus  decreasing  the 
agencies  of  temptation  to  the  thoughtless  and 
bringing  the  liquor  traffic  within  limits  where 
it  could  be  conveniently  and  satisfactorily  con- 
trolled. It  must  be  plain,  however,  not  only 
by  the  statistics  of  licenses  lately  published  in 
these  columns,  but  by  common  observation  as 
well,  that  the  happy  result  predicted  has  not 
been  brought  about  under  Rhode  Island's  new 
license  law.  The  saloons  seem  to  have  in- 
creased. Complete  and  absolutely  accurate 
statistics  are  not,  indeed,  obtainable.  But  there 
are  probably  not  less  than  1,200  licensed 
saloons  in  the  State  to-day,  while  at  the  close  of 
tlu;  low  license  period  in  June,  1886,  it  Avas 
estimated  that  the  number  was  a  little  over  900, 
certainly  not  more  than  950.  Indeed,  during 
the  lawlessness  of  the  Prohibition  period  itself 
there  were  hardly  more  tippling-places  of  all 
sorts  in  the  State  than  there  are  licensed  places 
now.  In  Providence,  in  June,  1886,  the  last 
month  of  the  operation  of  the  low  license  law, 
there  were  on  record  in  this  city  444  licensed 
saloons.      To-day  there  are  532,  and  the  ten- 

1  On  tho  authority  of  Mr.  Walter  B.  Frost  of  Providence. 
(See  the  Voice  lor  March  7,  188U.) 


dency  is  still  upward.  ...  It  does  not  ap- 
pear, then,  that  in  this  respect  we  are  much 
better  olf  to-day.  In  point  of  numbers,  in- 
deed, we  are  not  so  well  off  as  we  were  under 
low  license,  even  allowing  for  a  substantial 
growth  in  population  in  the  last  four  years." 

The  newspapers  of  the  other  cities 
commented  on  the  situation  in  the  same 
strain.  The  Pawtucket  Daily  Gazette 
and  Chronicle  said,  Sept.  20,  1889  : 

"More  drunken  men  were  seen  on  our  streets 
during  the  past  week  than  were  seen  here  in  the 
three  years  of  the  non-enforced  Prohibitory  law. " 

And  the  Newport  Daily  News  said, 
Sept.  28,  1889  : 

"  Drunkenness  is  increasing,  and  it  appears  to 
be  the  general  sentiment  of  the  conununity  that 
no  more  liquor  lic^enses  should  be  granted. 
Men  under  the  influence  of  liquor,  but  not  in 
any  way  unable  to  reach  their  destination,  are 
seen  on  any  hand  by  the  police  and  others." 

Connecticut. — In  this  State  the  Prohib- 
itory law,  enacted  in  1852  and  repealed  in 
1872,  was  not  thoroughly  enforced  at  any 
time.  During  the  early  years  of  the 
act,  however,  the  condition  of  the  State 
was  clearly  so  much  better  than  it  had 
been  under  license  that  the  warmest 
encomiums  were  pronounced.  Governor 
Dutton  said  in  1855 :  "  There  is  scarcely 
an  open  grogshop  in  the  State,  the  jails 
are  fast  becoming  tetiantless  and  a  de- 
lightful air  of  security  is  everywhere 
enjoyed."  And  Governor  Minor  in  1856 
said:  "From  my  own  knowledge,  and 
from  information  from  all  parts  of  the 
State,  I  have  reason  to  believe  that  the 
law  has  been  enforced,  and  the  daily 
traffic  in  liquors  has  been  broken  up  and 
abandoned."  Dr.  Leonard  l^acon  said 
that  "  Its  [the  law's]  effect  in  promoting 
peace,  order,  quiet  and  general  pros- 
perity no  man  can  deny.  Never  for 
20  years  has  our  city  [New  Haven]  been 
so  quiet  as  under  its  action."  (This 
statement  is  of  unusual  interest  since 
Dr.  Bacon  has  long  been  prominent 
as  an  opponent  of  the  principle  of 
Prohibition.)  E.  P.  Augur  of  Middle- 
town,  Conn.,  has  compiled  from  official 
records  a  table  giving  the  numbers  of 
commitments  to  jail  for  all  offenses, 
commitments  for  drunkenness,  for  as- 
sault, for  vagrancy,  etc.,  since  1852. 
The  following",  taken  from  Mr.  Augur's 
table,  compares  commitments  during  the 
last  seven  years  of  the  Prohibitory  law 
and  the  first  seven  years  of  the  license 
law  that  replaced  it : 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


527 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


Teaks. 


f 1866. 
I  1867. 
I  1808. 
{  1869. 

1870. 

1871. 

1872. 


^1      ? 


1873. 

1874. 

1875. 

]876» 

187 

1878.. 

18792 . 


Tot.  Proh.  Yrs. 
"     Lie.       " 


Total 
Commit- 
ments. 

Commit- 
ments 

FOR 

Drunk- 
enness 
and  Com- 
mon 
Drunk- 
ards. 

AsSADXT, 

Assault 
AND  Bat- 
tery,AND 
Breach 
of  Peace. 

Va- 
gran- 
cy. 

1,827 
1,693 
1,821 
2,246 
2,.593 
2,805 
2,985 

4.481 
4,448 
4,425 
3,103 
4.149 
4,577 
3,834 

537 
484 
575 
842 

i.o.'jo 

1.290 
1,470 

2,125 

2,044 
2,175 
1,347 
1,734 
2,141 
1,628 

273 
275 
280 
428 
202 
339 
447 

594 
661 
7:M 
391 
571 
572 
496 

07 
63 
75 
62 
97 
110 
164 

170 
214 
235 
149 
193 
279 
221 

1.5,970 
29.017 

6.248 
13,194 

2,244 
4,019 

638 
1,461 

>  Eight  months  only.    ^  Tramp  law  went  into  effect. 

According  to  this  table,  in  the  seven 
license  years  as  compared  with  the  seven 
Prohibition  years  the  commitments  for 
all  offenses  increased  82  per  cent.,  for 
drunkenness  and  common  drunkards  111 
per  cent.,  for  assault,  assault  and  battery 
and  breach  of  peace  79  per  cent.,  and  for 
vagrancy  129  per  cent.  Meanwhile  the 
increase  in  population  was  about  1.7G 
per  cent,  per  year,  or  only  12.32  per  cent, 
in  seven  years.  ^ 

Since  the  repeal  of  Prohibition  in  1872 
the  license  and  Local  Option  law  has 
been  steadily  maintained.  The  increase 
of  crime  and  drunkenness  has  been  con- 
stant. For  the  year  ending  June  30, 
1887,  the  total  number  of  commitments 
for  crime  was  6,849  and  of  commitments 
for  drunkenness  3,388.  The  following 
are  comparisons  for  three  decennial 
years,  beginning  with  18G7: 

Commitments  for  Crime. — For  1867  (the 
last  year  under  the  Prohibitory  law  before 
the  repeal  ajiitation  became  active),  1,693 ; 
population  in  1870,  537,454  ;  ratio  of 
commitment.s  in  1887  to  total  population  (on  the 
basis  of  the  Census  of  1870),  1  to  317.  For  1877 
(the  lifth  year  of  license),  4,149  ;  population  in 
1880,  622,700  ;  ratio,  1  commitment  to  150  in- 
habitants. For  1887  (the  lifteenth  year  of 
license),  6,849 ;  population  in  1890,  746,258  ; 
ratio,  1  commitment  to  109  inhabitants. 


'  It  should  be  borne  in  mind  also  that  the  seven  years  of 
Prohil)itory  hiw  here  given  were  in  most  respects  the 
worst  years  for  the  law,  ensuing  immediately  after  the 
return  to  civil  life  of  the  Federal  soldiers  with  the  drink 
habits  formed  amid  the  hardships  of  camp  life,  and  being 
years  during  which  an  incessant  agitation  for  the  repeal 
of  the  law  was  kept  up.— Wheeler's  ''Prohibition," 
p.  108. 


Com,mitmenU  for  Drunkenness. — For  1867, 
484 ;  ratio  (on  the  basis  of  the  Census 
of  1870),  1  to  1,110  inhabitants.  For 
1877,  1,734  ;  ratio  (on  the  basis  of  the  Census  of 
1880),  1  to  359  inhabitants.  For  1887,  3,388  ; 
ratio  (on  the  basis  of  the  Census  of  1890),  1  to 
220  inhabitants. 

These  startling  figures  make  it  per- 
fectly plain  that  even  under  the  poorly- 
enforced  Prohibitory  law,  Connecticut 
(so  long  as  that  law  was  undisturbed)  was 
a  sober  State  and  was  remarkably  free 
from  crime;  while  under  the  present 
license  system  (even  with  the  advantage 
of  Local  Option  Prohibition  in  a  major- 
ity of  the  towns)  the  commitments  for 
crime,  after  making  allowance  for  the 
increase  in  population,  are  relatively 
three  times  more  numerous  and  the  nitm- 
ber  of  commitments  for  drunkenness  is 
five  times  as  great. 

Massachusetts.  —  This  State  adopted 
many  interesting  restrictive  measures 
long  before  the  Maine  law  was  enacted; 
and  in  1848  a  complete  Prohibitory  act 
(with  search  and  seizure  clauses)  was 
framed  and  introduced  in  the  Legisla- 
ture." The  passage  of  this  bill  woukUiave 
deprived  Maine  of  the  distinction  that  she 
enjoys;  but  it  was  defeated.  In  1852  a 
Maine  Prohibitory  law  was  adopted  in 
Massachusetts  and  it  endured  until  18()8, 
when  a  license  law  took  its  place.  In 
1869  Prohi])ition  Avas  re-enacted  and  in 
1875  the  State  again  changed  to  license. 
It  has  retained  the  license  S3^stem  ever 
since,  subject  to  Local  Option  modifi- 
cations. Neither  of  the  two  Prohibitory 
laws  Avas  perfect  in  its  enforcement  feat- 
ures, and  the  execution 
most  of  the  time. 

In  spite  of  all  difficulties  there  is  con- 
clusive contemporaneous  testimony  to 
the  fact  that  the  condition  of  the  State 
was  decidedly  improved  in  the  first 
years  of  the  policy.  It  will  suffice  to 
present  here  a  statement  made  by  Gen. 
Benjamin  F.  Butler,  for  other  evidence 
is  to  the  same  effect.  Gen.  Butler,  it  is 
worthy  of    remark,  is  not  classed  with 

'^  The  bill  was  reported  and  ably  advocated  bv  Francis 
W.  Emmons  of  Sturbridge.  It  was  petitioned  for  by  the 
venerable  Moses  Stuart  of  Andover  and  5,000  others. 
The  legislative  committee,  in  its  report,  unanimously 
agreed  that  "the  present  license  law,  in  our  judgment, 
has  done  and  is  doing  incalculable  mischief."  It  added: 
"  Public  opinion,  we  are  happy  to  know,  is  in  advance  of 
this  law,  which  appears  from  the  fact  that  daring  the  last 
year  no  licenses  have  been  granted  under  it  in  13  out  of 
the  14  counties  in  this  Commonwealth."  (See  "  Alcohol 
and  the  State,"  pp.  287-8.) 


was  lax  during 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


528 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


the  Prohibitionists  or  eyen  the  active 
temperance  sympathizers.  In  a  letter  in 
the  Voice  for  Dec.  2G,  1889,  he  wrote: 

"Massachusetts  in  1853  had  a  very  efficient 
Prohibitory  law,  which  I  dratted  as  counsel  lor 
the  Temperance  Alliance,  with  the  aid  of  one 
of  the  very  best  lawyers  of  that  day,  the  Hon. 
Samuel  Hoar.  ...  I  was  afterward  employed 
by  the  State  Temperance  Alliance  to  enforce 
that  Prohibitorv  law  in  the  city  of  Lowell  and 
county  of  Middlesex  where  1  lived,  and  the 
law  was  enforced  in  that  portion  of  the  State 
which  was  covered  by  my  retainer,  and  the  sale 
of  liquor  was  as  fully  stopped  as  was  the  stealing 
of  goods  and  chattels  in  the  same  localities  by 
the  ordinary  laws  against  such  crime." 

The  second  important  joeriod  of  en- 
forcement began  in  1805,  with  the  crea- 
tion of  the  State  (Constabulary.  "  During 
that  year  alone,"'  says  Judge  Pitman, 
"  the  work  of  the  State  Police  resulted 
in  5,331  liquor  prosecutions,  1,979  seiz- 
ures aggregating  92,058  gallons  of  in- 
toxicants, and  the  payment  in  fines  aiul 
costs  of  1220,4:37.19.  (See  2d  annual 
report  of  the  Constable  of  the  Common- 
weahh.)  That  the  result  was  a  great 
diminution  of  the  traffic  hardly  requires 
proof.  The  same  report  gives  819  as  the 
number  of  dealers  who  had  discontinued 
the  traffic  during  that  year  alone."  ' 
This  vigorous  enforcement  was  continued 
until  the  fall  of  1807.  "  Up  to  the  0th 
of  November,  1807,"  reported  the  Con- 
stable of  the  Commonwealth,  "there  was 
not  an  open  bar  known  in  the  entire 
State,  and  the  open  retail  traffic  had  al- 
most entirely  ceased.  The  traffic,  as  such, 
had  generally  secluded  itself  to  such  an 
extent  that  it  was  no  longer  a  public, 
open  offense  and  no  longer  an  inviting 
temptation  to  the  passer-by."  '  These 
successful  assaults  caused  the  entire  rum 
element  to  rally  for  a  desperate  attack 
upon  the  law,  and  at  the  elections  of 
1807  an  anti-Prohibition  Legislature  was 
chosen.  The  result  was  that  '•  between 
the  day  of  the  election  and  the  1st  of 
April  ensuing  2,779  new  liquor-shops 
were  opened."  ^  The  comparative  sta- 
tistics of  commitments  for  crime,  etc., 
during  the  three  periods  of  unenforced 
Prohibition,  enforced  Proliil)ition  and 
license  are  remarkable.  AVe  summarize 
them  briefly. " 

CommitmenU  to  the  State  Prison. — In  the  first 
nine  months  of  1866  (before  the  results  of  en- 


1  Alrohol  and  the  Stutc,  pp.  387-8. 

»  Ibid.  p.  :3::8.     '  Iliid.  j).  341. 

*  See  WheekrV  '•  I'rohibitiou,"  i)p.  lOi-t. 


forcement  had  their  full  effect  upon  the  higher 
forms  of  crime),  1.56;  during  the  first  nine 
months  of  1866,  80;  during  the  first  nine  months 
of  1868,  143. 

Police  Figures  for  the  City  of  Boston  {-^here  the 
law  was  not  so  well  administered  as  in  other 
parts  of  the  State). — Last  six  months  of  1868 
(license),  as  compared  with  the  last  six  months 
of  1867  (Prohibition)  :  increase  in  criminal 
arrests,  348;  increase  in  number  of  station-house 
lodgers,  3,338;  increase  in  cases  of  drunkenness 
and  assault,  1,363 — total  increase  under  these 
three  heads,  5,449.  (N.  B. — In  the  last  six 
months  of  1867,  with  which  comparisons  are 
made,  there  were  two  months  of  imenforced 
Prohibition;  so  that  the  relative  increase  must 
have  been  even  larger  than  these  figures  show. ) 

Commitments  in  the  Entire  State  for  Drunken- 
ness.— Six  months  of  1867  (April  to  October), 
2, .501;  .same  months  of  1868,  3,170.  (N.  B.— 
These  figures,  of  course,  do  not  represent  all  the 
arrests  for  drunkenness.  Persons  apprehended 
for  this  offense  were  not  committed  unless  they 
were  unable  to  pay  tines. ) 

"The  Governor  of  the  State  (Claflin), 
the  State  Constable,  the  Board  of  Inspec- 
tors of  the  State  Prison,  and  the  Board 
of  State  Charities,"  says  Mr.  Wheeler, 
"all  called  attention,  in  very  emphatic 
language,  to  this  increase  of  crime,  and 
all,  without  exception,  attributed  it  to  tlie 
repeal  of  the  Proliityitory  law.  In  con- 
sequence of  this  increase  of  crime  Pro- 
hibition was  re-enacted,  going  into  force 
January,  1870,  but  in  the  same  year  ad- 
ditional legislation  was  enacted  exempt- 
ing malt  liquors  from  the  provisions  of 
the  law." " 

The  third  and  final  era  of  actual  Pro- 
hibition in  Massachusetts  began  in  1873, 
after  tlie  beer-exemption  clauses  were 
rescinded.  Concerning  the  results  we 
quote  from  Judge  Pitman : 

"  An  increasingly  vigorous  prosecution  of  the 
law  took  place  up  to  the  fall  election  of  1874, 
when  the  law  was  again  overthrown.  The  pros- 
ecutions for  that  year  were  7,126  ;  seizures, 
5,912  aggregating  117,683  gallons  ;  fines  and 
costs  paid,  $152,189.62;  number  sentenced  to 
the  House  of  Correction,  820.  Of  the  results 
of  this  action  on  a  single  branch  of  the  trade 
Mr.  Schade,  the  special  agent  of  the  Brewers' 
Congress,  says:  'Had  our  friends  in  Massa- 
chusetts been  free  to  carr*-  on  their  business  and 
had  not  the  State  authorities  constantly  inter- 
fered, there  is  no  doubt  that  instead  of  showing 
a  decrease  of  116,585  barrels  in  one  year  they 
woidd  have  increased  at  the  same  rate  as  they 
did  the  preceding  year.'  Again  we  note  that 
the  hiw  was  repealed  not  because  it  was  weak 
but  because  it  was  strong.   .   .  . 

"The  city  of  Boston  has  always  opposed 
Prohibition.  Yet  at  the  time  of  the  great  fire, 
in  November,  1872,  the  order  was  given  by  the 
city   to   close   all   the  dramshops.     'The  good 

6  Ibid,  p.  104. 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


529 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


effects  of  this  course,'  say  the  State  Police  Com- 
missioners, 'were  manifest  in  tlie  quiet  streets  of 
the  city  by  day  and  night,  even  when  in  the 
absence  of  gas  they  were  shrouded  in  darkness. ' 
The  Chief  of  the  City  Pohce  reported  that  the 
number  of  arrests  for  10  days  before  the  order 
was  1,169  ;  for  the  10  days  after,  only  675."  ' 

The  lessons  from  these  experiments  in 
Massachusetts  are  as  impressive  as  any 
furnished  by  the  existing  conditions  in 
Kansas  and  Iowa.  Prohibition  is  the 
only  system  in  that  State  which  has 
crushed  the  liquor  traffic  or  diminished 
its  evils.  This  conclusion  is  inevitable 
from  every  point  of  view  that  can  be 
taken.  The  facts  are  equally  clear  and 
convincing  whether  we  study  the  conse- 
quences of  the  low  license  policy  in 
1868-9  and  18T5-S8,  or  of  the  High 
License  policy — under  which,  be  it  re- 
membered, the  highest  license  fees  pre- 
vailing in  the  Union  are  charged — that 
has  been  in  force  since  May  1,  1889. 
The  failure  of  the  High  License  law  is 
partly  demonstrated  in  the  article  on 
High  License;  other  particulars  Avill  be 
found  in  our  comparison  of  High 
License  and  Local  Option  Prohibition 
for  separate  cities  of  Massachusetts.  (See 
pp.  531-3.)  ' 


•  Alcohol  and  the  State,  pp.  342-3. 

^  In  connection  with  thi8  general  review  of  Massachu- 
Betts  It  is  of  interest  to  present  certain  statistics  gathered 
by  the  Hon.  Carroll  D.  Wright,  for  many  years  Chief  of 
the  Massachusetts  Bureau  of  Statistics  of  Labor,  and  now 
(1890)  Conimissioner  of  the  United  States  Department  of 
Labor.  In  his  reports  as  Chief  of  the  Massachusetts  Bu- 
reau for  1880  and  1881  Mr.  Wright  made  exhaustive  anal- 
yses, from  official  returns,  of  the  "  Influence  of  Intemper- 
ance upon  Crime."  While  these  analyses  provided  no 
formal  comparisons  of  the  Prohibition  with  the  license 
systems  of  Massachusetts,  but  simply  souglit  to  show  the 
part  played  by  drink  as  a  cause  of  crime  regardless  of 
legislative  policy,  they  are  pertinent  to  our  subject.  In- 
deed, they  are  of  the  greatest  value  to  all  students,  be- 
cause of  Mr.  Wright's  high  reputation  and  the  scientific 
accuracy  characterizing  all  hisworli.  In  stating  his  ob- 
jects he  said:  "For  years  there  have  been,  among  the 
temperance  reformers  of  this  country  and  Europe,  much 
argument  and  eloquence  based  upon  the  more  or  less 
casual  and  scattered  observations  of  private  individuals  as 
to  the  nature  and  extent  of  the  inHuence  which  intemper- 
ance exerts  in  the  commission  of  crime.  The  loiiic  which 
the  temperance  advocate  stands  most  in  need  of  is  the  solid 
strength  of  facts  collected  and  collated  in  a  thorough  aiid 
systematic  manner  within  limits  circumscribed  as  to  time 
and  territory.  This  investigation  was  inaugurated  and 
conducted  in  the  interest  of  all  who  are  a  prey  to  the  sin 
of  intemperance,  but  more  especially  in  the'interest  of  the 
youth  of  our  State,  with  the  ardent  hope  of  revealing  to 
them,  stripped  of  prejudice  and  sentiment,  the  naked  pro- 
portions of  an  evil  prolific  in  poverty  and  prodigality,  the 
expense  of  which,  wlule  a  burden  to  all  classes,  falls  in  a 
greater  degree  on  the  workers  and  chief  consumers  of 
society."  Ilis  conclusions  were  thus  summarized:  "  Thc^e 
figures  paint  a  picture,  at  once  the  most  faithful  and 
hideous,  of  the  guilt  and  power  of  rum.  Men  and  women, 
the  young,  the  middle-aged  and  old,  father  and  son,  hus- 
band and  wife,  native  and  foreign-born,  the  night-walker 
and  niaiislayer,  the  thief  and  adulterer. — all  testify  to  its 
ramified  and  revolting  tyranny.  'I'herefore  the  result  (f 
this  investigation,  in  view  of  the  disproportionate  masrni- 
tude  of  the  exclusively  rum  offenses,  and  consideted  in  con- 
nection with  the  notorious  tendency  of  liquor  to  inflame  and 
enlarge  the  passions  and  appetites,  to  import  chaos  into  the 


The  remaining  States  that  have  had 
general  Prohibition  of  some  kind  afford 
no  grounds  for  important  deductions. 
Micliigan  was  under  an  anti-license  and 
nominally  Prohibitory  law  from  1855  to 
1875;  but  it  was  amended  so  as  to  ex- 
cept the  manufacture  of  alcohol,  wine 
and  beer,  and  the  sale  of  beer,  etc.  In 
view  of  this  fact  it  is  needless  to  inquire 
as  to  the  effects  of  the  measure : — it  can 
hardly  be  called  even  a  partial  Prohib- 
itory statute,  since  it  fostered  the  most 
dangerous  and  vilest  single  element  of 
the  retail  traffic,  the  beer-saloon.     New 

moral  and  physical  life,  to  level  the  barriers  of  decency 
and  self-respect  and  to  transport  its  victims  into  an  ab- 
normal and  irresponsible  state,  destructive  and  degrad- 
insr,  calls  for  earnest  and  immediate  attention  at  the  bar 
of  the  public  opinion  and  the  public  conscience  of  Massa- 
chusetts." 

Mr.  Wright  first  made  a  complete  classification  of  all 
the  sentences  in  Massachusetts  for  the  20  years  1860-79. 
He  found  that  these  sentences  aggregated  ,578,4.58.  He 
then  selected,  from  the  list  of  offenses,  those  which  '■  be- 
longed to  rum  al)solutely  "  and  obtained  the  following 
figures:  Common  drunkard,  21,859;  drunkenness,  271,482; 
liquor-selling.  12,240;  liquor-keeping,  26,423;  liquor-car- 
rying, 6-36;  liquor  nuisance,  8,174— total  "sentences  for 
rum  crimes,"  340.814,  or  about  59  per  cent,  of  the  sen- 
tences for  all  offenses.  There  remained  41  per  cent,  of 
the  commitments  \\  hich  were  for  offenses  that  could  not 
be  absolutely  attributed  to  drink,  and  the  problem  before 
Mr.  Wright  was  to  ascertain,  if  possiljle,  wliat  proportion 
of  them  should  be  added  to  the  .59  per  cent,  of  '•  distinc- 
tively rum  offejises"  as  to  which  there  could  be  no 
question. 

He  set  about  the  solution  of  this  problem  by  undertak- 
ing a  most  painstaking  analysis  of  the  commitments  in 
the  county  of  Suffolk  (containing-  the  citvof  Boston)  for 
the  year  ruiming  from  Sept.  1.  1879.  to  Sept.  1,  1880.  Here- 
he  found  that  12,289  of  the  16.897  commitments,  or  72 -f- 
per  cent.,  were  for  rum  otlVnses.  leaving  4,(i08,  or  27  +  per- 
cent., for  other  offenses.  In  order  to  determine  how  exten-  • 
sively  drink  was  responsible  for  these  4.608  crimes  he  em- 
ployed reliable  agents  to  trace  the  history  of  each  single 
case,  to  watch  each  trial  and  to  personally  interview  all 
the  offenders.     The   agents'    reports   were   suV)jected   to 
very  careful  supervision.     Of  the  4,608  criminals  whose 
records  were  thus  investigated,  2,097  were  in  liquor  at  the 
time  of  the  commission   of  the  offenses,  1.918  were  in 
liquor  at  the  time  of  the  formation  of  the  criminal  intent, . 
1.804  had  intemperate  habits   so  marked  as  to  induce  a' 
moral  condition  favorable  to  crime  and  821  were  led  to  a. 
criminal   condition   through  the  contagion   of  intemper- 
ance.    Taking  the  2,097  cases  in  which  the  offenders  were- 
under  the  influence  of  liquor  when  they  committed  their- 
offenses,  and  adding  this  number  to  the  12.289  "  distinc- 
tively rum  offenses,"  we  see  that  14,:386  of  the  16,897  com- 
mitments in  Suffolk  County  during  the  year  (or  more  than  i 
84  percent.)  were  due  to  drink  peculiarly.  This  is  the  miw- 
«.w(»/«j  number  and  the  minimum  percetitage;  for  itcani 
hardly  be  doubted  that  among  the  offenders  not  under  the 
infiaence  of  liquor  when  their  crimes  were  committed  a 
considerable  number  had  been  brought  to  a  criminal  condi- 
tion by  former  indulgence  in  liquor  and  by  saloon  asso- 
ciations. 

The  two  investigations  show  a  large  disparity  between 
the  percentage  of  "distinctively  rum  offenses "  in  the- 
State  at  lar^e  as  compared  with  the  percentage  in  the 
county  of  Suffolk:  in  the  State  at  large  the  jicrcentage 
was  .59,  and  in  Suffolk  County  72.  This  difference  inci- 
dentally illustrates  the  comparative  success  of  Prohibition 
in  Massachusetts  in  suppressing  intemperance.  The 
figures  for  the  State  at  large  cover  a  number  of  years  in 
which  Prohibition,  in  nearly  the  whole  of  the  State,  was 
well  enforced:  they  also  embrace  many  towns  in  which 
practically  no  liquor  had  beensold  during  that  entire  period 
of  20  years;  anil  therefore  the  percentage  of  "distinc- 
tively rum  offenses  is  a  percentage  obtained  from  totals 
of  which  the  returns  from  Prohibition  localities  consti- 
tute a  factor.  The  fact  that  this  percentage  is  13  loss 
than  the  iiercentage  of  "  rum  offenses  "  in  the  wholly  li- 
ceu'-'c  i-c.inify  nf  Suffolk  is  in  keejiing  with,  all  the  otheri 
teachings  of  Massachusetts  statistics. 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


5r,o 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


York  passed  an  imperfect  act  in  1855, 
which  was  declared  unconstitutional  in 
certain  parts  in  1856  and  repealed  in 
1857;  it  may  be  passed  by  with  no  other 
comment  save  the  one  made  by  Governor 
Clark  in  a  message  to  the  Legislature  at 
the  time,  that  it  had  been  "  subjected  to 
an  opposition  more  persistent,  unscrupu- 
lous and  defiant  than  is  often  incurred  by 
an  act  of  legislation ;  and  though  legal 
and  magisterial  influence,  often  acting 
unofficially  and  extra-Judicially,  have 
[had]  combined  to  render  it  inoperative, 
to  forestall  the  decision  of  the  Courts, 
wrest  the  statute  from  its  obvious  mean- 
ing and  create  a  general  distrust,  if  not 
hostility  to  all  legislative  restrictions  of 
the  traffic,  it  has  [had]  still,  outside  of 
our  large  cities,  been  generally  obeyed." 
"  The  influence  is  visible,"  added  Govern- 
or Clark,  "  in  a  marked  diminution  of 
the  evils  it  sought  to  remedy."  The 
nominal  Prohibitory  laws  of  Indiana 
(1855-8),  Illinois  (1851-3),  Delaware 
(1855-7)  and  Nebraska  (1855-8),  and  the 
still  less  useful  measures  like  the  Adair 
law  of  Ohio  (1854)  that  merely  prohib- 
ited sales  for  consumption  on  the 
premises  or  embraced  similar  qualifica- 
tions, encountered  circumstances  so  dis- 
advantageous as  to  deprive  their  results 
of  significance;  and  they  are  entitled  to 
remembrance  chiefly  because  the  fact  of 
their  enactment  illustrates  the  favor 
shown  Prohibition  by  the  people  and 
the  fact  of  their  speedy  overthrow  or 
comparative  non-enforcement  illustrates 
the  truth  that  legislation  does  not  vin- 
dicate or  perpetuate  itself  automatically. 

Local  Option  Proldbition. 

Both  reason  and  experience  teach  that, 
given  a  well-constructed  law  and  local 
faithfulness  to  it,  the  success  of  Prohi- 
bition will  be  proportioned  to  the 
stability  of  the  act  and  the  extent  of 
territory  over  which  it  is  administered. 
AVe  have  seen  that  the  enforcement  of 
State  Prohibition,  even  Avhen  operating 
throughout  great  commonwealths,  is 
disturbed  by  conspirators  at  home  and 
conspirators  in  neighboring  States, 
parties  to  an  illicit  traffic  which  is 
most  serious  and  hardest  to  repress  at 
and  near  the  boundary,  and  which  (as 
indicated  by  the  history  of  the  "original 
package  "  period  and  by  the  situation  in 
!New    Hampshire)    becomes    formidable 


with  each  relaxation  or  modification  of 
the  State's  powers  or  radical  attitude. 
Necessarily  inferior  are  the  fruits  of  the 
Local  Option  system,  whose  authority 
stops  at  a  city's  limits  or  a  county's  line, 
which  rarely  touches  the  manufacture 
and  seldom  places  thorough  restraint 
upon  drug-store  sales,  whose  practical 
enforcement  provisions,  moreover  (in- 
cluding penalties,  etc.),  are  not  of  local 
creation  and  in  most  cases  cannot  be 
made  more  stringent  by  the  local  govern- 
ment but  are  subject  to  the  action  of  the 
State  Legislature.  Giving  due  attention 
to  the  limitations  involved,  it  will  be 
found,  however,  that  even  isolated  Pro- 
hibition has  conferred  great  benefits  in 
numberless  instances,  and  that,  whenever 
executed  with  any  semblance  of  fairness, 
it  has  done  far  better  work  for  temper- 
ance, for  morality  and  for  the  prevention 
of  crime  than  has  been  done  by  any 
method  of  license.  To  fully  show  the 
results  of  Local  Option  Prohibition  is 
impossible.  There  are  countless  local- 
ities for  which  no  records  are  accessible  ; 
and  in  whole  States,  for  long  terms  of 
years,  no  one  has  taken  the  pains  to  col- 
lect general  evidence.  Yet  from  the 
testimony  at  hand  the  workings  of  the 
policy  in  separate  localities  of  every  part 
of  the  country  can  be  viewed,  and  in 
localities .  of  nearly  all  grades  of  im- 
portance, from  insignificant  townships 
to  populous  cities,  from  the  staid  com- 
munities of  New  England  to  the  lively 
towns  of  the  West,  from  places  peopled 
almost  wholly  by  native  white  Americans 
to  ones  containing  very  large  percent- 
ages of  foreign-born  citizens  or  negroes, 
from  towns  in  which  comparisons  may 
be  made  with  the  loosest  systems  of 
license  to  those  in  which  the  most  rigid 
High  License  and  restrictive  measures 
have  been  tried.  Our  examination  of 
this  testimony  must  be  brief,  but  will  be 
governed  by  the  chief  purpose  of  this 
article,  to  set  forth  the  representative 
facts  with  a  regard  for  detail  sufficient 
to  justify  reasonable  conclusions  as  to  the 
general  truth. 

Massachusetts  Cities. — Every  city  and 
town  of  Massachusetts  votes  each  year  on 
the  question  of  granting  liquor  licenses. 
(See  pp.  39G-8.)  A  majority  in  the  nega- 
tive makes  Prohibition  of  the  sale  obliga- 
tory for  the  ensuing  license  year.   While 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.J 


531 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


four-fifths  of  the  towns  regularly  refuse 
licenses  nearly  all  the  cities  are  fickle. 
There  are  certain  ones,  like  Boston,  that 
never  decide  for  Prohibition,  and  others, 
like  Somerville,  Quincy  and  Maiden,  that 
never  go  against  it.  It  is  beyond  ques- 
tion that  the  reliable  "■  no-license  "  cities 
are  the  quietest  and  most  creditably  con- 
ducted ones  in  the  State,  that  there  is 
very  little  crime,  pauperism  or  disorder  in 
them  and  that  they  compare  in  all  regards 
favorably  with  other  places  of  like  popu- 
lation and  natural  advantages.  As  an  ex- 
ample: The  city  of  Maiden  has  always 
been  under  Prohibition;  it  has  a  large 
laboring  class,  adjoins  the  famous  rum 
town  of  Medford,  is  only  four  miles  from 
Boston  and  is  traversed  by  two  railroads. 
The  city  of  Salem  is  about  two-thirds 
larger  than  Maiden  (State  Census  of 
1885),  and  has  steadily  adhered  to  license, 
having  charged  a  High  License  fee  of 
$500  in  1888  for  the  privilege  of  retailing 
all  kinds  of  liquors  for  consumption  oft' 
the  premises;  conditions  are  much  the 
same  as  in  Maiden,  the  laboring  element 
being  large,  although  Salem  lies  on  the 
sea-coast  and  is  a  less  important  railroad 
town  than  Maiden.  Manifestly  Salem 
should  be  no  worse  off  than  Maiden  if  it 
is  true  that  High  License  is  as  good  a 
temperance  policy  for  cities  as  Prohibi- 
tion. But  during  1888  there  were  1,162 
arrests  for  drunkenness  in  Salem  as 
against  132  in  Maiden ;  1,540  arrests  for 
all  causes  (of  which  eleven-fifteenths  were 
for  drunkenness)  as  against  518  in  Mai- 
den (of  which  only  one-fourth  were  for 
drunkenness),  in  each  of  the  six  years 
ending  with  1888  there  had  been  in 
Salem  an  increase  in  arrests  for  drunken- 
ness as  compared  with  the  next  pre- 
ceding year;  Salem  in  1888  employed 
36  police  officers  and  expended  137,800 
for  her  police  department,  while  Maiden 
employed  only  14  and  expended  but 
1)14,752;  and  in  the  same  years  Salem 
gave  lodgment  to  894  tramps  while  Mai- 
den lodged  only  174.  ^  Another  ex- 
ample: Quincy,  which  has  not  licensed 
the  saloons  since  1882,  had  only  55  ar- 
rests for  drunkenness  and  disorderly  con- 
duct in  the  year  ending  Sept.  30,  1888; 
but  the  near  license  town  of  Randolph, 
having  only  one-fourth  of  Quincy 's 
population,  had  143  arrests  for  these 
offenses  in  the  same  time.^ 

>  Political  Prohibitionist  for  1889,  p.  58.    »  Ibid. 


Again,  compare  the  statistics  of  pau- 
pers, homeless  children,  prisoners  and 
convicts  in  the  mpst  faithful  Prohibition 
cities  and  the  most  stubborn  license 
cities.  The  State  Census  of  1885  was 
taken  under  the  direction  of  one  of  the 
most  conscientious  and  respected  statisti- 
cians of  the  country,  Hon.  Carroll  D. 
AVright.  As  representative  Prohibition 
cities  take  Maiden,  Somerville  and 
Quincy,  with  an  aggregate  population  of 
58,523  in  1885,  and  as  characteristic 
license  cities  take  Salem,  Newburyport 
and  Northampton,  with  a  total  popula- 
tion of  54,702  in  the  same  year.  All 
the  figures  in  the  following  table  are 
from  Mr.  Wright's  Census  of  1885. 


Cities. 

Popu- 
lation. 

Pau- 
pers. 

Home- 
less 
Chil- 
dren. 

Prisoners 

AND 

Convicts.' 

Prohibition: 

Maiden 

Somerville  . . . 
Quincy 

License: 

Salem 

Newburyport. 
Northampton 

Totals: 

Proh.  Cities.. 
License  "     . . 

16,407 
29,971 
12,145 

28.090 
13,716 
12,896 

58,.523 
54,702 

18 

6 

23 

125 

51 

448 

47 
624 

11 

7 
10 

157 
15 
91 

28 
263 

None 
ti 

42 
14 
21 

None  ' 
77 

1  The  figures  under  this  head  include  persons  awaiting 
trial,  persons  serving  out  fines  and  convicts  under  sen- 
tence at  the  time  of  taking  the  Census. 

It  is  in  cities  like  Worcester,  Spring- 
field and  Lawrence,  in  which  no-license 
has  not  been  a  permanent  policy  but  has 
been  unexpectedly  adopted  and  speedily 
reversed,  that  Prohibition  has  operated 
under  the  worst  embarrassments.  Here 
are  communities  whose  normal  method 
is  license;  suddenly,  at  the  city  election, 
a  change  is  made  to  no-license;  at  the 
same  time  the  newly-chosen  municipal 
officers  may  not  be  and  are  not  likely  to 
be  cordial  supporters  of  Prohibition; 
the  conservative  citizens  look  with  cold- 
ness and  distrust  upon  the  novel  pro- 
gramme; there  is  a  prevailing  belief  that 
the  enforcement  will  be  passive  and  that 
the  saloons, will  gather  their  forces  and 
renew  the  license  system  at  the  end  of 
one  year ;  the  manufacturers  and  whole- 
salers of  liquor  in  other  cities  are 
actively  interested  in  enabling  the  local 
retailers  to  successfully  violate  the  law 
in  the  interval.  If  under  such  circum- 
stances Prohibition  has  beneficial  effects 
the  fact  must  certainly  be  pronounced 
encouraging,     The    comparisons   given 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


532 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


below  prove  that  even  this  least  promis- 
ing form  of  Prohibition  does  work  for 
good,  positively  and  conspicuously,  and, 
it  seems^  uniformly. 

Worcester,  from  May  1,  1886,  to  May  1,  1887, 
was  under  Prohibition;  from  May  1,  1887,  to 
May  1,  1888,  under  low  license,  and  from  May 
1,  1888,  to  May  1,  1889,  under  High  License. 
"  The  Political  Prohibitionist  for  1889  "(p.  57) 
thus  summarizes  certain  comparative  facts  and 
figures  published  by  Rev.  D.  O.  Mears,  a 
prominent  clergyman  of  Worcester:  "During 
the  Prohibition  year  there  were  1,682  arrests  for 
drunkenness;  during  the  low  license  year, 
8,549,  and  during  the  first  six  montlis  of  the 
High  License  year,  1,763.  Thus  in  six  months 
of  High  License  there  were  81  more  arrests  for 
drunkenness  than  during  12  months  of  Prohi- 
bition, and  only  12  fewer  than  one-half  of  the 
whole  number  of  arrests  for  drunkenness  dur- 
ing 12  months  of  low  license.  The  arrests  were 
so  numerous  under  High  License  in  Worcester 
that  the  Worcester  jail  was  not  large  enough  to 
accommodate  the  prisoners,  and  during  the 
seven  months  ending  Nov.  1,  1888,  153  prisoners 
were  transferred  to  the  jail  at  Fitchburg,  where, 
under  Prohibition,  there  were  ample  accom- 
modations. Even  then  Worcester's  jail  was 
overcrowded  and  it  was  necessary  to  discharge 
300  prisoners  to  make  room  for  the  great  num- 
bers of  offenders  manufactured  by  the  High 
License  saloons."'  The  Hon.  George  F.  Hoar, 
Senator  of  the  United  States  from  Massachu- 
setts, is  a  citizen  of  Worcester,  and  at  a  public 
meeting  he  made  the  following  remarks  upon 
the  Increase  in  arrests  since  the  abandonment  of 
Prohibition: 

"  This  meetino;  has  been  called  to  hear  the  report  and 
opinion  of  some  of  our  friends  who  have  had  especial  op- 
portunity to  observe  the  comparative  effects  of  what  is 
known  as  the  High  License  system,  and  of  the  no-license 
system,  npon  the  morals  and  good  manners  of  our  be- 
loved city.  .  .  .  Yon  know  what  the  meaning  of  the 
increase  in  drunkenness  is  to  a  city.  Twice  the  number 
of  murders,  twice  the  number  of  thefts,  twice  the  number 
of  paupers,  twice  the  number  of  all  kinds  of  sin  and 
misery.  Girls  growing  up  to  lives  of  vice,  and  young 
men  to  lives  of  crime,  all  because  of  the  sins  of  the  head  of 
the  family.  That  is  what  the  figures  of  our  increased 
number  of  arrests  since  the  no-license  year  of  1886  mean 
to  the  city  and  to  us." 

Lawrence,  for  the  year  ending  May  1,  1889, 

had  Prohibition,  and  after  that  date  was  under 

High  License  (the  fee  being  $1,000  for  the  sale 

of  all  liquors  for  consumption  on  the  premises). 

The  following  are  comparisons: 

1888,  1889. 
Prohibition.  High  License. 
Convictions     for     drunken- 
ness, May  1  to  Nov.  1 346  747 

Intoxicated  persons  helped 
home    by  police,     May    1 

to  Nov.  1 41  8.^ 

Women  arrested  for  drunk- 
enness, May  1  to  Nov.  1..  57  118 

'  These  Worcester  figures  in  each  ease  run  from  the  be- 
ginning of  the  license  year  (May  1).  The  police  year  ends 
Nov.  30.  The  year  beginning  with  May  1,  1890,  was 
anotlier  Prohibition  year,  and  again  there  was  a  marked 
decrease  in  arrests  for  crime  and  drunkenness.  We  have 
statistics  for  the  police  years  1888,  1889  and  1890  (ending 
Nov.  30),  as  follows:  Total  arrests  1888  (entirely  under 
license),  4,241;  1889  (entirely  under  license),  ;i,949;  1890 
(seven  months  under  Prohibition),  3,011.  Arrests  for 
drunkenness— 1888  (entirely  under  license),  3,216;  1889 
(entirely  under  license),  2,9.^;  1890(seven  months  of  Prohi- 
bition), 2,054.  (For  other  figures  see  the  Voice,  Jan.  1, 1891.) 


In  Springfield  Prohibition  was  the  law  for  the 
year  beginning  May  1,  1887,  license  ($400)  for 
the  year  beginning  May  1,  1888  and  High 
License  ($1,000)  for  the  year  beginning  May  1, 
1889.  The  arrests  for  all  ofi'enses  and  for 
drunkenness  during  the  first  four  months  of 
each  year  were  as  follows  :  ^ 

/ — ^May  1  to  Sept.  1. , 

1887,  1888,  1889, 

Arrests.  Prohibition.  $400  License.  $1,000  License. 
For  all  offenses...  408  879  84.5 

'•    drunkenness..  2;37  609  561 

"Drunkenness,"  said  the  Springfield  Home- 
stead in  1888,  '  is  increasing  at  a  fearful  rate, 
as  it  always  does  under  the  license  system. 
The  new  jail,  which  was  thought  to  be  enor- 
mous when  it  was  built  (1887),  is  already  full 
to  overflowing,  and  nine  out  of  every  ten  men 
there  were  confessedly  taken  there  by  rum. 
This  is  not  sentimental  temperance  talk  but 
dry,  solid  fact."' 

JVew  Bedford,  like  Springfield,  had  Prohibition 
during  the  year  beginning  May  1,  1887,  low 
license  (an  average  of  $230)  the  next  year  and 
High  License  ($1,100)  the  next  year.  The  fol- 
lowing are  police  figures  for  the  first  four 
months  of  each  license  year:  ' 

, May  1  to  Sept.  1. , 

1887,  1888,  1889, 

Arrests.  Prohibition.  $230  License.  $1,100  License. 
All  offenses..  341  474  ,551 

Drunkenness  182  336  316 

D  i  s  o  r  d  e  rly 

(assault  and 

battery  and 

d  i  s  turbing 

the  peace).  ,57  65  99 

Cambridge,  the  seat  of  Harvard  University, 
seems  to  have  taken  a  place  with  the  permanent 
no-license  cities  of  the  State,  having  voted  against 
license  for  five  years  successively  (beginnipg 
with  1886),  although  in  the  five  preceding 
years  it  voted  invariably  for  license;  the  tem])t- 
ations  of  the  High  License  bribe,  which 
proved  irresistible  in  many  cities  in  1$88,  1889 
and  1890  did  not  cause  Cambridge  to  waver. 
This  city  lies  just  on  the  outskirts  of  Boston,  its 
interests  are  identical  with  those  of  the  capital 
and  large  numbers  of  its  people  are  employed 
there,  but  on  the  license  question  it  is  diametri- 
cally opposed  to  Boston.  What  is  it  that  has 
induced  Cambridge  to  maintain  its  brave  stand 
for  Prohibition  ?  Certainly  nothing  else  than 
the  demonstrated  benefits  of  this  policy.  The 
arrests  for  crime  in  the  city  decreased  from 
1,567  in  1886  (11  months)  to  f,391  in  1889,  while 
in  11  months  of  1889  only  308  tramps  were  ac- 
commodated in  the  police  stations  as  against 
986  in  the  last  year  of  license.  ^  "  The  effect  of 
no- license  in  Cambridge  the  last  two  years," 
said  the  Boston  Daily  Traveller  in  December, 
1888,  "  may  be  gleaned  from  the  following:  The 
Police  Captain  says  that  District  No.  2  has  not 
been  so  quiet  since  he  has  been  on  the  force. 
There  have  been  Sundays  in  which  there  was 
not  one  arrest,  something  not  experienced  be- 
fore in  many  years.  The  number  imprisoned 
in  the  stations  has  fallen  off  one-fourth.  Com- 
plaints which  used  to  oc:cupy  four  pages  now 

2  The  Voice,  Oct.  31, 1889. 

3  Political  Prohibitionist  for  1889,  p.  ,57. 
<  TherokY,  Oct.  :«,  1889. 

s  Ibid,  Dec.  13, 1889. 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


533 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


take  less  than  one.  There  are  not  one-tenth  of 
the  men  going  to  Boston  for  liquor  that  went 
last  year." 

Lowell,  a  great  manufacturing  center,  very 
much  to  the  surprise  of  most  of  its  inhabitants, 
voted  for  Prohibition  in  December,  1889,  and 
during  the  succeeding  license  year  (beginning 
with  May  1)  it  was  under  Prohibition;  for 
many  years  previously  it  had  been  uniformly 
under  license.  Figures  for  the  police  years 
1888,  1889  and  1890  (ending  with  Nov.  30;  are 
as  follows; ' 


Years, 
Ending 
Nov.  .30. 

1888 
1889 
1890' 

License 
Fee. 

f500 
1,300 

No.  OF 

.Saloons. 

Total 
Arrests  . 

4.150 
4,557 
3,846 

Arrests 
forDrunk- 

enness. 

2.930 
3.307 
2,638 

217 
64 

'  Seven  months  under  Prohibition,  five  montho  under 
$1,300  license. 

Fall  River,  another  very  important  manu- 
facturing city,  with  an  enormous  population  of 
working  people,  also  had  Prohibition  from  the 
1st  of  May.  1890.  The  police  records  give  the 
following  showing:  '^ 


Years, 
Ending 
Nov.  30. 

1888 
18S9 
1890' 

License 
Fee. 

No.  OF 
Saloons. 

Total 
Arrests  . 

Arrests 
forDrunk- 

enness. 

1,348 
1.520 
1.309 

$1,000 
1,300 

260 
56 

2.372 

2,414 
2.069 

>  Seven  months  under  Prohibition,  five  months   under 
S;l,3f)0  license. 

Wohurn,  like  Lowell  and  Fall  River,  began  a 
Prohibition  year  with  May  1,  1890,  and  had 
license  the  two  preceding  years.  In  this  city 
the  police  year  ends  with  Dec.  30,  and  there- 
fore the  figures  for  1890  in  the  table  below  are 
not  complete:^ 


Years, 
Ending 
Dec.  30. 

1888 
18H9 
1890' 


License 

Fee. 

$300 
1,300 


No.  OF 

Saloons. 

62 
11 


Total 
Arrests 

4.50 
5(:9 
350 


Arrests 
forDrunk- 

ENNESS. 

252 
.332 
213 


'  Eleven  months,  of  which  seven  mouths  were  Prohibi- 
tion and  four  months  $1,300  license. 

Canada's  Experience  {Province  of 
Ontario). — The  extensive  Prohibition  of 
Canada  has  heen  secured  under  the 
Scott  (Local  Option)  act.  The  first 
county  in  the  Province  of  Ontario  to 
establish  the  act  throughout  its  territory 
was  Halton  (1881),  and  there  Avas  at  once 
a  fair  decrease  in  commitments  for 
drunkenness  there.  As  late  as  1884 
Halton  was  the  only  Ontario  county  in 
which  (as  a  whole)  the  act  was  in  force. 
But  during  the  next  three  years  many 
other    counties,  in    whole    or   in    part, 


adopted  it.  In  1887  no  less  than  23 
counties  were  wholly  and  nine  others 
were  partly  under  Prohibition;  while  16 
remained  entirely  under  license.  The 
following  tables  contrasting  the  numbers 
of  commitments  for  drunkenness  in  1884 
and  1887  for  each  of  the  three  classes  of 
counties  are  taken  from  Government 
returns : * 


Com. 

FOR 

Com 

FOR 

Dkunk 

1884, 

ENNESS. 

1887, 

Drunkenness. 

1884, 

1887, 

CoUNTrES. 

Entire- 

Entire- 

Counties. 

Entire- 

Entire- 

ly 

b- 

ly 

ly 

under 

under 

under 

under 

Li- 

Prohi- 

Li- 

Prohi- 

cense. 

bition. 

cense. 

bition. 

Bruce  .... 

3 

6 

Ontario. . . 

1 

None 

Dufferin. .. 

1 

3 

Oxford  . . . 

51 

i. 

Elgin 

82 

25 

Peterboro. 

30 

11 

Huron 

4 

None 

Renfrew . . 

27 

2 

Kent 

26 

7 

Simcoe  . . . 

99 

16 

Lambton  . 

105 

38 

S  tor-   "I 

Lanark 

7 

9 

mont . 

Leeds  . .  ) 

G  r  en-     /- 

ville  . .  \ 

Dundas.  V 

9 

4 

135 

24 

Glengar- 

ry ... . 

Lenox  . .  ) 

Welling- 1 
ton 1 

49 

22 

Adding-  V 

ton  ...\ 

Norfolk... 

20 

8 

17 

5 

Totals... 

692 

186 

N'thum-  1 

Decrease. 

506 

berland..  V 

26 

6 

Durham.  S 

Com 

FOR 

Com.  FOB 

Drunkenness. 

Drunkenness. 

1884. 

1887, 

1884, 

1887, 

Counties. 

Entire- 

Part- 

Counties. 

Entire- 

Part- 

ly 

ly 

ly 

ly 

under 

under 

under 

under 

Li- 

Prohi- 

Li- 

Prohi- 

cense. 

bition. 

cense. 

bition. 

Brant 

58 

113 

Victoria  . . 

Carleton.. 

314 

286 

Halibur-  1 

20 

2 

Frontenac 

75 

108 

ton f 

Lincoln  . . 
Middlesex 

.39 
445 

21 
404 

Totals... 

967 

941 

Musko-  ) 

Decrease. 

26 

ka  Parry  > 
Sound".  \ 

16 

8 

Counties. 

Co.H.    FOR 

Drunkenness. 

Counties. 

Com.  for 

Drunkenness. 

i 

1884. 
Entire- 

under 

Li- 
cense. 

1887, 
Entire- 

under 

Li- 
cense. 

1884, 
Entire- 

under 

Li- 
cense. 

1887, 
Entire- 

under 

Li- 
cense. 

Algoma. . . 

Essex 

(Jrey 

Halimand. 
Hastings. . 
Nippissing 

Peel 

Perth 

Prescott.  ( 

Russell. .  (■ 

P.    E.        \ 

County,  f 

15 

103 

23 

7 
50 
17 
10 
14 

None 
46 

85 
45 
21 
17 
51 
13 
8 
12 

None 
20 

Thunder  1 
Bay . . .  S 

Waterloo. . 

Wei  land  . . 

W  e  n  t  -  ( 
worth.  ( 

York 

Totals... 
Increase. 

705 

11 
23 

295 

1,661 

148 

8 
33 

373 

2,166 

2,980 

2,999 
19 

J  See  the  Voice,  Dec,  18, 1890.     « Ibid.    3  Ibid. 


*  The  Voice,  Feb.  7,  1889. 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


534 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


Other  Instances. — The  evidence  from 
Massachusetts  and  Canada  is  by  far  the 
most  important,  of  a  general  kind,  that 
has  yet  been  gathered.  Indeed,  Mas- 
sachusetts is  the  only  State  of  the  Union 
in  which  a  systematic  attempt  has  been 
made  to  exhibit  the  results  of  Local 
Option  Prohibition.  Avoiding  the  mul- 
tiplicity of  testimony  for  scattered  local- 
ities we  give  under  this  head  a  few  of  the 
most  vital  of  recent  facts,  selecting  com- 
munities that  are  strictly  representative 
and  widely  separated. 

Atlanta,  Oa. — This  city  voted  for  Prohibi- 
tion in  November,  1885,  after  a  prolonged  and 
exciting  discussion.  With  a  population  of 
37,409  in  1880(16,330  being  colored),  which  had 
increased  rapidly,  and  in  view  of  the  circum- 
stances under  which  the  policy  was  introduced 
and  tried,  the  experiment  in  the  Georgia  capital 
was  watched  with  uncommon  interest  through- 
out the  country.  There  is  no  other  city  of  the 
South  where  so  notable  a  test  of  Prohibition 
has  been  made.  The  system  had  excellent  sup- 
port, but  the  advantage  was  not  altogether  with 
its  friends;  seven  months  elapsed  before  it  took 
effect,  the  manufacturing  and  wholesale  trades 
continued,  wine  was  sold  at  retail,  and  there 
was  a  "jug  trade"  or  illicit  traffic  with  neigh- 
boring cities.  After  Prohibition  had  been  in 
force  for  12  months  the  Atlanta  Daily  Conhti- 
iution  (the  chief  newspaper  of  the  city,  which 
had  not  advocated  the  measure)  printed,  June 
21,  1887,  an  elaborate  editorial  article,  impar- 
tially examining  the  results.  Nearly  the  whole 
of  it  was  devoted  to  a  demonstration  of  the  im- 
proved condition  of  the  city  commercially  and 
socially  ;  the  information  bearing  upon  these 
aspects  will  be  noticed  in  our  survey  of  the 
"Effects  upon  Commercial  Prosperity."  (See 
p.  544.)  Concerning  the  operation  of  the  law 
in  reducing  the  evils  of  drink  the  ConstUution 
said  : 

;  "  Prohibition  in  this  city  does  prohibit.  The  law 
JB  observed  as  well  as  the  law  against  carrying;  concealed 
weapons,  gamblins:,  theft,  and  otiier  offenses  of  like 
character.  If  there  had  been  as  many  people  in  favor  of 
carrying  concealed  weapons,  theft,  gambling,  etc.,  as  there 
were  in  favor  of  the  retail  of  ardent  spirits  12  months  ago, 
law  against  these  things  would  not  have  been  carried  ont 
as  well  as  it  was  against  the  liquor  trade.  In  considera- 
tion of  the  small  majority  with  which  Prohibition  was 
carried,  and  the  large  number  of  people  who  were  op- 
posed to  seeing  it  prohibit,  the  law  has  been  marvelously 

well  observed 

•■  The  determination  on  the  part  of  the  people  to  pro- 
hibit the  liquor  traffic  has  stimulated  a  disposition  to  do 
away  with  other  evils.  The  laws  against  gambling  are 
rigidly  enforced.  A  considerable  stock  of  gamblers' 
tools  gathered  together  by  the  police  for  several  years 

East  was  recently  used  for  the  purpose  of  making  a  large 
onflre  on  one  of  the  unoccupied  squares  of  the  city.  The 
City  Council  has  refused  longer  to  grant  licenses  to 
bucket-shops,  thus  putting  the  seal  of  its  condemnation 
upon  the  trade  in  futures  of  all  kinds. 

'•  All  these  reforms  have  had  a  decided  tendency  to 
diminish  crime.  Two  weeks  were  necessary  formerly  to 
get  through  with  the  criminal  docket.  During  the  present 
year  it  was  closed  out  in  two  days.  The  chain-gang  is 
•almost  left  with  nothing  but  the  chains  and  the  balls. 
The  gang  part  would  liot  be  large  enough  to  work  tbe 
{lublic  roads  of  the  county  were  it  not  augmented  by 
Iresh  supplies  from  the  surrounding  counties.  The  City 
Government  is  in  the  hands  of  our  best  citizens.  .  .  . 
There  is  very  little  driukiug  iu  the  city.    There  has  been 


40  per  cent,  falling  off  in  the  number  of  arrests,  not- 
withstanding there  has  been  a  rigid  interpretation  of  the 
law  under  which  arrests  are  made.  Formerly,  if  a  mau 
was  sober  enough  to  walk  home  he  was  not  molested. 
Now,  if  there  is  the  slightest  variation  from  that  state  in 
which  the  center  of  gravity  falls  in  a  line  inside  the  base, 
the  party  is  made  to  answer  for  such  variation  at  the 
station-house." 

The   Sunny    South,    another    representative 

journal  of  Atlanta,  said,  June  11,  1887: 

"The  annals  of  history  will  never  perhaps  contains 
more  wonderful  revolution  than  that  of  Prohibition  in 
Atlanta.  When  the  issue  was  first  joined  the  advocates 
of  the  liquor  traffic  declared  that  Prohibition  could  never 
be  carried  in  a  city  of  the  size  of  Atlanta,  and  if  carried 
could  never  be  enforced.  Many  advocated  High  License, 
and  some  the  substitution  of  wine  for  whiskey  and  brandy. 
No  law  has  ever  been  more  vigorously  for.ght  than  Prohibi- 
tion has  been  in  Atlanta.  Every  artifice  and  scheme  has 
been  resorted  to  to  nullify  the  operations  of  the  law.  The 
Courts  have  been  tried.  The  provisions  of  the  Prohibitory 
law  exempting  licenses  from  being  terminated  before  they 
expired  were  used  to  defeat  the  law,  as  well  as  that  allow- 
ing the  sale  of  domestic  wine.  A  great  parade  was  made 
of  liquor  being  brouirht  in  the  city  in  jugs  in  order  to 
throw  odium  upon  the  law.  But  Prohibition  is  not  a 
failure  in  Atlanta,  as  the  records  show.  The  Courts  have 
sustained  it.  Drinking  has  been  cut  off  80  per  cent.  The 
arrests  for  drunkenness  have  been  largely  reduced,  and  it 
only  requires  one  policeman  to  guard  1,000  inhabitants. 
One  hundred  and  thirty  barrooms,  vending  on  an  aver- 
age 13,000  drinks  daily,  have  been  wiped  out.  Families 
that  during  the  prevalence  of  the  liquor  traffic  suffered 
for  the  necessaries  of  life  because  theh-  means  were 
squandered  for  licpior,  are  now  enal>led  to  supply  their 
wants  from  the  money  saved  by  Prohibition." 

When  the  question  of  repealing  the  act  came 
up  in  the  fall  of  1887  the  citizens  most  promi- 
nent for  character,  public  spirit  and  ability 
were  all  but  unanimous  in  opposing  repeal. 
Their  objections  were  based  upon  no  senti- 
mental considerations  or  mere  partisanship  but 
upon  the  great  good  that  Prohibition  had  ac- 
complished. Their  principal  spokesman  was 
the  brilliant  young  orator,  Henry  W.  Gradj-, 
whose  reputation  had  spread  throughout  the 
Union,  and  who,  as  a  man  before  whom  politi- 
cal opportunities  seemed  to  be  opening,  could 
certainly  not  have  afforded  to  champion  an  un- 
popular cause  unless  its  righteousness  was  unde- 
niable. In  1885  Mr.  Grady  had  doubted  the  ex- 
pediency of  Prohibition  and  had  favored  High 
License.  But  he  now  made  an  independent 
study  of  the  condition  of  the  city  and  found 
that  it  had  been  blessed  in  all  ways  by  this  law. 
He  delivered  a  series  of  thrilling  addresses, 
perliaps  the  most  famous  speeches  ever  made  in 
advocacy  of  the  policy  of  Prohibition  by  a  public 
man  not  specially  identified  with  the  movement. 
The  strength  of  his  pleas  was  in  the  proofs  that 
he  gave  of  the  better  condition  of  the  poor  and 
the  absolute  failure  of  all  predictions  that  the 
prosperity  of  Atlanta  would  be  injured.  There- 
fore quotations  from  them  are  reserved  for  the 
second  division  of  this  article,  under  the  head, 
' '  Benefits  to  the  Wage- Workers  and  the  Poor. " 
But  Mr.  Grady  bore  emphatic  testimony  to  the 
diminution  of  criminal  convictions.  He  showed 
from  the  records  that  there  had  been  a  steady 
increase  in  the  number  of  convictions  during 
the  license  years,  but  that  the  number  had  de- 
creased to  a  marked  extent  under  partial  en- 
forcement of  Prohibition.  "  There  was  scarcely 
a  case  of  vagrancy  for  a  year  past,"  said  he. 
The  returns  for  nine  months  of  the  last  year  of 
Prohibition,  compared  with  nine  months  of  the 
year  of  High  License  following  it  (fees  of 
1 1,000  lor  the  sale  of  all  liquors  and  $100  foi 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


535 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


the  sale  of  beer  only  being  charged),  are  as  fol- 
lows :  Total  arrests — first  nine  months  of  1887 
(Prohibition),  4,524  ;  first  nine  months  of  1888 
(High  License),  5,805.  Arrests  for  drunkenness 
— fir.st  nine  months  of  1887,  674 ;  first  nine 
months  of  1888,  1,519.  The  total  arrests  for  the 
whole  of  the  year  1885  (low  license)  were  6,305  ; 
for  the  whole  of  the  year  1887  (Prohibition), 
6,138;'  for  the  whole  of  the  year  1888  (High 
License),  7,817.  =^ 

Raleigh,  the  capital  of  North  Carolina,  with 
a  negro  element  proportionately  even  larger 
than  Atlanta's,  had  local  Prohibition  during  the 
two  years  beginning  with  1886.  In  1888  High 
License  was  substituted  for  that  system,  and 
after  a  few  months'  trial  of  the  new  law  the 
Raleigh  Spirit  of  the  Age  said: 

"What  is  the  consequence?  No  pen  can  answer  that 
question  save  the  pen  of  the  recording  angel,  for  God 
only  knows  the  fearful  result  of  the  reopening  of  the  bar- 
rooms. Is  there  more  drunlienness  now  than  during 
Prohibition?  At  least  five  times  as  much;  and  commen- 
surate with  the  increase  of  drinking  and  drunkenness  is 
the  increase  of  wickedness  and  crime.  The  daily  arrests 
by  our  policemen  will  give  any  man  who  wants  the  infor 
mation  an  idea  of  what  the  dramshops  are  doing." 

The  other  newspapers  of  Raleigh  printed 
from  time  to  time  tacts  in  keeping  with  these 
statements.  For  example,  in  the  month  of 
March,  1889  (High  License),  there  were  103 
arrests  for  all  causes  as  against  53  in  the  same 
month  of  1888  (Prohibition),  50  arrests  for 
"drunk  and  disorderly,"  "drunk  and  down" 
and  "drunk  on  the  street  " as  against  13  in  1888, 
10  arrests  for  "affrays"  as  against  2  in  1888, 
etc.^ 

Charleston,  the  capital  of  West  Virginia,  had 
low  license  ($300),  Prohibition,  and  High  Li- 
cense ($850),  respectively,  in  the  years  ending 
in  1886,  1887  and  1888.  The  total  arrests  for 
the  three  years  were:  1886  (low  license),  423; 
1887  (Prohibition),  236;  1888  (High  License), 
496.* 

1  As  is  shown  above,  the  total  number  of  arrests  in  the 
first  nine  months  of  1887  was  4,5.24,  so  that  in  the  last 
three  months  there  were  1,614,  a  disproportionately  large 
numl)er  as  compared  with  the  preceding  months  of  this 
Prohibition  year.  Tlie  explanation  is  that  in  the  repeal 
campaign,  which  was  waged  with  great  vigor  in  October 
and  November,  liquor  was  unscrupulously  smuggled  in 
by  the  rum  element  and  dealt  out  liberally  to  the  low 
classes  with  the  double  purpose  of  discrediting  the  law 
and  bribing  the  voters,  and  that  after  the  election  (which 
came  in  the  end  of  November)  the  rumsellers  took  pos- 
session of  the  town  and  sold  boldly.  At  Christmas  time 
there  was  a  fearful  outburst  of  intemperance,  disorder  and 
crime.  "The  prison  van  ran  hither  and  thither  until  the 
wee  hours  of  the  Sabbath,"  said  a  daily  press  dispatch, 
Dec.  25,  "carrying  each  time  full  complements  of  men  and 
women,  whites  and  blacks,  who  were  unceremoniously 
piled  into  the  grated  conveyance,  and  as  it  bowled  over 
the  pavement  profanity  of  the  vilest  type  and  songs  of 
the  most  revolting  kind  issued  through  the  iron-oarred 
cages.  At  the  pen,  a  close  and  confined  apartment  in- 
tended for  the  imprisonment  of  perhaps  a  score  of  of- 
fenders, the  sight  was  one  that  carried  with  it  but  one 
suggestion — that  of  a  den  of  hungry  beasts  howling  for 
their  customary  allowance  of  food.  Yelling,  screaming 
and  singing  were  indulged  in  by  the  drunken  contingent 
as  the  hours  rolled  on,  and  the  van  being  still  out  the  ros- 
ter received  considerable  accessions,  more  than  70  per- 
sons being  corraled  in  all  before  morning.  The  police 
were  kept  busy  to-day  and  the  prisoners  were  joined 
by  other  delegations.  Pew  were  discharged,  and  to-night 
more  recruits  were  recorded."  (See  the  Voice,  Dec.  29, 
1887.) 

2  The  Voice,  Jan.  2,  1890. 

3  Political  Prohibitionist  for  1889,  p.  59. 

*  In  the  two  license  years  there  were  great  revivals,  in- 
fluences helping  to  promote  sobriety  and  diminish  the 


RocJcford,  III.,  presents  an  equally  acceptable 
basis  for  comparisons.  In  the  year  beginning 
June  1,  1887,  the  license  fee  was  $1,000,  and  in 
the  next  year  the  sale  was  prohibited.  The 
total  arrests  for  the  first  seven  months  of  the 
license  year  1887-8  (High  License)  were  309, 
for  the  same  months  of  1888-9  (Prohibition), 
157  ;  arrests  for  drunkenness  in  the  same 
months  of  1887-8,  310,  as  against  110  in  the 
same  mouths  of  1888-9.  The  following  are 
statistics  for  each  license  year  from  June  1, 
1879  to  June  1,  1888,  inclusive:  ^ 


Years 
Ending 
June  1. 

License 

Fee. 

No.  OF 
Saloons. 

Drunk 

AND 

Disorderly. 

1879 

1880 
1881 
1^82 
1883 
1884 
1885 
1886 
1887 
1888 

$2.50 
Prohibition. 
Prohibition. 

501) 

500 

600 

600 

600 

600 
1,000 

24 
Prohibition. 
Prohibition. 

23 

23 

25 

24 

24 

26 

25 

150 
124 
117 
348 
414 
338 
3(i2 
243 
305 
343 

Local  Prohibition  has  numerous  forms 
not  strictly  classifiable  under  the  term 
"  Local  Option  Prohibition."  In  many 
places  the  "'  option  "  principle  has  never 
been  recognized,  outright  and  permanent 
Prohibition  having  been  prescribed  by 
original  settlers  or  controlling  land- 
owners, and  subsequent  purchasers  of 
property  having  been  bound  by  the  con- 
ditions of  title-deeds  not  to  permit  liquor- 
selling.  In  other  places,  not  anchored 
to  Prohibition  by  such  arbitrary  restric- 
tions, the  citizens  have  been  wise,  virtu- 
ous and  persevering  enough  to  adhere 
steadily  to  the  policy  after  witnessing  its 
advantages,  and  thus  the  "option"  is 
never  exercised;  such  places  are  the 
thriving  cities  of  Maiden,  Sonierville  and 
Quincy  in  Massachusetts  (see  p.  531), 
and  Vineland,  MillviUe  and  Bridgeton 
in  New  Jersey.  In  another  class  of  cities 
and  towns  the  normal  method  is  license, 
but  the  sale  is  absolutely  prohibited  on 
Sundays,  on  holidays  and  in  times  of 
emergency. 

Oreeley,  Col.,  is  a  flourishing  Western  town 
in  a  region  supposed  to  be  filled  with  cowboys 
and  other  lawless  people.  In  1886  it  had  a 
population  of  about  2,500.  Its  county  (Weld) 
contained  10,000  people,  and  neither  in  the 
town  nor  in  the  county  was  there  a  single 
pauper.  Prohibition  had  been  the  law  without 
interruption    for    many    years.     A    prominent 


business  of  the  saloons.  But  in  the  Prohibition  year 
there  were  no  such  helps  to  the  temperance  cause,  and, 
liesides,  there  were  heated  electoral  campaigns  and  a  very 
exciting  session  of  the  Legislature — conditions  that  did 
not  exist  in  either  of  the  license  years. — Political  Pro- 
hibUionist  for  1889,  p.  59. 
5  Political  Prohibitionist  for  1889,  p.  58. 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


536 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


citizen  of  Greeley  wrote  as  follows  in  the  Voice 
for  Nov.  18,  1886: 

"  We  have  a  $40,000  Court-house,  and  a  fine  jail— an 
ornamental  appendage  of  the  Court-house, — which  has  on 
an  average  onl\'  one  occupant;  and  those  who  are  impris- 
oned from  time  to  time  do  not  generally  belong  here,  but 
are  caught  here  while  trying  to  hide  away  frotn  justice.  .  .  . 
From  the  City  C^lerk's  office  We  learn  that  the  expense  of 
the  Marshal  for  the  city  of  (irceley  for  the  year  1880 
was  $81. ,55;  the  number  of  arrests  niade,  7:  the  expense 
for  ^Marshal  in  1881  was  $49  and  the  number  of  arrests,  5. 
The  Marshal's  exp^-nse  for  188i  was  $39.75,  and  the  num- 
V)er  of  arrests,  4.  In  1883  the  Marshal  was  paid  by  the 
month  at  a  salary  of  $40  per  month.  But  this  was  re- 
garded as  a  useless  expense,  and  from  that  time  on  the 
Marshal  has  been  paid  only  for  the  amount  of  work 
done.  In  1884  the  expense  of  the  Marshal  amounted  to 
$288. .55.  This  large  expense  was  caused  by  the  success- 
ful iirosecution  of  a  liquor  case.  The  expenses  for  Mar- 
shal in  1885  were  only  $8;^.  On  several  occasions  persons 
have  attempted  to  sell  liquor  on  the  sly,  but  they  have 
been  speedily  detected,  arrested  and  fined  to  the  full  ex- 
tent of  the  law." 

PuUman,  III. — The  foundations  of  this  city 
were  laid  in  May,  1880,  and  the  first  family 
moved  there  in  January,  1881.  In  October, 
1890,  it  had  a  population  of  about  11,000.  It 
owes  its  existence  and  prosperity  to  the  Pullman 
Palace  Car  Company.  Mr.  Pullman  chose  tlie 
site  and  bought  all  the  laud  (4,000  acres).  Ex- 
tensive car-works  were  erected  and  cottages  were 
built  for  the  accommodation  of  the  workmen. 
It  is  strictly  a  manufacturing  and  wage-earners' 
city:  in  1890  5,250  persons  were  employed  as 
operatives  in  the  industries;  many  of  these, 
however,  were  residents  of  neighboring  towns, 
for,  besides  the  11,000  inhabitants  of  Pullman, 
there  weie  10,000  more  people  within  a  mile  of 
its  railroad  depot.  In  the  title-deeds  to  all  the 
property,  from  the  beginning,  have  been  clauses 
absolutely  prohibiting  the  liquor  traffic,  and  it 
is  uuiversidly  admitted  that  I  his  provision  has 
given  its  humble  people  the  remarkably  fortu- 
nate conditions  of  life  that  they  enjoy.  In  1890 
not  more  than  200  children  were  employed  in 
the  shops,  a  wonderfully  small  number  in  a  city 
of  which  nearly  all  the  male  adults  are  day- 
laborers.  There  were  only  five  physicians  living 
within  its  limits  to  .serve  the  11,000  people. 
Tlie  death-rate  has  never  been  in  excess  of  11  per 
1,000  per  annum,  about  one-half  the  average 
death-rate  for  American  cities.  Only  two 
policemen  were  needed  to  keep  order,  and  these 
were  detailed  from  the  Chicago  force;  for  in 
the  absence  of  saloons  it  is  unnecessary  to  main- 
tain a  police  department.  Yet  license  towns  are 
not  far  distant,  and  Pullman  is  embraced  with- 
in the  34th  Ward  of  the  great  rum  city  of  Chi- 
cago; so  that  the  effectiveness  of  local  Prohibi- 
tion, even  here,  is  counteracted  to  a  certain 
extent,  i 

The  experience  of  all  other  long-established 
and  strict  temperance  towns,  from  the  smallest 
to  the  largest,  simply  repeats  the  evidence  that 
we  have  given.  Permanent  Prohibition  by 
title-deeds  or  by  ordinance  is  rapidly  gaining 
popularity  among  men  of  sound  business  judg- 
ment as  well  as  those  of  humane  instincts.  In 
mining  centers  like  the  new  city  of  Harriman 
(Tenn.)  and  others  of  the  South,  in  seaside 
resorts  like  Asbury  Park  and  Ocean  Grove  (N. 
J.),  in  the  popular  mountain  towns  of  Mary- 

'  Most  of  the  facts  here  stated  are  taken  from  a  de- 
scriptive circular  issued,  Oct.  14,  1890,  by  Duane  Doty, 
editor  of  tlie  Pullman  Arcade  Journal, 


land,  in  such  California  communities  as  Pasa- 
dena and  Riverside,  the  results  are  always  the 
same — the  worst  public  evils  are  hardly  known 
if  the  drink  business  is  not  present,  or  vanish 
with  its  disappearance. 

England,  having  no  other  reliable  means  of 
procuring  complete  local  Prohibition  than  the 
authority  of  proprietors,  has  utilized  this  means 
in  a  great  many  places.  The  large  town  of 
Saltaire,  neiu-  the  city  of  Bradford,  resembles 
Pullman  in  its  conditions;  it  is  devoted  to  manu- 
facturing and  most  of  its  inhabitants  are  work- 
ingmen.  The  sale  of  liquors  is  totally  pro- 
hibited. Mr.  James  Hole,  in  his  "Homes  of 
the  Working  Classes,"  says: 

"There  are  scarcely  ever  any  arrears  of  rent.  Infant 
mortality  is  very  low  as  compared  with  that  of  Bradford, 
from  which  place  the  majority  of  the  hands  have  come. 
Illegitimate  births  are  rare.  The  tone  and  self-respect  of 
the  work-jjeople  are  much  greater  than  that  of  factory 
hands  generally.  Their  wages  are  not  high,  but  they  en- 
able them  to  secure  more  of  the  comforts  and  decencies 
of  life  than  they  could  elsewhere,  owing  to  the  facilities 
placed  within  their  reach,  and  the  absence  of  drinking- 
houses." 

In  the  Province  of  Canterbtiry  more  than  a 
thousand  parishes  are  wholly  free  from  public 
houses  and  beer-shops,  and  in  1869  the  Com- 
mittee of  the  Lower  Hou.se  of  Convocation  of 
that  Province  made  a  report  declaring  that  "in 
consequence  of  the  absence  of  thc^e  induce- 
ments to  crime  and  pauperism,  according  to  the 
evidence  before  the  Committee,  the  intelligence, 
morality  and  comfort  of  the  people  are  such  as 
the  friends  of  temperance  would  have  antici- 
pated." Appended  to  the  report  were  detailed 
answers  from  243  clergymen  and  11  Chief  Con- 
stables and  Superintendents  of  Police,  in  which 
appeared  frequent  statements  like  the  following: 
"No  public  hou.se,  no  beer-shop — no  crime;" 
"  No  public  house,  no  beer-shop — no  intemper- 
ance ;"  "In  parishes  where  there  are  neither 
public  houses  nor  beer-shops  the  absence  of 
crime  is  remarkable."'''  All  candid  English- 
men, when  confronted  with  infoimation  as  to 
the  actual  effects  of  Prohibition  by  landlords, 
have  admitted  its  exceeding  benefits.  The 
Artisans,  Laborers  and  General  Dwellings' 
Company  operates  great  estates,  upon  which 
are  many  thousands  of  residents,  and  has  rigidly 
excluded  all  dramshops.  At  the  opening  of 
Shaftesbury  Park,  one  of  these  estates,  on  July 
18,  1874,  Earl  Shaftesbury  presided  and  an- 
nounced amid  cheers  that  no  public  house  would 
be  permitted  within  its  limits.  The  Prime 
Mini.ster  and  eminent  Conservative  statesman, 
Benjamin  Disraeli  (Earl  Beaconsfield)  then 
said: 

"The  experiment  which  you  have  made  has  succeeded 
and  therefore  can  hardly  be  called  an  experiment;  but  in 
its  success  is  involved  the  triumph  of  the  social  virtues, 
and  the  character  of  the  great  body  of  the  people.  .  .  . 
I  see  the  possibility  of  attaining  results  which  may  guide 
the  councils  of  the  nation  in  the  enterprise  which  I  be- 
lieve is  impending  in  this  country,  on  a  great  scale,  of  at- 
tempting to  improve  the  dwellings  of  the  great  body  of 
the  people. "3 

Liverpool  has  populous  districts  under  Pro- 
hibition, and  the  system  works  for  the  welfare 
of  all,  landlords  and  tenants,  builders  and  in- 

*  Alcohol  and  the  State,  pp.  314-15. 

'  Local  Option,  by  \V.  S.  Caine,  M.  P.,  William  Hoyle, 
F.  S.  S.,  and  Kev,  Dawson  Burns,  D.  D.  (London,  1885), 
p.  84. 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


537 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


vestors,  rich  and  poor,  while  the  police  have 
few  or  no  duties  to  perform  in  the  temperance 
quarters  of  that  drink-cursed  city.' 

As  for  the  influence  of  Sunday  and  holiday 
Prohibition  in  license  cities,  it  is  invariably 
wholesome.  This  is  seen  in  the  almost  com- 
plete application  of  the  principle  of  Sunday-clos- 
ing throughout  tlie  United  States:  it  is  recognized 
to  be  a  good  thing.  Enforcement  is  not  always 
rigid,  but  even  a  nominal  closing  of  the  saloons 
is  found  to  be  an  advantage.  Thorough  en- 
forcement never  fails  to  have  striking  results. 
New  York  Glty  has  been  forced  to  provide  the 
Prohibition  advocates  with  valuable  compari- 
sons. In  1866  a  Metropolitan  Excise  law  for 
New  York  and  Brooklyn  was  passed,  and  for 
two  years  the  police  suppressed  Sunday  sales 
with  tolerable  rigor.  The  report  of  the  Metro- 
politan Police  Commissioners  for  1867  showed 
that  on  eight  Sundays  in  1865  (under  the  old 
system)  there  were  1,078  arrests,  and  on  the 
corresponding  eight  Sundays  of  1867  (under 
Prohibition)  there  were  523  ;  meanwhile  on 
eight  Tuesdays  in  1865  the  arrests  aggre- 
gated 1,018,  and  in  1867  1,303."  The  Massa- 
chusetts license  law  uow^  prohibits  liquor-sell- 
ing on  all  holidays.  In  Bonton  this  meas- 
ure has  brought  a  great  reduction  in 
the  number  of  holiday  arre.sts.  On  "  Labor 
Day  "  (the  first  Monday  of  September)  the  total 
arrests  in  1888  (saloons  open)  were  212  as  against 
78  in  1889  (saloons  closed);  arrests  for  drunken- 
ness on  this  day,  179  in  1888  as  against  58  in 
1889;  arrests  of  non-residents,  58  in  1888  as 
against  9  in  188').^  (For  police  returns  for  the 
period  of  Prohibition  at  the  time  of  the  Boston 
tire,  see  pp.  528-9.) 

ECONOMIC   AND   OTHER   EFFECTS. 

The  unprejudiced  person  must  in- 
stinctively feel  that  ii.  policy  that  so  re- 
markably curtails  intemperance,  crime 
and  pauperism,  the  most  dreadful,  wast- 
ino;  and  humiliatinsj  evils  of  modern 
civilization,  is  presumably  sound  and 
beneficial  from  the  economist's  point  of 
view.  If  under  such  a  policy  fewer  in- 
dividuals destroy  their  health,  character 
and  happiness,  squander  their  means  and 
impoverish  and  disgrace  their  families; 
if  violence,  indecency  and  graver  wrongs, 
offenses  against  the  person,  against 
property  and  against  the  State,  are  al- 
ways lessened  under  fairly  executed  Pro- 
hibition and  often  put  practically  to  an 
end;  if  the  occupations  of  the  criminal, 
the  policeman,  the  shyster  and  the  jailer 
become  less  important,  it  is  hard  to  un- 
derstand how  the  policy  can  fail  to  do 
good  on  economic  as  well  as  on  moral 
and  social  grounds.  It  is  recognized,  of 
course,  that  certain  deprivations  must 
ensue  from  it;  individuals  are  made  to 

>  See  "Alcohol  and  the  State,"  pp.  332-4.    ^  Ibid,  p.  332. 
»  The  Yoice,  Sept.  12,  1889. 


sacrifice  indulgences  which  by  many  are 
thought  to  contribute  to  the  charms  of 
life;  particular  kinds  of  opportunities 
for  trade  and  gain  are  necessarily  shut, 
and  the  visible  revenues  of  the  Govern- 
ment from  various  sources  are  checked. 
But  it  is  capable  of  demonstration  that, 
assuming  that  the  drink  trafhc  could  be 
wholly  exterminated,  all  these  depriva- 
tions would  be  more  than  balanced  by 
resulting  advantages.  The  merits  of 
this  conditional  proposition  are  con- 
sidered in  other  articles,  especially  Cost 
OF  THE  Dkixk  Traffic  and  Personal 
Liberty.  The  teachings  of  actual  ex- 
perience will  now  be  examined. 

Effects  upon  Commercial  Prosper'ity. 

The  license  advocates  have  no  more  ag- 
gressive argument  against  Prohibition 
than  that  it  will  injure  the  general  inter- 
ests of  trade.  But  if  this  argument  is 
viewed  apart  from  all  evidence,  simply 
with  a  desire  to  see  upon  what  fundamen- 
tal principles  it  is  based,  we  shall  find  it 
difficult  to  think  that  the  assumption  of 
the  license  theorists  is  more  reasonable 
than  the  assumption  of  the  Prohibition 
theorists.  On  the  one  hand  license 
causes  a  single  line  of  trade,  the  liquor 
traffic,  to  flourish,  and  incidentally  keeps 
a  few  allied  industries — like  the  malting 
and  bottling — afloat,  while  it  brings  some 
business  to  certain  other  merchants;  on 
the  other  hand  it  prevents  consumption 
of  and  therefore  demand  for  the  neces- 
saries and  luxuries,  and  the  degree  of 
this  prevention  is  known  by  all  to  be  ap- 
palling. Contrast  the  commercial  ad- 
vantages of  license  with  its  commercial 
disadvantages  (aside  from  all  questions 
as  to  the  possibility  of  carrying  out  Pro- 
hibition if  secured),  and  few  will  be  dis- 
posed to  claim  that  the  former  are 
superior.  The  fact  that  trade  enjoys 
wonderful  and  increasing  prosperity  in 
license  cities  is  misleading  if  used  to 
assert  that  fortunate  trade  conditions 
exist  because  of  license  or  would  be  im- 
paired if  the  license  policy  were  ended. 
Such  an  assertion  resembles  the  opinion 
of  the  self-satisfied  manufacturer  or 
farmer,  who,  having  prospered  by  stick- 
ing to  the  methods  of  his  ancestors,  dis- 
cards new  devices  without  studying  them, 
on  the  principle  that  it  is  wisest  to  "let 
well  enough  alone."  Therefore  no  in- 
telligent  plea    against    Prohibition    on 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 

commercial  grounds  can  be  founded  on 
the  encouraging  general  aspects  of  busi- 
ness under  the  license  system.     The  de- 
velopment of  trade  depends  upon  natural 
and  acquired  facilities  (the  inducements 
to  enterprise),  and  upon  enterprise.     The 
great  cities  are  the  centers  of  trade  de- 
velopment,  not    because    they    nourish 
saloons  but  because  they  enjoy  facilities 
and  enterprise.     At  best  neither  license 
nor  Prohibition  can  have  more  than  an 
incidental  influence  for  the  stimulating 
or  crippling  of  industries.     Prediction^ 
as  to  the  tendency  of  Prohibition's  in- 
fluence are  unprofitable  in  localities  that 
have  not  made  the  test.     The  truth  must 
be  sought  in  those  places  where  Prohibi- 
tion has  been  on  trial ;  and  invariably  it 
disproves  the  claims  of  the  alarmists. 

The  testimony  runs  parallel  with  that 
which  we  have  given  concerning  the 
effects  of  this  system  upon  the  consump- 
tion of  drink,  upon  crime,  etc.  Indeed 
in  preparing  the  preceding  pages  it  was 
in  nearly  all  cases  necessary,  in  order  to 
confine  ourselves  to  the  features  of  the 
subject  there  discussed,  to  pass  over  a 
great  deal  of  evidence  pertinent  to  the 
present  topic.  Commendation  of  Pro- 
hibition as  a  temperance  measure  carries 
with  it  the  positive  declaration  that  no 
harm  is  done  to  the  material  interests  of 
the  people  but  that  it  reflects  benefits 
ujjon  all  legitimate  trades. 

Maine,  it  is  asserted  by  those  best  qual- 
ified to  express  opinions,  was  a  very  poor 
State  when  the  liquor  traffic  was  licensed, 
but  has  thrived  under  Prohibition.  Neal 
Dow  says  that  the  law  now  annually 
saves  to  the  people  of  the  State  (directly 
and  indirectly)  $20,000,000.  (See  p.  412.) 
If  it  is  assumed  that  no  liquor  is  now 
consumed  in  Maine  the  reasonable- 
ness of  this  estimate  can  scarcely 
be  questioned,  for  in  that  case  it 
would  represent  a  yearly  saving  per  in- 
habitant of  only  130,  and  that  sum  is 
about  the  average  yearly  ])er  capita  ex- 
penditure (direct  and  indirect)  caused 
by  the  traffic  in  the  United  States 
at  large,  if  total  abstainers  and  per- 
sons living  in  Prohibition  localities  are 
counted  in  making  calculations  for  the 
country  as  a  whole.  But  if  it  is  sup- 
posed that  the  per  capita  direct  and  in- 
direct expenditure  in  Maine  is  as  much 
as  $15 — and  this  is  merely  an  assump- 


538 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


tion  for  the  sake  of  argument,  not  an 
admission, — the  total  annual  saving  is  at 
least  $10,000,000. 

James  G.  Blaine,  in  a  speech  at  Far- 
mington.  Me.,  in  September,  1888,  said : 
"Maine  for  the  last  37  years  has  been  under 
a  Prohibitory  law.  I  think  the  State  has  de- 
rived great  advantage  from  it.  I  think  that 
the  State  is  far  richer  and  far  better  because  of 
the  law  than  it  would  have  been  without  it."  ' 

"'  The   State  has  been  growing  richer 
every  year,"  wrote  Senator  Frye  in  1890; 
"  I  believe  I  am  entirely  safe  in  saying 
there  is  no  State  in  the  Union  enjoying 
more  general  prosperity   than  is  to  be 
found  in  Maine.     There  has  been  no  de- 
preciation of  property ;  on  the  contrary, 
a  general  appreciation.     I  do  not  believe 
a  respectable  emigrant  from  the  State  of 
Maine  can  be  found  who  will  admit  that 
he  left  the  State  because  Prohibition  pre- 
vailed there."  "  Tlie  material  interests  of 
Maine,"  wrote  ex-Governor  Sidney  Per- 
ham   at   the   same   time,   "have   had   a 
steady  and  healthy  growth,  and  no  other 
law  has  contributed  so  much  toward  this 
result  as  the  Prohibitory  law.     Under  it 
the  business  of  therumsellerhas  suffered, 
while  every  legitimate  interest  has  been 
benefited.     The  suppression  of   his  busi- 
ness  has   secured   to   the    people    more 
meaiis  to  purchase  v/liat  is  essential  to 
comfortable     living,     thus     increasing 
other  and    more   desirable   branches   of 
trade,"    Joseph  A.  Locke,  ex-President 
of  the   State   Senate   of   Maine,  wrote: 
"The  good  results  arising  from  Prohibi- 
tion can  be  readily  seen  by  any  unpreju- 
diced person  who  will  travel  throughout 
our  State  and  observe  the  general  pros- 
perity   and    happiness    of    our    people, 
especially  so  should  lie  take  a  team  and 
ride  through  su])urban  villages  and  the 
country.     The  allegation  that  people  are 
leaving  the  State  to  escape  the  '  blight  of 
Prohibition'   is    all    bosh,"'      "In    my 
opinion,"  wrote  John  Ayer,  President  of 
the  Somerset  Kailway,  "the  Prohibitory 
liquor  law  has   done  great  good  in  this 
State.     The  general  business  depression 
is  affected  favorably  by  the  Prohibitory 
law  and  made  less  than  it  would  be  but 
for  this  law,"  ^• 

The   following  are    statements    from 
Maine  bankers  :  * 

John  G.  Brooks,  President  Belfast  National 


1  Political  Prohibitionist  for  1889,  p.  ,55. 

2  The  Voice,  Oct.  9,  1890.    s  Ibid,  Oct.  16,  1890.    «  Ibid. 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


539 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


Bank,  Belfast  :  "Prohibition  of  the  liquor  traffic 
is  not  detrimental  to  the  business  interests  of  our 
city.  .  .  .  The  partial  suppression  of  the  sale  of 
liquors  has  caused  the  saving  of  much  money 
for  legitimate  business  that  would  otherwise 
have  gone  to  the  saloons.  Our  people  to-day 
dress  better,  have  more  of  the  comforts  of  life 
and  have  better  homes  than  before  the  passage 
of  the  law.  More  business  is  now  done  than 
there  was  10  or  20  years  ago.  The  deposits  in 
our  banks  have  increased  every  year  for  the  past 
10  years,  showing  that  the  people  have  more 
money  to  use  for  business  purposes.  In  tine, 
the  law  has  had  a  tendency  to  improve  business 
rather  than  depress  it." 

Galen  C.  Moses,  President  1st  National  Bank, 
Bath  :  "  I  do  not  believe  any  candid,  fair  busi- 
ness man  in  Maine  will  contend  that  Prohibi- 
tion affects  business  unfavorably  or  in  any  way, 
except  that  when  enforced  its  effect  is  excellent 
upon  every  industry  where  men  are  employed." 

J.  Dingley,  Jr.,  President  1st  National  Bank, 
Auburn  :  "  Prohibition's  effect  has  been  to  keep 
our  people  sober  and  industrious,  to  give  them 
homes,  to  feed  and  clothe  their  children,  to 
make  them  better  citizens  and  to  help  build  up 
our  industries,  which  has  been  done,  that  would 
not  if  liquor  had  been  sold  with  us.  We  boast 
of  having  a  city  that  does  not  sell  intoxicants  of 
any  kind  ;  business  is  first-class." 

Thomas  C.  Kennedy,  President  New  Castle 
National  Bunk,  New  Castle  :  "  More  than  uine- 
tentlis  of  the  business  men  of  this  county  f  .dly 
believe  that  Prohibition  of  the  liquor  traffic  in 
this  State  is  decidedly  a  great  benefit  to  the 
business  interests  of  the  State." 

lu  the  Western  States  the  high  author- 
ities from  whom  we  have  quoted  so 
copiously  on  pp.  507-10  and  514-17  de- 
chire  with  the  same  emphasis  that  Pro- 
hibition has  been  no  less  successful  in 
promoting  the  material  welfare  than  in 
reducing  the  business  of  the  Courts  and 
emptying  the  prisons. 

Kansas. — We  summarize  the  testimony 
of  some  of  the  representative  public  men, 
and  of  fully  trustworthy  observers  from 
other  States. 

John  A.  Martin,  Governor  of  the  State  from 
1885  to  1889,  in  a  letter  to  the  Associated  Press, 
July  12,  1887:  "During  the  past  two  years  and 
a  half  I  have  organized  17  counties  in  the  west- 
ern section  of  the  State,  and  Census-takers  have 
been  appointed  for  four  other  counties,  leaving 
only  two  counties  remaining  to  be  organized. 
The  cities  and  towns  of  Kansas,  with  hardly  an 
exception,  have  kept  pace  in  growth  and  pros- 
perity with  this  marvelous  development  of  the 
State.  Many  of  them  have  doubled  their  popu- 
lation during  the  past  year.  And  it  is  a  remark- 
able fact  that  several  cities  and  towns  languished 
or  stood  still  until  they  abolished  their  saloons, 
and  from  that  date  to  the  present  time  their 
growth  and  prosperity  has  equalled,  and  in 
some  instances  surpassed,  that  of  other  places 
with  equal  natural  advantages.  Summing  up, 
the  facts  of  the  Census   [State  Census  of  1886] 


confute  and  confound  those  who  assert  that  the 
material  prosperity  of  any  community  is  pro- 
moted by  the  presence  of  saloons.  So  far  as 
Kansas  and  all  her  cities  and  towns  are  con- 
cerned, the  reverse  of  this  assertion  is  true. 
The  most  wonderful  era  of  prosperity,  of  mate- 
rial, moral  and  intellectual  development,  of 
growth  in  country,  cities  and  towns  ever  wit- 
nessed on  the  American  ("ontinent  has  been 
illustrated  in  Kansas  during  the  six  years  .since 
the  temperance  Amendment  to  our  Constitution 
was  adopted,  and  especially  during  the  past  two 
years,  the  period  of  its  most  energetic  and  com- 
plete enforcement." 

John  J.  Ingalls,  United  States  Senator:  "  The 
prediction  of  its  [Prohibition'.s]  opponents  has 
not  been  verified  ;  immigration  has  not  been 
repelled,  nor  has  capital  been  diverted  from  the 
State.  The  period  has  been  one  of  unexampled 
growth  and  development.  Whether  post  hoc  or 
propter  hoc,  coincidence  or  cause,  is  not  mate- 
rial. The  evils  prophesied  have  not  come  to 
pass. " ' 

M.  Mohler,  Secretary  of  the  State  Board  of 
Agriculture:  "The  idea  that  Kansas  has  lost 
either  in  population  or  wealth  because  of  Pro- 
hibition is  simply  preposterous,  and  in  my 
judgment  no  one  in  his  right  mind  really  be- 
lieves it.  For  every  man  we  lose  because  of 
Prohibition  we  gain  two  better  men  because  we 
have  Prohibition."  A  State  Census  is  taken 
each  year  in  Kansas,  and  the  following  figures 
from  the  Cen.sus  of  1889  were  given  by  Secretary 
Mohler:'^ 

Gain. 

1880.  1889.     Per  Cent. 

Population 996,0fi6  l,4tU.914  47 

Field  Crops,  Acres.       8,868,SS4  16,831.572  90 

Value.  S63,in,(m  $104,.57~',498  G6 

Live  Stock,  Value..  $61,56.3,956  §116,1:^6,466  89 

All  Farm  Products, 

Value S80.500.244  S147,4;i4,:»3  83 

Wealth $160,570,761  $360,813,902  124 

Manufactures,  Capi- 
tal Invested $11,192,315  $29,016,760  159 

Schools.  No.  of  Dis- 
tricts.               6,1.34  8,775  43 

School    Property, 

Value $4,633,044  $8,608,203  86 

Children    of  School 

Atre 340,647  532,010  56 

Churches 964  1,956  103 

Church   Property, 

Value $2,430..385  $6,415,937  164 

L.  K.  Kirk,  President  of  the  Board  of  Trus- 
tees of  the  Charitable  Institutions  of  the  State 
of  Kansas :  ' '  There  has  been  no  backward  step 
in  either  the  moral,  social  or  monetary  condi- 
tion of  the  State  in  the  remotest  degree  attribu- 
table to  Prohibition  or  its  effects.  On  the  other 
hand  there  has  been  vastly  less  drunkenness, 
and  that  will  assure  anyone  that  the  moral, 
social  and  financial  condition  of  the  State  is 
the  better  to  that  extent."  ^ 

D.  M.  Valentine,  Associate-Justice  of  the 
State  Supreme  Court:  "The  State  has  vastly 
increased  both  in  wealth  and  population,  and 
the  quality  of  both  is  probably  very  much  better 
than  it  would  have  been  if  the  State  had  been 
filled  with   liquor-saloons."  * 

'  Fornm  Magazine  for  August,  1889. 
a  The  Voice.  Oct.  9,  1890. 

For  explanations    of   differences    between    the    State 
Census  of  1889  and  the  Federal  Census  of  1890,  see  p.  553. 
'  The  Voice,  Oct.  9,  1890.    ••  Ibid. 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


540 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


W.  A.  Jolinston,  Associate-Justice  of  the 
State  Supreme  Court:  "I  say  without  hesita- 
tion that  I  believe  that  Prohibition  has  been  of 
vast  benefit  to  Kansas,  and  that  its  operation 
has  greatly  advanced  the  moral,  social  and 
financial  condition  of  our  people."  ' 

D.  W.  Wilder,  Superintendent  of  the  State 
Insurance  Department:  "Kansas  is  very  pros- 
perous, gaining  very  fast  in  wealth  and  people. 
But  her  greatest  gain  has  been  in  the  abolition 
of  saloons."  "^ 

William  Sims,  State  Treasurer:  "  The  loss  to 
our  business  interests  resulting  from  the  re- 
moval of  those  heretofore  engaged  in  the  liquor 
traffic  has  been  more  than  compensated  for  by 
the  increase  oi  legitimate  business,  and  the 
inunigration  hither  of  those  seeking  homes 
where  the  open  saloon  is  unknown  ;  and  no  de- 
pression in  value  can,  in  my  judgment,  be 
traced,  directly  or  indirectly,  to  the  enforcement 
of  Constitutional  Prohibition."  ^ 

As  is  shown  on  pp.  508-9,  the  Probate  Judges 
of  the  counties  of  Kansas,  upon  being  asked 
whether  "the  loss  of  revenue  from  former 
saloon  licenses"  had  been  "more  than  made 
good  by  .  .  .  the  directing  of  the  money  form- 
erly speuu  in  the  saloons  now  into  legitimafp 
channels  of  trade,"  answered  almost  unani- 
mously in  the  affirmative. 

The  formal  declaration  issued  in  1889  and 
signed,  among  others,  by  the  Governor,  the 
Secretary  of  State,  the  Auditor  of  State,  the 
Treasurer  of  State,  the  Superintendent  of  Public 
Instruction,  the  Attorney-General,  the  Chief- 
Justice  and  two  Associate-Justices  of  the 
Supreme  Court,  to  which  we  have  alluded  on 
p.  509,  embraced  unqualified  statements  like  the 
following  : 

"In  its  practical  operation  the  law  promotes  the  wel- 
fare and  prosperity  of  our  citizens  of  all  classes  and 
conditions,  especially  of  laHorins  men.  and  of  all  men 
who  are  strugijlins;  by  honest  work  to  maintain  their 
families  and  educate  their  children.  ...  In  connection 
with  other  intluemes  the  contest  successfully  waged  in 
this  State  against  the  saloon  has  increased  our  popula- 
tion, it  has  enlarged  our  wealth  and  it  has  powerfully 
advanced  the  material,  educational  and  moral  interests  of 
our  people.  The  State  of  Kansas  is  far  more  prosperous 
to-day  than  it  ever  has  been  at  any  former  period  in  its 
history." 

Fair-minded  men  at  the  East  who  have  busi- 
ness investments  in  Kansas,  or  who  have 
visited  it  for  the  purpose  of  ascertaining  whether 
investment  there  was  desirable  or  of  investi- 
gating the  results  of  the  liquor  law,  all  pro- 
nounce Prohibition  a  leading  factor  in  advancing 
its  prosperity.  The  Stockholders'  Committee 
of  the  Farmers'  Loan  and  Trust  Company, 
which  is  under  the  direction  of  Eastern  capital- 
ists and  deals  extensively  in  Kansas  farm  mort- 
gages, said  in  its  annual  report  to  the  company  in 
December,  1888 : 

"  Believing  it  to  be  a  matter  of  financial  interest  and 
otherwise  to  our  stockliolders,  we  digress  somewhat  to 
treat  upon  a  question  which  has  been  and  is  agitating  the 
moral,  social,  religious  and  political  welfare  of  all  sec- 
tions of  our  common  country.  We  have  no  motive  other 
than  to  apply  the  deductions  therefrom  obtained  to  the 
value  of  your  Kansas  investments.  Noting  the 
practical  effects  of  Prohibition  upon  the  people  of  the 
State,  our  observations  lead  us  to  believe  that  this  move- 
ment is  a  grand  success  in  Kansas,  which  adds,  and  will 
continue  to  add,  value  to  all  the  lands  in  the  State.  What- 
ever makes  human  existence   less   burdensome,  reduces 


I  The  Voice,  Oct.  9,  1890,    «  Ibid.    »  Ibid,  Oct.  16, 1890. 


taxation,  prevents  crime  and  destroys  pauperism  is  sure 
to  give  tangible  and  material  wealth  to  any  State.  .  .  . 
We  look  upon  the  above  facts  [concerning  the  success  of 
Kansas  ProhibilionJ,  vouched  for  by  such  high  authority, 
as  a  strong  arL'unient  in  favor  of  loans  in  a  State 
advancing  so  rapidly  in  moral  as  well  as  material 
progress."  '' 

D.  O.  Bradley,  a  prominent  banker  of  Tarry- 
town,  N.  Y.,  whose  sympathies  had  always  been 
with  High  License  in  preference  to  Prohibition, 
published  a  letter  in  the  Tarrytown  Argus  in 
1889  in  which  he  said  : 

"  I  have  just  returned  from  seven  days  spent  in  roam- 
ing over  the  State  of  Kansas,  with  a  party  of  New  York 
City  bank  officers  who  were  delej^ates  to  the  annual 
Baiikers'  National  Convention  whicli  was  held  on  Sept. 
25  and  26  at  Kansas  City,  Mo.  We  were  entertained  in 
various  ways  by  the  bank  officers  who  lived  at  the  towns 
which  we  visited.  Topeka,  Hutchinson  and  other  cities 
made  careful  provision  to  welcome  us.  We  were  brought 
into  contact  with  the  leading  business  men  of  various 
localities,  under  the  most  favorable  auspices.  Our 
curiosity  and  interest  in  the  matter  tempted  us  every- 
where to  introduce  the  Prohibition  question.  Tlie 
testimony  was  concurrent  and  unanimous  .  .  .  that 
the  business  men  and  property  owners  of  the  State  are  as 
thoroughly  united  in  support  of  the  Prohibitory  law  as 
on  any  otner  question  of  politics  or  morals.  I  heard 
many  men  in  different  localities  talk,  and  all  without 
exception  were  decisive  and  positive  supporters  of  the 
present  order  of  things.  Polygamy  and  Mormonism 
could  be  introduced  into  the  State  as  easily  as  the  rum 
traffic.  I  have  never  entered  better  or  more  prosperous 
hotels,  cither  in  this  country  or  in  Europe,  than  I  found 
all  over  Kansas.  Their  proprietors  scouted  the  idea  that 
the  sale  of  liquors  constituted  in  any  way  a  legitimate 
part  of  their  business.  They  all  agreed  that  tlie  Pro- 
hibitory law  had  given  character,  dignity  and  profit  to 
their  calling."  ^ 

L.  A.  Maynard,  representing  the  New  York 
Observe)-,  went  to  Kansas  in  1889  to  make  an  im- 
partial study  of  the  Prohibitory  law.  "I  have 
lieai-d  so  much  in  the  East  about  the  way  that 
Prohibition  kills  the  towns,"  he  wrote,  "  that  I 
was  quite  prepared  to  find  a  lot  of  dead  munici- 
palities. ...  On  the  contrary  I  have  found  an 
amazing  amount  of  life  and  vigor  in  these 
villages  and  cities  that  ought  to  be  dead,  accord- 
ing To  the  whiskey  logic  of  the  East :  many  of 
them  growing  so  fast  that  it  is  as  much  as  ever 
the  mother  government  of  the  State  can  do  to 
keep  them  properly  dressed  up  in  mimicipal 
clothes.  I  have  met  scores  of  persons,  mer- 
chants, bankers  and  solid  business  men,  who 
have  told  me  that  they  were  not  in  favor  of  Pro- 
hibition when  the  question  was  first  submitted  ; 
they  fought  and  voted  against  it,  but  now  they 
say  they  would  not  be  willing  to  take  the  saloon 
back  again  on  any  terms.  They  have  become 
so  thoroughly  convinced  of  the  good  results  of 
the  law  upon  the  business  interests  of  the  State, 
as  well  as  upon  other  interests,  that  they  stand 
openly  and  firmly  in  favor  of  its  continuance." " 

No  attempt  can  here  be  made  to  quote 
from  individual  business  men  of  Kansas: 
separate  quotations  would  add  little  to 
the  preceding  opinions  from  the  most 
responsible  and  representative  sources, 
and  our  space  is  insufficient  for  such  an 
elaborate  review  as  would  be  necessai'y  in 
undertaking  a  general  presentation  of 
private  experience.     Yet  in  private  expe- 

•<  Political  Prohibitionist  for  1889,  p.  51. 

5  The  Voice,  Oct.  24.  1889. 

« Political  Prohibitionist  for  1889,  pp.  48-9. 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


541 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


rience  lies  the  final  test  of  Prohibition's 
elfects  upon  trade.  It  may  be  claimed 
that  the  politician  merely  echoes  views 
that  are  most  agreeable  to  him,  and  that 
public  officials  speak  only  for  partisans 
who,  while  in  the  majority  for  the  time 
being,  may  possibly  be  mistaken.  Such 
a  claim  cannot  by  any  reasonable  process 
of  judgment  be  suggested  in  qualifica- 
tion of  the  weighty  declarations  of  Kan- 
sas public  men:  these  declarations  are 
too  specific  to  be  read  with  any  tinge  of 
distrust,  and  the  facts  sustaining  them 
are  too  strong;  besides  (remembering 
that  it  is  the  rarest  of  things  for  public 
men  to  exaggerate  the  good  of  Prohibi- 
tion), it  would  be  nothing  less  than  fan- 
tastic to  assert  that  a  Governor  who  op- 
[)osed  the  law  Avhen  it  was  enacted,  a 
conservative  United  States  Senator,  the 
C'hief-Justice  and  other  Judges  of  the 
Supreme  Court,  the  State  Treasurer,  the 
Secretary  of  State,  the  State  Auditor^jthe 
Attorney-General,  the  Secretary  of  the 
State  Board  of  Agriculture,  the  Super- 
intendent of  the  Insurance  Department 
and  numerous  other  officials  of  every 
grade  are  all  ignorant  of  the  true  com- 
mercial situation,  or  are  engaged  in  a 
conspiracy  to  falsify  the  facts,  or  would 
dare  praise  the  law  on  business  grounds 
if  the  material  interests  of  Kansas  were 
really  sulfering  in  consequence  of  it. 
But  the  truth  can  be  most  significantly 
shown  by  inquiry  among  the  men  whose 
fortunes  are  staked  in  commercial  enter- 
prises. Their  general  opinion  has  been 
ascertained  repeatedly,  by  the'  New  York 
l)anker  from  whom  we  have  quoted,  by 
the  Obse?'ve7''.'^  correspondent,  by  the 
State  authorities,  and  by  various  news- 
paper editors  and  others  who  have  sent 
letters  to  representative  business  men 
tiiroughout  the  State.  The  Voice  in 
1  >^9()  forwarded  a  large  number  of  such 
letters,  and  the  replies  were  favorable 
with  few  exceptions.  Represented  among 
those  who  answered  encoiiragingly  were 
Umr  bankers  of  Topeka,  real  estate  deal- 
ers, manufacturers  and  tradesmen  of 
many  avocations.  A  few  of  the  re- 
sponses were  published  by  the  Voice  in 
its  issue  for  Oct.  Ki,  1890. 

To  sum  up:  The  most  cautious  stu- 
dent must  at  least  concede  that,  so  far  as 
Kansas  is  concerned,  the  statistical  facts 
as  well  as  the  presumptions  deduced 
from  public  and  private  assertion  throw 


the  burden  of  proof  upon  the  opponents 
of  Prohibition.  It  may  be  admitted  that 
the  evidence  submitted  is  partial  and  that 
some  public  men  esteemed  reputable  in 
Kansas,  together  with  some  honorable 
merchants,  are  not  prepared  to  indorse 
it  and  even  speak  counter  to  it;  but  no 
important  consensus  of  hostile  opinion 
has  been  presented.  Much  has  been  said 
against  the  law  by  the  Resubmissionists, 
Avho  avow  that  they  attack  it  for  the 
sake  of  the  State's  prosperity ;  but  there 
is  a  strong  suggestion  of  intolerance  and 
localism  in  their  arguments,  and  it  is  not 
encouraging  to  find  that  their  character- 
istic suj)porters  among  the  masses  are 
persons  who  desire  to  sell  liquor,  persons 
who  desire  freedom  to  drink  it  and  per- 
sons of  criminal  or  objectionable  profes- 
sions or  tendencies.  On  the  side  of  the 
law  are  distinctively  ranged  the  best  citi- 
zens, in  opposition  to  it  the  worst  ones: 
this  contrast  may  not  be  decisive,  but  it 
must  surely  emphasize  the  belief  that 
the  burden  of  proof  rests  with  the  law's 
foes.  No  disturbance  of  judgment  need 
be  occasioned  by  the  fact  that  an  ele- 
ment of  respectable  business  men  may 
by  diligent  search  be  found  associated 
with  the  opposition :  a  division  of  opin- 
ion concerning  any  policy  of  only  ten 
years'  standing  is  unavoidable.  Trades- 
men are  always  Avilling  to  think  that 
their  prosperity  is  not  satisfactory,  and 
it  would  be  remarkable  if  the  represen- 
tations against  Prohibition  that  are  so 
industriously  spread  did  not  find  some 
credence  among  merchants  in  Kansas. 
Tradesmen  of  particular  kinds  in  par- 
ticular towns  have  plausible  reasons  for 
discontent:  they  remember  the  lively 
times  of  years  gone,  forgetting  that 
those  were  times  of  crudity  and  improvi- 
dence, which  must  have  come  to  an  end 
in  any  case,  and  that  more  substantial 
conditions  have  been  evolved. 

The    testimony    for   loiva  is  equally 

abundant  and  strong. 

William  Lairabee,  Governor  of  the  State  ^ 
from  1885  to  1889:  "The  assertion  that  Prohi- 
bition has  been  ruinous  to  the  business  interests 
of  Iowa,  and  that  real  estate  and  values  of 
other  property  are  depressed,  and  that  people 
are  leaving  the  State  to  escape  the  'blight  of 
Prohibition,'  is  too  absurd  for  notice.  Iowa  has 
never  been  more  prosperous  than  now.  The 
beneficial  results  of  Prohibition  are  observable 
on  every  hand  where  the  law  has  been  enforced. 
Moral,  "intellectual  and  material  Velfare  have 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


543 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


been  advanced."'  "As  to  the  depreciation  of 
value  of  real  estate  occasioned  by  Prohibition, 
it  is  the  sheerest  nonsense.  Values  have,  I  be- 
lieve, been  sustained  in  Iowa  as  well  as  adjoin- 
ing States  where  Prohibition  is  not  the  rule. 
The  same  causes  that  have  affected  values  else- 
where have  undoubtedly  had  their  effect  here. 
Crops  grow,  herds  multiply  and  the  markets  of 
the  world  continue  open  to  us  the  same  as  be- 
fore, and  why  should  business  suffer  ?  Money 
is  now  spent  for  the  necessaries  of  life  and  for 
legitimate  uses  instead  of  being  spent  at  the 
saloon.  The  banking  business  of  a  State  is 
perhaps  as  fair  a  barometer  of  business  as^  can 
be  found.  The  number  of  banks  in  the  State 
has  increased  from  186  in  1883  to  244  in  1888; 
deposits  have  increased  from  |27,231, 719.74  to 
$39,935,363.68  in  1888.'"' 

J.  A.  Lyons,  Auditor  of  State:  "It is  my 
opinion  the  Prohibitory  law  of  this  State  has 
not  depreciated  the  value  of  real  estate,  but  has 
promoted  legitimate  lines  of  business."^ 

Henry  Sabine,  State  Superintendent  of  Public 
Instruction:  "My  official  duties  have  taken  me 
into  every  section  of  the  State  during  the  past 
summer.'  I  have  nowhere  found  any  signs  of 
blight  or  depression  among  our  people.  I  have 
had  especial  occasion  to  note  the  condition  of 
our  educational  institutions.  There  never  was 
a  time  in  the  history  of  Iowa  when  our  institu- 
tions of  learning  were  as  full  of  earnest,  ener- 
getic young  men  and  women  as  they  are  to-day. 
Our  denominational  colleges,  our  private 
schools  and  our  State  institutions  without  ex- 
ception report  an  increased  number  of  students. 
This  could  hardly  be  true  if  values  were  de- 
pressed and  people  leaving  the  State  to  escape 
the  'blight  of  Prohibition.'  "  ■* 

M.  Stalker,  State  Veterinary  Surgeon:  "Since 
the  passage  of  the  Prohibitory  law  in  Iowa  I 
have  been  in  as  many  as  90  counties  of  the 
State  in  one  summer.  I  have  endeavored  to 
note  carefully  and  impartially  the  effects  follow- 
ing the  operation  of  this  'law.  I  was  very 
doubtful  of  its  results  at  the  time  of  its  pass- 
age. I  am  now  of  the  opinion  that  the  law 
lias  been  and  is  now  an  incalculable  benefit  to 
the  State,  and  that  no  material  or  other  legiti- 
mate interest  has  suffered  to  the  extent  of  a 
single  penny,  imless  you  choose  to  place  the 
liquor  traffic  in  that  categrry.  No  man  has 
left  the  State  on  account  of  this  laAV  without 
bringing  up  the  moral  average  of  the  State  he 
left.'"* 

R.  C.  Webb,  Superintendent  of  the  Iowa 
State  Agricultural  Society:  "As  for  our  land 
depreciating  in  value  that  is  a  fearful  mistake. 
Land  in  Iowa  is  as  high  in  price  as  it  ought  to 
be  for  farming  purposes.  Land  is  from  $25  to 
$100,  and  even  up  to  $200.  Our  State  is  in  a 
healthy  condition,  out  of  debt,  and  we  stand  in 
the  front  rank  for  education  and  Christianity. 
Money  with  us  is  plenty,  and  it  is  hard  work  to 
get  8  per  cent,  on  loans,  and  many  are  loaning 
at  6  per  cent,  and  glad  to  get  it." " 

E.  H.  Conger,  Member  of  Congress:  "In  my 

>  The  Voice,  Oct.  9,  1890. 

2  From  a  lotter  to  Rev.  William  Fuller  of  Aberdeen, 
S.  D.,  Feb.  16.  1889.  (Sec  the  "Political  Prohibi- 
tionist for  1889,'"  p.  53.) 

3  The  Voice,  Oct.  9,  18i;0.    ••  Ibid.    « Ibid.    « Ibid, 


home  city,  Des  Moines,  the  ptopulation  has 
doubled  under  it,  property  has  continually  ap- 
preciated and  a  considerable  majority  of  our 
citizens  are  delighted  with  the  operation  of  the 
law,  and  would  strenuously  and  bitterly  oppose 
its  repeal.  In  a  certain  railroad  town  with 
which  I  am  very  familiar,  when  operating  under 
the  license  system,  it  was  with  the  greatest  diffi- 
culty that  merchants  secured  payment  of  their 
accounts  at  pay-day,  but  under  Prohibition  the 
cases  of  non-payment  were  rare  indeed,  and 
merchants  easily  collected  the  entire  bills  from 
the.se  railroad  employes.  But  on  the  very  first 
pay-day  after  the  '  original  package '  saloons 
were  recently  established,  from  one-third  to  one- 
half  of  the  bills  were  left  unpaid.  Yet  during 
the  same  month  one  vendor  of  '  original  pack- 
ages'in  this  town  deposited  over  $1,100  of 
profits  in  bank."  ■" 

Specimen  letters  from  Iowa  business 
men  themselves  may  be  found  in  the 
Voice  for  Oct.  16,  1890.  These  repre- 
sent a  number  of  the  cities  which  figure  re- 
peatedly in  the  highly-colored  reports  of 
Prohibition's  hurtful  effects.  The  Presi- 
dent of  the  National  Bank  of  Sioux  City 
writes :  "  Our  city  has  made  a  marvellous 
growth  since  the  law  was  enacted,  and 
while  we  do  not  attribute  it  all  to  the 
law,  there  is  no  question  in  my  mind  but 
a  portion  of  our  prosperity  is  due  directly 
to  the  beneficial  results  of  the  law." 
"  Five  years  ago,"  says  the  Secretary  of 
the  Board  of  Trade  of  Ottumwa,  "we 
had  three  National  banks  whose  com- 
bined deposits  were  about  $600,000. 
These  three  banks  have  to-day  about 
1800,000  on  deposit.  Some  two  years 
ago  two  savings-banks  were  started  here, 
and  their  deposits  now  amount  to  nearly 
$300,000."  A  lumber  merchant  of  Bur- 
lington expresses  the  opinion  that  "  if 
the  city  has  suffered  for  the  lack  of 
legitimate  business  it  is  because  Prohibi- 
tion has  not  been  enforced."  A  wagon 
company  of  the  same  city  declares  that 
"there  is  no  one  living  in  Nebraska  or  in 
Burlington  who  can  convince  us  that 
Prohibition  of  the  liquor  traffic  is  detri- 
mental to  our  business."  A  Des  Moines 
wholesale  dealer  in  boots  and  shoes  de- 
clares :  "  Many  of  our  customers  tlirough- 
out  the  State  have  assured  its  that  their 
trade  in  boots  and  shoes  has  been  larger 
since  the  close  of  the  saloons  in  their 
towns.  We  find  collections  better  in 
Iowa  than  in  any  other  Western  State, 
excepting  possibly  Colorado."  The  post- 
master of  Muscatine  remarks  that  "  We 
people  of  Iowa  know  that  the  Prohibitory 

T  Ibid. 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


543 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


law  is  a  blessing  in  the  proportion  that  it 
is  enforced."  A  Dubuque  manufacturer 
of  lard  oil,  soap  and  candles,  testifies: 
''Instead  of  Prohibition  having  injured 
my  business  it  has  enabled  me  to  double 
my  business,  and  my  per  cent,  of  bad 
debts  has  decreased  about  one-half.  I 
have  carried  on  this  business  30 
years  in  this  city,  and  my  trade  covers 
the  northern  half  of  the  State.  And  I 
believe  my  experience  is  not  different 
from  that  of  other  manufacturers  in 
Iowa."  "After  25  years'  experience  in 
business  in  this  city  I  am  convinced  that 
Prohibition  does  not  injure  trade,"  writes 
a  Des  Moines  jeweler.  All  the  testimony 
so  far  presented  by  persons  who  have 
made  impartial  attempts  to  learn  the 
general  opinion  of  the  Iowa  tradespeople 
indicate  that  expressions  like  the  fore- 
going are  representative  of  the  sentiment 
not  only  of  a  large  majority  but  of  the 
most  intelligent  and  least  prejudiced 
business  men.  It  is  undoubtedly  true, 
however,  that  the  judgment  of  Iowa  as  to 
the  wholesome  commercial  consequences 
of  the  law  is  not  so  sweeping  as  that  of 
Kansas.  This  is  another  illustration  of 
the  fact  that  Prohibitory  laws  are  recog- 
nized as  l)ent;ficial  in  proportion  to  the 
length  of  trial  and  the  completeness  of 
enforcement ;  for  the  system  has  been  in 
force  in  Iowa  only  about  half  as  many  years 
as  in  Kansas,  and  the  resistance  to  it  has 
been  more  successful  in  the  former  State 
than  in  the  latter.  It  is  also  instructive 
that  the  complaints  of  merchants  against 
Prohibition  are  most  numerous  from 
those  cities,  like  Council  Bluffs,  Du- 
buque, Davenport  and  Burlington,  where 
the  statute  has  been  violated,  while  in 
places  like  Des  Moines  and  Sioux  City, 
where  the  most  striking  enforcement 
work  has  been  done,  the  business  men 
are  least  disposed  to  criticise. 

The  reader  who  has  carefully  followed 
this  evidence,  while  probably  admitting 
that  the  Prohibitionists  have  the  better 
of  the  discussion  so  far  as  Maine,  Kansas 
and  Iowa  are  concerned,  will  recall  the 
formidable  list  of  States  that  have  re- 
pealed Prohibition  and  the  confident  as- 
sertions so  often  made  by  saloon  advo- 
cates that  the  injury  inflicted  upon  the 
business  community  was  everywhere  a 
chief  cause  of  repeal.  Yet  it  is  safe  to 
say  that  no   reader,  however  vivid  his 


recollection  of  these  assertions  may  be, 
can  mention  any  specific  proofs  of  them. 

The  case  of  Ehude  Island  is  the  most 
recent  and  is  most  frequently  instanced  by 
the  anti-Prohibitionists.  In  that  State 
many  manufacturers  and  other  business 
men  in  1889  signed  a  declaration  against 
the  Prohibitory  law.  Stripped  of  ex- 
planations this  circumstance  may  be 
thought  damaging  to  the  belief  that 
Prohibition  did  no  harm  in  Rhode  Is- 
land. But  the  petitions  for  resubmis- 
sion of  the  Constitutional  Amendment 
had  only  about  5,000  signatures,  while 
those  against  resubmission  received  more 
than  10,000.^  Naturally  the  canvassers 
on  both  sides  sought  indorsements  prin- 
cipally from  persons  of  influence  and 
respectability;  and  although  it  is  prob- 
able that  the  anti-repeal  petitions,  being 
hastily  prepared,  did  not  contain  so 
many  prominent  names  as  tlie  petitions 
of  the  repealers,  the  much  larger  total 
number  of  signatures  to  the  former 
deprives  the  argument  based  on  business 
opposition  to  the  law  of  all  conclusive- 
ness. 

The  reputable  repealers  objected  not 
to  Prohibition  but  to  unenforced  Prohi- 
bition. There  had  been  no  opportunity 
in  the  State  for  ol)serving  the  efl'ects  of 
genuine  Prohibition.  Disgust  had  been 
excited  by  the  scandalous  unfaithfulness 
of  some  of  the  chief  officials  and  by  the 
political  "  deals "  that  had  been  perpe- 
trated. The  thousands  of  conservative 
men  who  either  voted  against  the  Amend- 
ment in  188G  or  supported  it  with  strong 
distrust  now  felt  a  keener  prejudice,  and 
many  who  had  looked  forward  with  confi- 
dence to  the  execution  of  the  law  were 
ready  to  advocate  a  change.  But  in  the 
city  of  Providence  the  act  had  been 
partly  enforced,  and,  as  we  have  seen, 
the  arrests  for  drunkenness  and  crime 
had  been  noticeably  diminished.  (See 
p.  525.)  If  it  is  true  that  the  pros- 
perity of  Rhode  Island  was  disturbed 
by  any  influences  reasonably  attributable 
to  the  Prohibition  policy  the  years  of 
the  law's  existence  must  have  been  bad 
years  for  general  business  in  Providence. 
On  the  contrary  they  were  uncommonly 
good  years,  as  the  following  figures  show :  "^ 

Bank    Clearings    in    Providence. — For    1883 

1  Political  Prohibitionist  for  1889,  p.  36. 

2  On  the  authority  of  Walter  B.  Frost  of  Providence. 
(See  the  Voice,  March  7,  1889.) 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


544 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


(license),  $237,148,800  ;  1884  (license),  $217,448,- 
300  ;  1885  (license),  $21(), 465,200— net  decrease 
in  1885  compared  with  18S3,  $20,683,600.  For 
1886  (one-half  Prohibition),  $232,688,200  ;  1887 
(Prohibition),  $244,977,100;  1888  (Prohibition), 
$248,669,640— net  increase  in  1888  as  compared 
with  1885  (the  last  year  of  license),  $32,204,440. 

Savings  Bank  Deposits  (for  the  entire  State).— 
In  1882  (license),  $48,320,671.80 ;  in  1885 
(license),  $51,816,390.42— increase  in  three  years, 
$3,495,628.62,  or  7.2  per  cent.  On  Nov.  21, 
1888  (Prohibition),  $57,699,884.94— increase 
since  1885  (the  last  year  of  license),  $5,883,494.- 
52,  or  11.4  per  cent.  The  actual  increase  for  the 
three  years  ending  1888  was  68  per  cent,  larger 
than  the  actual  increase  for  the  three  years  end- 
ing 1885  (the  last  year  of  license). 

Total  Valuation  of  Real  Estate  in  Providence. 
—In  1885  (the  last  year  of  license),  $92,887,- 
400;  in  1888,  $100,915,860— increase,  $8,028,460, 
or  8.6  per  cent. 

Total  Valuation  of  ■  Personal  Property  in 
Providence.— In  1885  (the  last  year  of  license), 
$31,314,600;  in  1888,  $35,837,840— increase, 
$3,523,240,  or  11.2  per  cent. 

Without  exception  the  reports  that 
Prohibition  has  been  abandoned  in  other 
States  because  of  injury  done  to  business 
either  are  designing  misrepresentations 
or  have  absokttely  no  element  of  proof 
to  sustain  them. 

The  results  under  Local  Option  laws 
are  equally  cheering  from  the  business 
point  of  view.  We  have  not  space  for  a 
detailed  examination  of  various  locali- 
ties. The  flourishing  Southern  city  of 
Atlanta,  it  will  be  admitted,  is  typical  of 
all  the  large  and  active  communities 
Avhere  the  policy  has  had  a  temporary 
trial.  There  can  be  no  higher  authority 
cited  in  reference  to  the  trade  affairs  of 
Atlanta  than  the  Daihi  Constitution^  of 
that  city.  In  a  careful  editorial  article 
(June  21,  1887)  on  the  results  of  a  year's 
trial  of  the  Prohibito/y  law,  the  Consti- 
tution said: 

"  Prohibition  has  not  injured  the  city  finan- 
cially. According  to  the  Assessors'  books,  prop- 
erty in  the  city  has  increased  over  $2,000,000. 
Taxes  have  not  been  increased.  Two  streets  in 
the  city,  Decatur  and  Peters,  were  known  as 
liquor  streets.  It  was  hardly  considered  proper 
for  a  lady  to  walk  these  streets  without  an  escort. 
Now  they  are  just  as  orderly  as  any  in  the  city. 
Property  on  them  has  advanced  from  10  to  25 
per  cent.  The  loss  of  $40,000  revenue  conse- 
quent on  closing  the  saloons  has  tended  in  no 
degree  to  impede  the  city's  progress  in  any 
direction.  Large  aiipropriations  have  been 
made  to  the  water-works,  the  pid)lic  schools,  the 
Piedmont  Fair  and  other  improvements.  The 
business  men  have  raised  $400,000  to  build  the 
Atlanta  &  Hawkinsville  Railroad.  The  number 
of  city  banks  is  to  be  increased  to  live.     The 


coming  of  four  new  railroads  has  been  settled 
dining  the  year.  Fifteen  new  stores  containing 
house-furnishing  goods  have  been  started  .since 
Prohibition  went  into  effect.  The.se  are  doing 
well.  jVIore  furniture  has  been  sold  to  mechan- 
ics and  laboring  men  in  the  last  12  months  than 
in  any  12  months  during  the  history  of  the  city. 
The  manufacturing  establishments  of  the  city 
have  received  new  life.  A  glass  factory  has 
been  built.  A  cotton  seed  oil  mill  is  being  built, 
worth  $125,000.  All  improvement  companies 
with  a  basis  in  real  estate  have  seen  their  stock 
doubled  in  value  since  the  election  on  Pro- 
hibition. 

' '  Stores  in  which  the  liquor  trade  was  con- 
ducted are  not  vacant,  but  are  now  occupied  by 
other  lines  of  trade.  According  to  tlie  real 
estate  men  more  laborers. and  men  of  limited 
means  are  buying  lots  than  ever  before.  Kents 
are  more  promptly  paid  than  formerly.  More 
houses  are  rented  by  the  same  number  of  fami- 
lies than  heretofore.  Before  Prohibition,  some- 
times as  many  as  three  families  would  live  in 
one  house.  The  heads  of  those  families  not  now- 
spending  their  money  for  drink  are  each  able  to 
rent  a  house,  thus  u.sing  three  instead  of  one. 
Workingmen  who  formerly  spent  a  great  part 
of  their  money  for  liquor  now  spend  it  in  food 
and  clothes  for  their  families.  The  retail  gro- 
cery men  sell  more  goods  and  collect  their  bills 
better  than  ever  before.  Thus  they  are  able 
to  settle  more  promptly  with  the  wholesale 
men. 

"A  perceptible  increase  has  been  noticed  in 
the  number  of  people  who  ride  on  the  street 
cars.  According  to  the  coal-dealers  many  people 
bought  coal  and  stored  it  away  last  winter  who 
had  never  been  known  to  do  so  before.  Others 
who  had  been  accustomed  to  buying  two  or 
three  tons  on  time,  this  last  winter  bought  seven 
or  eight  and  paid  cash  for  it.  A  leading  pro- 
prietor of  a  millinery  store  said  that  he  had  sold 
more  hats  and  bonnets  to  laboring  men  for  their 
wives  and  daughters  than  before  in  the  history 
of  his  business.  Contractors  say  their  men  do 
better  work,  and  on  Saturday  evenings,  when 
they  receive  their  week's  wages,  spend  the  same 
for'tiour,  hams,  drygoods,  or  other  necessary 
things  for  their  families.  Thus  they  are  in 
better  spirits,  have  more  hope,  and  are  not  in- 
clined to  strike  and  growl  about  higher  wages." 

Two  months  after  Prohibition  had  taken 
effect  in  Atlanta  Mr.  M.  M.  Welch,  Secre- 
tary of  the  Chamber  of  Commerce,  wrote  a 
very  thorough  statement  of  the  condition 
of  the  city.  This  was  at  a  time  when  any 
ill  effects  of  the  system  should  have 
been  especially  noticeable,  for  the  liquor 
traffic  (which  is  said  to  be  an  ally  to 
general  trade)  had  just  suffered  complete 
paralysis  and  the  city  had  not  yet  fully 
adjusted  itself  to  tbe  new  order  of 
things.  Yet  nine  months  had  elapsed 
since  the  vote  on  Prohibition  had  been 
taken,  and  therefore  there  had  been  seven 
months  of  warning  —  a  period  long 
enough  to  have  caused  a  marked  depres- 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


545 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


sion  if  serious  apprehensions  were  cher- 
ished.    Secretary  Welch  said,  in  part:  • 

"There  have  been  more  new  houses  built  in  the 
city  during  the  hist  12  months  than  there  are 
vacant  houses  of  every  description  in  the  city  at 
present,  .  .  .  and  the  number  of  vacant  houses 
vs  not  so  great  at  present  as  it  was  one  year 
ago.  .  .  .  Our  manufacturers  are  all  doing  well, 
with  good  markets  for  their  jn'oducts,  contented 
labor  and  constantly  increasing  capacity.  .  .  . 
A  review  of  the  trade  of  the  city  for  the  year 
closing  with  the  1st  of  this  month  is  very  grati- 
fying in  its  results,  and  the  outlook  for  the  en- 
suing year  more  encouraging  than  that  of  any 
preceding  year  within  the  history  of  the  city.  I 
am  prepared  to  substantiate  these  general  state- 
ments by  reliable  information  collected  from 
aealers,  which  shows  a  decided  increase  in  the 
vohune  of  trade  during  the  year  in  every  line  of 
wholesale  business  except  the  grocery  trade,  and 
that  has  held  its  own,  with  a  number  of  new 
houses  opened  during  the  year.  There  are 
special  reasons  that  have  operated  against  the 
wliolesale  grocery  trade  during  the  year,  but  in 
the  face  of  this  fAct  the  volume  of  business  has 
been  equal  to  that  of  any  preceding  year. 

"  Every  line  of  retail  trade  in  this  city  .shows  an 
increase  over  any  preceding  year  of  from  10  to 
25  per  cent,  and  in  some  lines  in  excess  of  this 
amount.  The  increase  in  the  retail  grocery 
trade  is  especially  notable  for  the  year,  while 
during  the  last  (JO  days  [the  exact  period  since 
Prohibition  took  effect — Ed.]  it  willamout  toat 
least  30  per  cent,  in  excess  of  a  similar  period 
during  any  preceding  year.  It  is  a  fact,  also,  that 
this  increase  consists  largely  in  the  sale  of  fancy 
groceries.  Patrons  who  formerly  purchased  for 
their  families  only  plain  corn  meal  and  bacon 
now  add  to  these  substantials  fancy  goods,  such 
as  canned  meats,  sardines,  canned  fruits  and 
vegetables,  pickles,  etc.  Tliere  are  evidences  of 
a  spirit  of  frugality  springing  iip  among  the 
laboring  classes.  Some  are  leaving  regularly  on 
deposit,  in  the  offices  of  their  employers,  a  por- 
tion of  their  week's  earnings,  others  investing 
in  houses  on  the  installment  plan." 

Jlenry  W.  Grady,  in  his  celebrated 
speech  during  tlie  Atlanta  repeal  cam- 
paign (November,  1887),  exhaustively 
showed  from  the  testimony  of  individual 
real  estate  dealers  and  other  business 
men,  as  well  as  from  official  statistics, 
that  the  people  were  more  prosperous 
than  they  had  ever  been.  "  What  harm 
has  it  done?"  said  he.  "They  [the 
anti-Prohibitionists]  said  we  were  going 
to  be  ruined,  that  bats  and  owls  Avould 
fly  in  and  out,  and  tlie  real  estate  men 
have  the  renting  of  nine  out  of  ten 
houses  that  are  rented.  They  testify 
witiiout  a  break,  absolutely  without  a 
break,  that  they  have  fewer  houses  on 
their  lists  than  they  have  ever  had  since 
they   have   been   in    business.     Two   of 

1  The  Voice,  Sept.  23,  1886. 


them  have  advertised  in  the  last  few  days 
for  100  houses,  and  to-day  Mr.  Tally  told 
me  that  he  actually  left  his  office  because 
he  was  bored  by  people  who  wanted  to 
get  somewhere  to  live  in  this  town.  Mr. 
Scott  told  me  that  he  could  put  tenants 
in  500  houses  in  30  days  from  to-mor- 
row." (Further  quotations  from  Mr. 
Grady,  together  with  a  summary  of  re- 
cent interesting  correspondence  with 
tradesmen,  are  given  under  the  head  of 
"  Benefits  to  the  Wage-Workers  and  the 
Poor.") 

Effects  upon  Taxation  and  Population. 

These  effects  of  Prohibitory  law  are 
incidental  to  its  relations  to  commercial 
prosperity,  as  those  relations  are  to  its 
moral  and  social  influences.  As  we  have 
said  before,  we  cannot  fully  separate  the 
difl'erent  classes  of  effects,  except  arbi- 
trarily: evidence  upon  one  branch  of 
the  subject  cotitinually  runs  into  evi- 
dence upon  other  branches.  Thus  fre- 
quent allusions  to  taxation  and  popula- 
tion are  scattered  through  the  testimony 
already  introduced.  In  that  remarkable 
series  of  letters  from  the  Probate  Judges 
of  Kansas,  as  is  pointed  out  on  p.  108, 
reports  from  90  of  the  97  represented 
counties  declared  emphatically  that  the 
loss  of  the  revenue  from  former  saloon 
licenses  had  been  "  more  than  made  good 
by  the  decreasing  burdens  of  pauperism 
and  crime  resulting  from  Prohibition," 
etc.  And  the  County  Prosecuting  At- 
torneys of  Io\va  answered  similarly — 49 
of  them  in  a  total  of  57  heard  from. 
(See  p.  515.)  Such  statements,  if  trust- 
worthy, carry  with  them,  of  course,  the 
implication  that  taxes,  so  far  as  they  are 
affected  by  Prohibition,  are  made  rela- 
tively less  onerous;  for  the  distinctive 
fiscal  effect  of  the  policy  is  to  remove 
from  the  public  treasury  the  liquor  rev- 
enue, and  if  this  revenue  is  "  more  than 
made  good"  by  a  decrease  of  certain 
ptiblic  expenses  nothing  remains  to  be 
said  touching  the  tax  aspect  of  the 
question. 

It  is  no  unimportant  thing  to  prove 
that  the  taxes  laid  ujion  the  community 
in  general  do  not  necessarily  become 
proportionately  heavier  with  the  relin- 
quishment of  license  moneys  and  the 
complete  or  measurable  destruction  of  a 
rich  and  widespread  traffic.  In  both 
Kansas  and  Iowa  tolerably  high  license 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


)46 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


charges  prevailed  when  tlie  Prohibitoi'y 
statutes  were  adopted.    The  saloon  rev- 
enue was  a  considerable  factor  of    the 
public  income  in  every  town  and  county 
where  licenses  were  granted.  Each  liquor 
establishment  represented   also  a  round 
sum  of  accumulated  capital,  which  could 
be  levied  on  at  general  tax  rates  so  long 
as  the  business  existed,  but  would  prob- 
ably be  wiped  out,  or  materially  reduced, 
or  taken  to  another  State,  upon  the  en- 
forcement of  Prohibition.  Therefore  the 
new    legislation    threatened    each    pro- 
license  locality  with  an  immediate  loss 
of  revenue  large  enough  to  perceptibly 
increase    the    tax-bills    of    all   assessed 
people,  unless  a  compensating  diminu- 
tion of  expenditures  should  ensue.     Rec- 
ognition   of     the    claim     that    such   a 
diminution  has  ensued    in  Kansas  and 
Iowa,  and  will  probably  ensue  wherever 
Prohibition   is  well   executed,   and   has 
been  and   will   be   accomplished  in  the 
very  departments  whose  costliness  every 
good  citizen  deplores — the  departments 
devoted   to   the   arrest,  conviction   and 
punishment  of  offenders,  the  mainten- 
ance of  paupers,  etc., — must  be  counted 
as  one  of  the  crowning  triumphs  of  the 
temperance  reform. 

13ut  if  we  glance  at  the  relation  of 
strict  liquor  offenses  to  the  total  offenses, 
and  from  the  aggregate  cost  of  police 
services  deduce  that  part  of  the  cost 
occasioned  by  the  saloons,  it  will  in- 
stantly be  concluded  that  effectual  Pro- 
hibition, by  its  necessary  influence  upon 
the  cost  of  the  police  department  alone, 
cannot  fail  to  do  much  toward  squaring 
the  losses  due  to  extinguishment  of  liquor 
licenses.  Comparisons  are  made  in  the 
table  on  p.  547  for  38  leading  cities,  the 
figures  in  each  case  being  for  the  munici- 
pal year  ending  in  1889  or  early  in 
1890.  In  every  instance  the  arrests  for 
"drunkenness  and  disorderly  conduct " 
are  for  those  specific  offenses  only,  and 
the  returns  under  such  titles  as  "va- 
grancy," ''loitering,"  "suspicious  per- 
sons," "  persons  assisted  to  their  homes," 
and  under  similar  desiijnations  which 
veil  mere  liquor  offenses,  are  ignored. 
No  doubt  this  accounts  for  the  compar- 
atively small  percentages  in  cities  like 
Cincinnati,  New  Orleans,  Kansas  City 
(Mo.),  Memphis,  Richmond  (Va.),  Los 
Angeles  and  Charleston  (S.  C),  some  of 
which   are   amona:   the   most    notorious 


rum  centers  of  the  country.  There  is 
no  discoverable  reason  why  the  "drunks 
and  disorderlies"  should  constitute  8;') 
per  cent,  of  the  total  arrests  in  a  com- 
j)aratively  quiet  place  like  Trenton  and 
only  27  per  cent,  in  a  city  like  Cincinnati 
which  has  so  long  been  known  as  a 
Sodom  of  the  saloon,  80  per  cent,  in 
Mobile  and  only  30  per  cent,  in  Memphis, 
77  per  cent,  in  Hartford  and  only  21  per 
cent,  in  Kansas  City  (Mo.)  The  average 
percentage  of  53  is  really  much  too 
small,'  but  considering  that  it  has  been 
obtained  without  resorting  to  any  process 
of  interpretation,  but  simply  by  taking 
those  figures  that  the  designing  police 
officials  have  not  covered  up  with  vague 
titles,  it  is  significant  enough.' 

1  A  pcrcentag:i!  that  is  nearer  the  real  one,  and  yet 
probably  under  the  mark,  is  that  s:iven  for  the  city  of 
Boston  in  1881  by  Carroll  D.  Wright,  in  liis  notable  in- 
vestigation of  tlie  "  Influence  of  •intemperance  upon 
Crime  "  in  Massachnselts.  (See  footnote,  p.  520.)  Mr. 
Wright  found  that  in  the  year  covered  by  his  inquiry 
72  per  cent,  of  all  the  commitments  for  offenses  in 
Boston  was  for  "distinctively  rnm  offenses,"  and  that 
this  percentage  was  increased  to  84  by  counting  the  cases 
of  persons  wt)o  were  in  liquor  at  the  time  of  committing 
ofi'euses.  It  is  not  possible  that  so  careful  a  statistician  as 
Mr.  Wright  would  liave  used  tliese  Boston  figures  for  the 
purpose  of  a  dispassionate  study  if  the  percentage  of 
commitments  for  rum  offenses  shown  by  them  had  been 
above  a  fair  average  for  large  cities. 

"  The  table  on  the  next  page  is  taken  from  the  Voice 
for  Nov.  20,  1890.  (In  all  instances  the  figures  as  pub- 
lished in  the  Voice  have  been  compared'with  original 
data;  and  some  inaccuracies  have  been  corrected.) 

This  tat)le  (p.  547)  supplies  an  excellent  basis  tor  calcu- 
lating tlie  api)roximate  total  number  of  arrests  caused 
peculiarly  by  drink,  and  the  approximate  total  expendi- 
ture for  police  purposes  on  account  of  these  drink-caused 
arrests,  for  all  the  cities  of  the  United  States. 

According  to  the  Census  of  1880  (the  1890  returns  for 
all  cities  not  being  available  at  the  time  this  is  written), 
the  total  population  of  all  the  cities  having  over 4,000  in- 
habitants was  in  that  year  13,234,796.  Of  this  population 
the  38  cities  represented  in  the  table  had  6,614,140,  or 
almost  exactly  one-half.  Assuming  that  the  remaining 
cities  have  as  many  arrests  and  spend  as  much  for  their 
police  departments  as  the  38  cities  instanced,  we  get  the 
following  figures: 

Total  arrests  annually  in  all  the  cities  having  4,(XKt 
or  more  inliabitaiits,  with  an  asigresate  population  of 
1.3,2:54.7%  (as  shown   by   the   Cens.is   of  1880).  1,020,722. 

Total  annual  expenses  of  the  police  departments  of 
these  cities,  $33,370,600. 

How  many  of  tliese  total  arrests  and  how  much  of  thin 
total  exiwnditure  for  the  police  are  to  be  charged  dis- 
tinctively to  drink?  Clearly  we  cannot  get  at  reliable 
results  by  using  the  average  percentage  of  "drunks  and 
disorderlies  "  jjiven  in  the  table.  That  percentage  is  ridicu- 
lously low.  Even  Mr.  Carroll  D.  Wright's  percentage  of 
72  for  the  city  of  Boston  was  too  small  for  that  city,  and 
taking  Mr.  Wright's  inquiry  as  a  foundation  we  find  th.at 
84  is  nearer  the  true  percentage.  (See  footnote,  p.  529.) 
But  assuming  that  the  arrests  due  to  drink  in  the  cities 
will  average,  in  round  numbers,  80  per  cent,  of  all  the 
arrests,  the  following  conclusions  are  obtained: 

Total  annual  arrests  due  to  drink  in  cities  bavins  an 
aggregate  of  13,234,796  population  (Census  of  1880),  820,978. 

Total  expenditures  (proportionate)  in  tliese  cities  for 
police  duty  on  account  of  the  drink  traffic,  $26,696,480. 

These  figures  are  based  on  police  returns  for  the  year 
1889  and  population  returns  for  the  year  1880.  The  popu- 
lation of  all  the  cities  represented  has  increased  largely 
since  1880,  so  that  their  iiggregate  number  of  inhabitants 
is  probably  now  not  less  than  17,(X)0.000.  Therefore  all 
the  preceding  estimates  should  be  for  a  city  population  of 
about  17,000,000  instead  of  13,234,796. 

The  total  population  of  the  United  States,  city  and 
country,  is  about  63,000,000.     Consequently  the  new  citicu 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


547 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


Cities. 

Total 
Arrests. 

Arrests  for 

Drunkenness 

AND  Disorderly 

Conduct. 

Per  cent,  op 
Arkeststhat 
ARE  FOR  Drunk 
and    Disor- 
derly. 

Total  Expense 
OF  Maintaining 
the  Police  De- 
partment. 

Proport  ion  ate 
Cost  of  Policing 
Drunks   and    Dis- 
orderlies. 

New  York 

82,200 

48,119 

42,073 

34,331 

19,724 

40,066 

31,420 

23,549 

15,695 

10,377 

20,150 

21,1.50 

9,315 

8,746 

7,426 

7,779 

6,964 

7,213 

6,901 

6,888 

6,617 

5,488 

4.557 

3,949 

3,735 

3,594 

3,756 

3.453 

3,343 

3,214 

3,133 

2,950 

2,863 

3,705 

2,504 

3,-347 

2,-314 

1,855 

47.666 
27,536 
20.097 
19,-593 
9,207 
25,418 
20,100 
12,773 
4,169 
6,414 
7,206 
7,443 
4,.5;« 
5,259 
4,069 
1,667 
4,748 
3,129 
3,610 
3.447 
3,0-58 
3,851 
3,318 
3,033 
1,863 
1,763 
1,153 
1,013 
3,581 
3,242 
1,660 
1,459 
1,470 
1,096 
3,001 
1,995 
1,326 
1,007 

58 
57 
47 
57 
47 
63 
64 
54 
27 
62 
36 
35 
49 
60 
55 
21 
68 
30 
38 
50 
55 
70 
72 
77 
50 
49 
31 
39 
77 
69 
53 
50 
51 
41 
80 
85 
53 
54 

84,426,347.11 

l,()(f,',.5'.)4.(JO 

l,>Sit7,7(KI.  K) 

1,.")K8,489.99 

571,850.00 

1,181,914.46 

780.010.79 

535,493.79 

469,195.61 

324.128.80 

180,000.00 

451,440.00 

102,000.00 

-321.877.-56 

194,241.55 

163.-5O0.tX) 

180.000.00 

57,.583.88 

97.222..50 

178,983.03 

370,333.13 

189,000.00 

89,9.54.07 

98,241.82 

49,917  .50 

48,120.75 

78,000.(X) 

67.335.00 

66,000.00 

85.000.00 

133,817.18 

45.01X1.00 

45,000.00 

63,756.09 

28,.520.ll0 

38,000.00 

22,600.11 

52,180.13 

$2,567,281.32 

913,478.92 

849,619.19 

905.410.79 

268,769.-50 

744,606.11 

499,206.91 

289,166.65 

126,682.81 

200,959.86 

64,800.00 

158,004.00 

49,980.00 

193.126..54 

106.832.85 

34,3:35.00 

122,400  00 

17,275.16 

36,944.55 

89,491.51 

148,683.23 

132,300.00 

64,766.93 

75,646.20 

24,958.75 

2:3,-579.17 

24,180.00 

19,537.15 

50,830.00 

58,650.00 

70,923.11 

22,-500.00 

22.9.50.00 

26.140.00 

22,816.00 

.32,300.00 

11,978.06 

28,177.26 

Cliicatto 

Pliiladt'lphia 

Brooklyn 

St.  Louis 

Boston 

Baltimore 

iSau  Francisco 

Cincinnati 

Cleveland 

New  Orleans 

Wasliington,  D.  C 

Denver 

Detroit 

Minneiii)olis  ' 

Kansas  City,  Mo 

Louisville 

Memphis 

Richmond,  Va 

St.  Paul 

flereev  C'ity 

Milwaukee 

Lowell 

Worcester 

Dayton.  0 

Oakland,  Cal 

Los  Anijeles 

Charleston,  S.  C 

Hartford 

Alle^'heny 

Albany,  N.  Y 

San  Antonio 

Wilmington,  Del 

Savannah  

Mobile 

Trenton 

Wheeling  

Grand  Rapids 

Totals 

513,361 

373,430 

53 

$16,685,399  82 

$8,843,208.90 

'  There  is  an  apparent  discrepancy  between  these  figures  of  arrests  in  Minneapolis  and  the  fignres  given  in  the 
table  on  p.  521.  But  as  is  explained  in  the  summary  appended  to  that  table,  the  police  year  was  in  1889  changed  so  as 
to  end  on  Dee.  31  instead  of  March  30,  so  that  the  arrests  given  on  p.  521  include  only  nine  months  of  the  year  1889. 
'I'o  these  figures  for  nine  months  we  have  added,  in  the  table  above  the  figures  for  the  three  months  from  Dec.  31, 
1889,  to  March  31,  1890— making  a  full  year.  The  expenses  of  the  Police  Department  of  Minneapolis  for  the  year 
March  31, 1889,  to  March  31, 1890,  are  estimated. 


I^his  table  shows  in  a  practical  way 
that  if  Prohibition  can,  as  it  does, 
greatly  reduce  arrests  for  drunkenness 
and  disorderly  conduct,  a  considerable 
part  of  the  lost  license  revenue  will  at 
once  be  offset  by  a  decrease  in  the  cost 
of  the  police.  Another  large  part  of 
the  police  expense  arises  from  the  numer- 
ous contributions  made  by  the  saloons  to 
the  num])er  of  apprehensions  for  offenses 
other  than  "  drunk  and  disorderly  "  (see 
Mr.  Wright's  statistics,  footnote  p.  529), 
and  thus  enforced  Prohibition  will  effect 
another  saving  in  the  police  department. 

that  have  reached  the  4,000  mark  since  1880.  the  smaller 
cities,  the  towns  and  the  rural  districts  contain  about 
40,000,000  inhabitants.  Among  these  are  many  Prohibi- 
tory localities.  The  work  and  cost  of  the  police  ere  rela- 
lively  less  in  these  than  in  the  large  centers  already  con- 
-sidered.  Let  us  assume  that  the  whole  of  these  46,000,- 
(KX)  people  produce  no  more  oft'enders  and  pay  no  more 
for  police  service  than  the  17,000,000  city  people;  never- 
theless the  number  of  arrests  caused  by  the  saloons  for 
the  whole  country  will  then  be  not  less  than  1.600.000 
annually,  and  the  proportionate  amount  paid  the  police 
for  making  thes^e  saloon  caused  arrests  will  be  more  than 
$5:3,000,000  annually  for  th(!  nation  at  large. 


A  policy  that  lightens  the  work  of  the 
police  must  lighten  the  burden  of  the 
Courts  and  jails.  And  the  public  expend- 
iture for  almshouses,  hospitals,  asylums, 
reformatories  and  houses  of  refuge  can- 
not fail  to  be  materially  lessened  by  a 
measure  that  so  gratifyingly  lessens  crime 
and  disorder. 

All  this  simply  applies  the  test  of 
facts  and  common  sense  to  the  statements 
of  the  Kansas  Probate  Judges  and  the 
Iowa  Prosecuting  Attorneys.  The  fami- 
liar answer  that  ideal  Prohibition  and 
unexecuted  Prohibition  are  entirely  dif- 
ferent things,  and  that  unexecuted  Pro- 
hibition is  the  more  frequently  encoun- 
tered in  the  great  cities,  does  not  affect 
the  fundamental  consideration  that  the 
Prohibition  policy,  even  as  a  fiscal  meas- 
ure, has  within  it  the  possibilities  of 
beneficence,  and  that  wide  experience 
has  failed  to  condemn  even  partial  Pro- 
hibition on  fiscal  grounds. 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


548 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


Nor  does  the  second  part  of  this  asser- 
tion require  any  qualification.  All  Pro- 
hibition up  to  this  date  has  been  but  par- 
tial. Given  some  encouraging  degree  of 
enforcement,  and  we  shall  invariably 
lind  that  the  tax  assessments  upon  the 
general  community  are  lighter  or  at  most 
are  not  appreciably  heavier  because  of 
the  sacrifice  of  license  revenues. 

At  times,  it  is  true,  there  is  an  appa- 
rent increase.  But  when  the  reasons  are 
sought  it  is  seen  that  the  advance  has 
been  brought  about  by  special  causes, 
oftenest  by  public  improvements  made 
possible  (presumably)  by  greater  pros- 
perity. Thus  the  Hon.  Charles  Dan- 
lorth,  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of 
Maine  for  25  years,  gives  the  following 
discriminating  account  of  the  situation 
in  that  State : 

"I  can  very  well  remember  the  condition  of 
the  community  in  regard  to  temperance  before 
and  at  the  time  the  Prohibitory  law  was  passed. 
The  same  linancial  evils  were  then  prophesied 
as  resulting  from  it  as  now.  But  so  far  as  can 
be  perceived  none  of  them  have  come  to  pass. 
It  is  evident  that  less  liquor  is  sold  now  than 
then.  It  is  equally  true  that  more  of  other  and 
more  wholesome  business  is  done  now.  It  is 
true  taxes  are  higher  now,  but  the  difference  is 
more  than  accounted  for  in  the  increased  facili- 
ties for  doing  business,  and  improvements  in 
better  roads,  schools,  protection  from  fires  and 
diseases,  in  lighted  streets  and  more  comfortable 
public  buildings,  as  well  as  in  all  those  things 
which  pertain  to  a  better  life  and  higher  civiliza- 
tion. So  the  increased  public  expense  is  more 
than  compensated  for  by  increased  advantages 
to  individuals.  It  is  quite  certain  that  the  Pro- 
hibitory law  has  had  nothing  to  do  with  this 
increased  public  expense.  If  it  has  tended  to 
diminish  intemperance  it  is  self-evident  that  its 
tendency  must  be  the  other  way." 

Similar  reports  come  from  the  Western 
Prohibition  States.  Taxes  have  de- 
creased or  have  not  increased — so  testify 
the  officials  of  most  of  the  counties  of 
Kansas  and  lowa.^  But  those  who  con- 
fess an  increase  almost  without  exception 
account  for  it  by  saying  that  extensive  im- 
provements have  been  inaugurated  since 
Prohibition  took  effect. 

The  writers  who  defend  the  liquor- 
saloons  have  unscrupulously  attacked 
Prohibition  by  comparing  tax-rates  in 
Kansas  and  Iowa  with  tax-rates  in  cer- 
tain selected  license  cities.  For  example, 
a  leaflet  used  in  all  the  recent  Amend- 
ment campaigns,  of  which  probably 
millions  of  copies  were  scattered,  gave 

>  See  e6|)ecially  the  Voice,  April  4  and  May  IG,  18S9. 


these  figures:  Tax-rate  in  Des  Moines, 
6.3  per  cent. ;  in  Atchison,  5.G5  per  cent. ; 
in  Topeka,  3.28  per  cent.;  in  Kansas 
City  (Mo.),  1.4  per  cent.  Any  fair  com- 
parison of  tax-rates  in  different  com- 
munities involves  the  necessity  of  deli- 
cate distinctions.  In  some  places  natural 
conditions  are  more  favorable  to  low 
taxes  than  in  others ;  in  some,  at  a  given 
time,  heavy  but  temporary  burdens  are 
imposed  because  of  public  enterprises, 
while  in  others  no  such  enterprises 
are  afoot;  in  some,  extravagant  and  cor- 
rupt men  are  in  charge,  while  in  others 
economical  and  honorable  officials  ad- 
minister afl'airs  ;  in  some,  property  is 
assessed  for  taxation  purposes  at  but  a 
mere  fraction  of  its  market  value,  while 
in  others  it  is  assessed  at  nearly  or  quite 
its  actual  value.  Throughout  Kansas 
and  Iowa  the  custom  is  to  assess  property 
at  from  one-third  to  one-sixth  its  real 
worth,  and  thus  a  seemingly  high  tax- 
rate  prevails,  although  the  fact  is  that 
the  tax-bills  paid  by  citizens  are,  on  the 
average,  proportionately  smaller  than  in 
neighboring  license  States. 

Proof  of  this  has  been  established  by 
painstaking  investigatiojis.  The  Hon. 
Albert  H.  Horton,  Chief-Justice  of  the 
Kansas  Supreme  Court,  is  authority  for 
this  statement : 

"From  1880  to  1889  the  assessed  value  of 
property  in  Kansas  has  increased  over  $200,- 
000,000.  In  Nebraska,  under  license,  its  valu- 
ation has  increased  only  a  little  over  $92,000,- 
000.  The  average  rate  of  increase  in  Kansas 
has  teen  $30,000,000  annually,  while  in 
Nebraska  it  has  been  only  $9,000,000.  The 
increase  in  wealth  in  Kansas  has  more  than 
doubled  that  of  Nebraska,  althoiigh  the  latter 
has  been  aided  by  its  $1,000  license  tax. 

"  The  tax-rate  for  State  purposes  [in  Kansas] 
has  steadily  decreased  since  1880,  when  it  was 
55  cents  on  $100,  to  40  cents  in  1889;  while  in 
Nebraska  it  has  increased  from  39  cents  and  5 
mills  in  1880  to  63  cents  and  3  mills  in  1889. 
Its  average  rate  [in  Nebraska]  for  the  last  nine 
years  has  been  56  cents  and  7  mills,  making 
its  present  rate  more  than  50  per  cent,  higher 
than  in  Kansas,  showing  clearly  that  license 
for  revenue  increases  instead  of  diminishing 
taxation."  ^ 

And  the  Voice,  in  1890,  by  means  of 
persistent  correspondence,  secured  data 
from  a  majority  of  the  county  officials  of 
Kansas,  Iowa  and  Nebraska,  which  when 
analyzed  showed  conclusively  that  taxes 
were  relatively  higher  in  the  High 
License  State  than  in  the  two  Prohibi- 

a  The  Voice,  Sept.  18, 1890. 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


549 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


tion  States.     We  summarize  the  Voice's 
exhaustive  tables.  ^ 

Kansas:  73  of  ilie  106  Counties. — Total  as- 
sessed valuation  of  property  in  counties  report- 
ing, $380,984,573.07  ;  total  actual  value,  $1,- 
016,782,230.61  ;  total  taxes  levied  for  county 
purposes  in  counties  reporting,  $2,640,389.29  ; 
average  amount  represented  by  ,f  100  of  assessed 
valuation,  $362  ;  average  rate  on  $100  of  as- 
sessed valuation,  $0,939  ;  average  actual  rate  of 
ta.xation  on  $100  in  the  counties  reporting, 
$0,259. 

Iowa:  82  of  the  ^Q  Counties. — Total  as.sessed 
valuation  of  property  in  counties  reporting, 
$435,570,141.50;  total  actual  value,  $1,346,- 
104,100  ;  total  taxes  levied  for  county  purposes 
in  counties  reporting,  $3,851,061.07 ;  average 
amount  represented  by  $100  of  assessed  valua- 
tion, $310 ;  average  rate  on  $100  of  asses.sed 
valuation,  .$0,884  ;  average  actual  rate  of  taxa- 
tion on  .$100  in  the  counties  reporting,  $0,286  ; 
average  actual  rate  in  73  counties,  exclusive  of  10 
Mississippi  river  counties  in  which  it  is  said  tfie 
Prohibit jry  law  is  not  enforced,  $0,369. 

Nebraska :  68  of  the  88  Counties. — Total  as- 
sessed valuation  of  property  in  counties  report- 
ing, $141,094,705.16;  total  actual  value,  $803,- 
215,.068.80  ;  total  taxes  levied  for  county  pur- 
poses in  counties  reporting,  $2,236,857.34  ; 
average  amount  represented  by  $100  of  assessed 
valuation,  $568  ;  average  rate  on  $100  of  as- 
sessed valuation,  .$1,577;  average  actual  rate  of 
taxation  on  $100  in  the  counties  reporting, 
$0,277. 

Summary  of  Actual  Tax-Rates  {County  Pur- 
poses).— Kansas,  $0,259  per  $100  ;  Iowa  (omit- 
ting 10  Mississippi  river  counties),  .fO.269  per 
$100  ;  Nebraska,  $0,277  ;  per  $100. 

Average  Tux-Rates  for  County  and  State  Pur- 
poses Combined. — Kansas  (73  counties),  $1,349 
per  $100  of  assessed  valuation,  or  $0,372  per 
$100  of  actual  value.  Iowa  (72  counties), 
$1,134  per  $100  of  assessed  valuation,  or  $0,350 
per  $100  of  actual  value.  Nebraska  (68  counties), 
$2,227  per  $100  of  assessed  valuation,  or 
$0,391  per  $100  of  actual  value. 

These  scrupulously  fair  and  most  valu- 
able comparisons  remove  all  possibility 
of  doubt  as  to  the  harmlessness  of  a 
tolerably  well-enforced  Prohibitory  law 
in  its  eifects  upon  State  and  county  taxa- 
tion. But  they  do  not  illustrate  the  con- 
sequences upon  taxation  for  city  pur- 
poses. In  regard  to  city  taxation  it  is  very 
difficult,  indeed  impracticable,  to  make 
general  averages  for  a  whole  State.  Local 
differences  cause  wide  variations  in  local 
tax-rates,  and  to  strike  a  general  average 
for  various  cities  would  be  inuch  like 
averaging  dilfereni  fractions  without  re- 
ducing them  to  a  common  denominator 
— an  impossible  task.  But  if  several 
typical  cities  of  Prohibition  and  license 
States,  respectively,  are  examined,  it  can 

>  See  the  Voice,  Oct.  30,  1890. 


at  least  be  learned  whether  the  tendency 
in  the  Prohibition  cities  gives  color  to 
unfavorable  representations.  The  Voice 
supplemented  its  county  tax  returns  by 
comparing  cities  of  Kansas  with  cities  of 
Nebraska  and  Missouri,  and  cities  of 
Iowa  with  cities  of  Michigan,  Minnesota 
and  Wisconsin,  as  follows":  ^ 


Cities. 

valua- 

of   all 

perty, 

or  per- 

1  (1889). 

o  L  s  s^S" 

.2 

ss'd 

tion 

pro 

real 

sona 

axle 
c  i  t 
pos 
c  1  u 
scho 

'^   C3   ^ 

a  o  > 

ate  ( 
of  a 
valu 

< 

E-i 

m 

K 

K 

Kansas  : 

Topeka . . 

$9,228,838.60  $278,710.93 

f.500 

$3.02 

$.60 

Kan.  City 

8,000,000  00 

2.37.6(H).00 

350 

2-97 

.85 

Salina  ... 

1,7:35,189.79 

.50.667..54 

400 

2.92 

.73 

Ottawa . . . 

1.300,000.00 

4;B..500.00 

400 

3-35 

.84 

Abilene  .. 

815,000.00 

29,340.00 

450 

3.60 

.80 

X^br'ska: 

Omaha. . . 

20,047.-589.00 

994,881.42 

700 

4-96 

.71 

Lincoln  . . 

5,600,000.00 

217,-342.05 

600 

3.95 

.66 

G'd  Isla'd 

1,059,068.00 

44.701.30 

600 

4.22 

.70 

Fremont  . 

837,000.00 

35,.363.25i 

800 

4.25 

.53 

Wahoo . . . 

290,000.00 

11,890.00 

.500 

4.10 

.82 

Missouri : 

St.  Joseph 

23,610,000.00 

389,465.00= 

230 

1.65 

.72 

Hannibal 

3,402,830.00 

62.0.52.34 

150 

1.85 

1.24 

Carthage . 

1,645-.678.00 

31,267.88 

300 

1.90 

.63 

Moberly  ,. 

1.0.50.000.00 

25,200.00 

300 

2.40 

.80 

Clinton... 

1,114,020.00 

16,710.30 

200 

1.50 

,76 

1  Fremont's  report  does  not  include  water-works  and 
interest  on  water  bonds  and  City  Hall,  Court.  House  and 
.ntersection  bonds.  -  Not  stated  whether  school  tax  is  in- 
cluded. 


Cities. 

d  valua- 
n    of    all 

0  p  e  r  ty, 

1  and  per- 
ml  (1889). 

levied  for 
y     P  u  r- 
s  es    r  or 
».    school 
included. 

of  ass'd 
1  uation 

ircsents 

on   $100 
assessed 
uation. 

on  $100 
actual 
uation. 

S-2- go 

kl  .t^  o  oo  X 

o?5- 

«i<^  « 

^^o-Ts 

«^;xgco 

^"=^-5  . 

$400 

s  o  > 
$4.20 

d  o  > 
$1.05 

Iowa  : 
Burling'n 

$4,393,445.00 

$184,446.78 

Cedar      1 

Rapids  i 

n.  Moines 

3,172,-300.00 

90,029..32: 

400 

2.84 

.71 

11,3C6,840.00 

331,648.042 

600 

2.91 

.58 

Dubuque. 

17,868,940  00 

188,500.092 

200 

1.05 

.52 

Musc'tine 

2,462,-567.00 

66.489.:30 

300 

2.70 

.90 

Osk'loosa 

1,299,979.00 

57,605,47 

400 

4.43 

1.11 

Waterloo. 

1,0:35,689.00 

39,515.08 

250 

3.73 

1.50 

Michigan: 

Jackson. . 

7,037,040.00 

148,509.93 

300 

2.11 

.70 

E.   Sag-  ( 
inaw  ^ .  ( 

10,605,220.00 

251,353  20 

150 

2.36 

1.57 

Saginaw  ' 

5.300,000.00 

112,890.00 

150 

2.13 

1.42 

Battle  C'k 

3,780,151.00 

48,500.002 

200 

1.28 

64 

Manistee - 

2,:378,6]0.00 

69,931.13 

300 

2.94 

.98 

^/^/^'*o);a.■ 

Mi  n 'polls 

127,101,861.00 

2.948,2C0.95 

400 

2.-32 

.58 

Duluth.-- 

22,047,322.00 

414.489.65 

1-88 

Winona  -  - 

6,8:32,228.00 

198.818.66 

'250 

2.91 

1.16 

Red  Wing 

1.770,988.00 

27.987.:332 

300 

1.58 

..53 

Hastings - 

1,186,790.00 

19.049.61 

1.50 

1-60 

1.07 

Brainerd  - 

1,641,621.00 

34.474.04 

150 

2.10 

1.40 

Anoka...  - 

1,417,5-31.00 

30,496.92 

200 

2.15 

1.08 

Wise' sin : 

Madison  . 

6,-396,917.00 

79,618.-57 

150 

1.24 

.83 

Milw'kee. 

100,498.200.00 

1,8:31.746.71 

200 

1.82 

.91 

Oshkosh.. 

7,093,a)5.00 

167.040.56 

200 

2.:35 

1.18 

Sheb'gan. 

3,742,435.00 

97.951.35 

250 

2.62 

1.05 

Appleton. 

3,504,725.00 

84,176.60 

300 

2.40 

.80 

Manito- 
woc. 

1,821,325.00 

46,291.65 

200 

2.54 

1.27 

'  Not  stated  whether  school  tax  is  included.  2  School 
tax  not  included.  ^  Saginaw  and  East  Saginaw  are  now 
one. 

«  Ibid,  Oct.  2,  1890. 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


550 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


Naturally  the  city  tax-rates  in  all  the 
States  instanced  show  marked  differ- 
ences. But  there  is  nothing  in  the 
Kansas  and  Iowa  figures  to  fortify  the 
anti-Prohibitionists'  assertions. 

If  the  evidence  that  we  have  given  is 
taken  with  some  allowance  because  it 
has  been  collated  by  Prohibitionist  par- 
tisans, the  same  objection  will  not  attach 
to  the  following  Census  statistics  : 


CD  fl>    D" 

2  o  hH 

s  "^  f» 

CU  ''^  p 


23   '^■' 


2  "■'  2 

C3  re  2 


2  P3  2  re  p 
"^  M  S  2  S" 

=  232 
!??;  Wo 

M  S"  IS.  O  CT 


re 
o  2  f^  ft> 

ri  ^  y^  rn 
• — -  a  HH-^ 

Er.§5w 


j  »^ 


<T> 


">,~§2 

re  "-• 
^  2 

IB  2 

re  3 

--.^  CO 

•    re 


^'a   *     re 


^^ 


t-'o  =:. 

2  o-n-. 
S  5-'2 

3  • 


&! 


CD 

> 
H 
t4 


*5  ~ 

(^  O  I-'  '-^OD 

05  GO  J>S  ^'-^  ^  ^w3  ^ 

CO  00  CD  O  <0  CO 
rfi.  ^  *^  -J  4- 00 
■^"l-j  OT^  0-1 
Ol  «D  ^5  00  *-5  iO 
Or  00^-5  *- CD 


i-i  ^^ 

00  ^-1 

en'*-' 

is  00 

<lco 


O        rfi.  O  ^0  io  ">-». 

-vj  CO  >-*  O  iC  CO  05 
_4-  4-  p  _-l  _►-'  CO  ►-» 

"OCC  GO  UT^l  OOD 
4-  O  CO  «D  Ci  iO  •-* 
05  O  ^3  O  00  O  -J 


^  iO»_t  »_A  CD  *-* 

Ol  O  *^p  ,-"!*•  ^ 
^"O  iiu  OC  (w  CO  'l"^J 

tD  hi-  ~  --O  CO  CO  0-  H-^ 
Si  -  !  ii  CO-}  X -IJO 

'►-'"cO  -3  CO  CO  O  p  CO 
COOCDOCOOOMO 
i-iCnWC0t«-3— iCO 


^        iC^^CO^CO 

"il  CO  CO  o  *- m'Vs 

iO  iO  CJT  '-'  CC  O  4:^ 
JO  4- -JO  4^-3  to 
^/*S  Oj  ^  O  ^  CO 
Oi  ^  Ol  4-  00  •-*  -3 
iCCDCD4^CDOO 


o 

a 
o  o 

H 

M 

a 


1-1  1   ^sl-lCo■-l 

CU  en  CD  OD  O  02 -3  00 

-3  OiCC  CT 

Per 

CENT. 

ofIn- 
ckease. 

CO  CD  ^  -^  Cj  CO  _  or 
cocc>'-*OD>^c:)aoco 

►J-.  en  CD  QOCO  OS  O  or 
tfk  M  C5  bi  be  GO  or  o 

-?  OS  ^7  tS  *0  :D  CD  *». 
I— i-^<JCOOiO'>^Oi 


CO  CO       "-^  ■— *■ 

t^^        JO  4-  0»  I-'  ht». 
O  ?*  00  - 1  JUl  ^►-'  JO 

o  0^ »-'  00 '-'  tc  io 

Jii  -I  Of  CO  O  '-'  <o 

oo  >*^  O  CO  -^  o:p  05 


fe 


CJt  -1  CS  CD  (O  "-^  CO 
.-Oht-  4--11-1-7GO 
O  CD  -i  O  CDj-tj-J  Ot 

rfi.  ^o  bo  o  '-^  bo  CD  ^ 

OC005-^3  0005*t-*>' 
COCDCOCOtOOO^ 


O  COOOOTOi 

CO  K><I  CO  GO  Ot  CO 
(i^-I  4^j:d  O  en  tS 

"c:  ^I  Co'hfi.'OTTo  00 
^3  -I  O  "-^  00  Oi  "-^ 
O  en  CO  Oi  hi*  H-^  CO 


o 
■    ta 

£4 


JO  O  "  JO  *^  CO  CO 

iO  *0  en  OD  CO  CD  Oi 

»-» CO  4-  ;;t  CI  CD  4* 


to  "^  o 

W  "^  M  ^ 


OD  OS  ~1  I-*  en  -1 
t-i  ^ii  -?  O  en  '30 
o  o  ' —  cc  -1  CO 
Oio'^'^1^>  CO 
O  OT  QC  .t.  CD  CO 

t*-  GO  en  oi  «:■  ej( 


005 

CO  *-*■ 
COht*. 


<!        COOi  '-"-'  O 

Oi  CD  00  at  CD  00  en 
O^  *0  CD  o:  CT  en 

H-*  GO  -">  ^1  O  *».  CO 
-1  iCJ  4-  0<  GO  O  O 
en  OS  ^  i-i  »-*  h4^  O 


iC  Oi  ^  J:i  A»  '-'  en  CO 

►-*o'renooco-}co 

^pT^JC-  .'^>0JJ1  00  p'p^ 
■jo'—'  '•-O'Ici'^  en  ?C!  GO 

enOSCOCOOCDOOGO 

^aco*^oooco-^io 


"co  -:i'go  o:  --i'cd  Os 
)-*  CD  00  -I  O  if-:; 

jc-  CI  j^  P^i^  ,^  r^ 

"go  4-  "cc  bo  rfi.  *•-«■  b> 

CO  4-  OS  Oi  CO  CO  ^:i 
H-L  It^  OS  >(^  CO  00  ^ 


f->.  CJ1  CD  CO  CO  CO  C 


5  CO  to  (SI -3 


sji^s:^ 


^  w 


M  i*  .< 

W  00  S^ 


-§w 


The  table  is  from  the  Census  returns 
for  1890,  under  the  title  of  "  Total  Debts 
and  Available  Eesources  of  Eepresenta- 
tive  Municipalities  in  Various  States  for 
1880  and  1890,"  as  given  in  Census  Bul- 
letin No.  14  (Table  51),  issued  by  the 
Census  Bureau  near  the  end  of  1890. 
Not  all  the  cities  in  the  respective  States 
are  included — only  certain  ones  selected 
by  the  Census  officials  as  typical. 

It  is  not  a  little  significant  that  the 
tax  argument  has  least  weight  with  citi- 
zens who  have  actually  experienced  the 
results  of  Prohibition  and  may  be  re- 
garded as  more  candid  judges  than  the 
drunkard-makers  and  their  subsidized 
editors  and  pamphleteers.  Year  after 
year  the  tax-payers  of  four-fifths  of  the 
Massachusetts  towns  and  a  nuuiber  of 
the  cities  of  that  State  steadily  decline 
to  accept  license  money  from  saloons, 
although  the  statute  places  no  limit  upon 
the  fee  "which  any  locality  may  fix  for 
the  privilege  of  liquor-selling.  No  in- 
telligent man,  knowing  the  practical 
spirit  of  the  Massachusetts  "Yankee," 
will  say  that  this  sturdy  opposition  is 
caused  by  mere  blind  fanaticism  or  runs 
counter  to  sound  fiscal  policy.  It  is  in- 
deed a  most  instructive  fact  that  a  vast 
majority  of  the  communities  of  so  con- 
servative a  State,  after  nearly  half  a  cen- 
tury of  alternate  trials  of  Prohibition 
and  license,  have  come  to  the  settled  con- 
clusion that  it  is  best  on  all  grounds  not 
to  invite  the  saloons  to  assist  in  paying 
taxes.  The  town  of  Dracut,  Mass.,  with 
a  population  of  about  2,000,  made  a  novel 
experiment  in  1890.  Only  one  liquor 
license  was  issued,  and  the  great  jn'ice  of 
18,000  was  charged  for  it.  The  licensee 
immediately  prepared  to  conduct  busi- 
ness on  a  large  scale,  and  the  prospects 
seemed  bright  for  him,  since  the  city  of 
Lowell,  close  by,  had  voted  for  Prohi- 
bition and  had  no  licensed  saloons  to 
supply  the  demand.  For  two  days 
Dracut  was  thronged  with  a  drunken 
rabble,  and  then  the  Town  Selectmen, 
with  the  approval  of  the  citizens  who 
had  most  at  stake,  cancelled  the  $8,000 
license.'  Always  it  is  found,  where  Pro- 
hibition is  in  effect  or  is  proposed,  that 
as  a  class  the  well-to-do  citizens,  the 
men  who  have  tax-bills  to  pay  and  whose 
judgment  as  to  consequences  is  keenest, 

1  The  Voice,  May  22,  1890. 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


551 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


are  inclined  to  discountenance  license  on 
fiiiy  terms,  and  that  the  scum  of  the 
population,  the  thieves  and  loafers,  the 
irresponsible  and  the  illiterate  individ- 
uals, are  the  readiest  supporters  of  the 
proposition  that  license  promotes  the 
public  welfare  and  reduces  taxes. 

The  assertion  that  Prohibition  has  a 
depopulating  tendency  is  founded  either 
on  dense  ignorance  or  on  heartless  mis- 
representations. Intrinsically  it  is  ludi- 
crous. The  evidence  that  enforced  Pro- 
hibition cleanses  a  community  of  its 
crime-producing  and  disorder-breeding 
institutions,  makes  less  work  for  the 
police,  the  Courts  and  the  prison  and 
almshouse  keepers,  and  is  of  benefit  also 
to  the  material  interests  of  the  people  as 
a  whole,  is  too  abundant  and  positive  to 
be  disputed.  By  what  method  of  reason- 
ing  can  it  be  predicted  that  in  conse- 
i|uence  of  the  very  policy  which  has 
such  effects  the  increase  of  population 
will  be  retarded  ?  The  saloon-keepers, 
bartenders,  brewers  and  distillers,  and 
numbers  of  rogues  and  ruffians  of  high 
and  low  degree,  will  probably  move 
away:  that  is  admitted.  But  their  ag- 
gregate number  is  relatively  small,  and 
e'ven  if  no  better  people  come  to  take 
their  places  the  loss  must  be  esteemed  an 
economic  gain.  It  is  said  that  a  consid- 
erable element  of  "liberal"  citizens,  re- 
spectable and  estimable,  will  not  brook 
Prohibitory  interference  with  their  per- 
sonal liberty  and  will  hasten  away  from 
the  puritanical  spot.  But  while  some 
highly  intolerant  persons  of  this  class 
may  impulsively  desire  to  leave,  very  few 
whose  retention  is  really  desirable  will 
actually  do  so.  Local  ties  are  strong;  es- 
tablished business  and  social  interests  are 
not  sacrificed  by  prudent  men  for  the 
sake  of  a  prejudice  or  a  whim ;  the  per- 
sonal grievance  will  be  endured  with  a 
certain  fortitude,  sustained  by  a  confi- 
dence in  the  resources  of  the  express 
office  and  a  willingness  to  await  tangible 
evidence  of  the  prol^ability  of  improving 
the  existing  lot.  Therefore  it  may  be 
expected  that  the  offended  drinking  man, 
if  he  is  indeed  a  useful  member  of  the 
community,  will  emulate  the  example  set 
by  a  well-known  capitalist,  who  in  a 
heated  Presidential  campaign  announced 
that  if  a  particular  candidate  were  suc- 
cessful he  would  sell  his  property  at  50 


cents  on  the  dollar,  but  after  the  election 
of  the  abhorred  aspirant  clung  to  his 
possessions  with  unrelaxed  tenacity. 
The  behavior  of  the  violent  Boston 
partisan,  who  committed  suicide  on  the 
night  of  another  Presidential  election 
because  the  returns  showed  the  defeat  of 
his  favorite,  has  few  parallels.  It  is 
natural  for  individuals — and  worthy  in- 
dividuals— of  strong  prejudices  to  de- 
clare that  they  will  shake  the  dust  of  a 
certain  locality  from  their  feet  if  a  meas- 
ure distasteful  to  them  is  carried ;  but  it 
is  equally  natural  for  all  men  of  ordinary 
sense  to  remain  in  the  old  j^lace  of  resi- 
dence until  there  is  visible  proof  that  the 
conditions  of  life  will  be  bettered  by  re- 
moving to  another  place. 

"If  any  person,"  says  Justice  Valen- 
tine of  the  Supreme  Court  of  Kansas, 
"  has  refused  to  immigrate  to  this  State 
because  of  the  Prohibition  of  liquor- 
saloons,  then  the  State  is  undoubtedly 
that  much  better  for  it,  and  if  any  per- 
son has  removed  from  the  State  because 
of  the  Prohibition  of  liquor-saloons  the 
State  is  equally  benefited."'  This  opinion, 
however  uncomplimentary  to  some  Avho 
drink  in  "moderation"  and  with  "in- 
nocence," expresses  a  conviction  that  is 
deep-rooted  in  the  most  observant  men 
of  Kansas  and  every  other  Prohibition 
State.  "  As  regards  the  assertion  that 
Prohibition  has  driven  people  out  of  the 
State,"  writes  ex-Governor  Larrabee  of 
Iowa,  "'  I  think  not  a  person  has  left  the 
State  on  account  of  Prohibition  whom 
it  is  desirable  to  have  return.""  It  is 
needless  to  amplify  such  testimony.  An 
overwhelming  majority  of  the  State, 
county  and  local  officials,  and  of  the 
most  respectal;)le  private  citizens,  declare 
that  the  Prohibitory  laws  have  operated 
to  increase  rather  than  to  diminish  the 
total  population,  and,  what  is  more  im- 
portant, to  elevate  its  character.  And 
there  is  nowhere  a  keener  sensitiveness 
to  all  influences  that  may  disturb  growth 
than  in  Iowa  and  Kansas. 

■  In  tlie  following  table  the  populations 
(1870,  1880  and  1890)  of  the  Prohibition 
States  are  compared  with  those  of  their 
nearest  license  neighbors,  and  in  each 
instance  where  a  State  Census  was  taken 
in  1885  the  figures  are  given : 


'  Thn  Voice.  Oct.  9.  1S00. 

-Letter  to  Rev.  William  Fuller  of  Al>erdeon.  S.  D., 
Feb.  1().  1889.  (See  the  "Political  Prohibuionist  for 
1883,"  p.  53.) 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


552 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


States. 

1870. 

1880. 

1885. 

1890. 

626,915 
339.. 551 
318.300 
1.457,351 
537,4.54 
217,353 

364,399 
1,194,020 

f  14,181  ] 

122,993 

1,721,295 

439,706 

648,936 
332,286 
340,991 
1.783,085 
622,700 
276,531 

996,096 

1,624,615 

36,909 

98,268 

452,402 

2,168.380 

780,773 

I,942',i41 

304.284 

1,268,.5.30 
1,753,980 

f- 415,610 -j 

740,645 

1,117,798 

661.086 
332,422 
376.  .5-30 
2,238,943 
7'46.2.58 
345,506 

1,42';  ,096 
1,911,896 
182.719 
328.808 
1.0.58.910 
2.679,184 
1,301,826 

Vermont 

New  Hampshire 
Massachusetts. . 
Connecticut .... 
Rhode  Island. . . 

Kansas 

Iowa 

North  Dakota.. 
South  Dakota.. 

Nebraska 

Missouri 

Minnesota 

Maine  and  Vermont  have  each  been  under  Prohibition 
for  more  than  .30  years.  Neil'  Hampshire  while  prohibit- 
JuK  the  retail  safe  licenses  the  manufacture.  Massachu- 
setts .and  Connecticut  have  been  steadily  under  license  in 
the  last  decade.  Rhode  Island  was  under  license  from 
1880  to  1886  and  from  1889  to  1890;  under  Prohibition 
from  1886  to  1889.  Kansas  voted  for  Prohibition  in  1880 
and  Iowa  in  1833.  The  Dakotas,  while  voting  for  Pro- 
hibition in  1889,  were  steadily  under  license  iip  to  that 
time,  as  were  Nebraska,  Missouri  and  Minnesota. 

Below  are  given  the  actual  increases 
and  the  percentages  of  increase. 


States. 

1870  TO  1880.                   1880  to  1890. 

INCREASE.                 j              INCREASE. 

Maine 

Vermont 

NewHamp- ) 

shire ( 

Massachu-    1 

setts 1 

Connectic\it. . 
Rhode  Island 

Kansas 

Iowa 

North  Diikota 
South  Dakota 

Nebraska 

Missouri 

Minnesota . . . 

22,021,  or     3.51   % 
1,735    "     0.52  '• 

28,691    "     9.01  " 

325,734    "    22.35  " 

83.246    "    15.86  " 
59,178    '^    27.23  " 

631.697    "  173  35  " 
430,595    "    30.06  " 

[  120,990    "  853.23  " 

.329.409    "  267.83  " 
447,085    '•    25.97  " 
341,167    "   77.57  *'■ 

12,150  or     1.87   % 
130    "     0.04  '• 

29,539    "     8.51  " 

455,858    "    25.57  " 

123,5.58    "    19.84  " 
68,975    "    24.94  " 

431,000    "  43.27  " 
287,251    "    17.68  " 
145.810    "395.05  " 
230..540    "234  60  " 
0-,5i8    "  134.60  '• 
il(i,8)4    •'    23.56  " 
521,053    "    66.74  " 

Inr.reases  in  States  Reporting  Population  Figures 
for  1885. —Massachusetts:  1880  to  1885,  159,056,  or  8.9  per 
cent.;  1885  to  1890,  296.802,  or  15.3  per  cent.  Rhode 
Island:  1880  to  1883.  27,753,  or  10  percent;  1885  to  1890, 
41.222,  or  13.5  per  cent.     Kansas:  1880  to  1885,  272.4.34,  or 


cent.  Nebraska:  1880  to  1885,  288,243,  or  63.7  per  cent.; 
1885  to  1890,  318,265,  or  43  per  cent.  Minnesota:  1880  to 
1885,  337,025,  or  43.2  per  cent.;  1885  to  1890,  184,028,  or 
16  5  per  cent. 

Viewed  apart  from  explanations  it 
may  be  thought  that  these  statistics 
make  an  unfavorable  showing  for  the 
Prohibition  States.  This  conclusion  is 
not  borne  out  by  impartial  study. 

In  Maine  and  Vermont,  the  complete 
Prohibition  States  of  New  England, 
agriculture,  lumbering  and  similar  in- 
dustries engage  the  people,  and  manu- 
factures have  not  been  developed.  There 
are  no  large  cities  to  concentrate  po2)ula- 
tion  and  induce  rapid  growth.  Besides, 
the  soil  is  less  favorable  to  profitable 
agriculture  than  that  of  most  other  parts 
of  the   Union,  many    farms   have   been 


abandoned  because  of  their  unproduc- 
tiveness, and  as  the  young  men  grow  up 
they  seek  the  richer  lands  of  the  West. 
Tlie  same  is  partly  true  of  New  Hamp- 
shire, although  several  cities  of  that 
State  are  assuming  importance  and  manu- 
facturing is  a  more  prominent  industry 
than  in  Maine  and  Vermont — an  explan- 
ation that  fully  accounts  for  the  advan- 
tage in  point  of  increase  of  popula- 
tion that  this  semi-Prohibition  State 
has  over  the  complete  Prohibition  States 
adjacent  to  it.  In  Massachusetts,  Con- 
necticut and  Ehode  Island,  the  remain- 
ing States  of  the  group,  manufacturing 
is  conducted  on  a  great  scale  and  large 
cities  are  numerous — hence  the  larger 
growth.  The  Census  Bureau,  in  its  re- 
view of  the  New  England  population 
returns,  officially  attributes  these  differ- 
ences to  the  very  causes  above  indicated, 
and  to  no  other  causes.  It  says  that  the 
small  rate  of  increase  in  Maine,  Vermont 
and  New  Hampshire  is  "  probably  due  to 
the  fact  of  a  large  mijjration  of  the  farm- 
ing  population  to  the  far  West,  and 
manufactures  not  having  yet  assumed 
sufficient  prominence,"  and  that  Massa- 
chusetts, Connecticut  and  Rhode  Island 
have  enjoyed  greater  growth  because  in 
them  "manufactures  have  assumed  so 
great  prominence."  '  If  Prohibition  has 
had  a  prejudicial  effect  in  New  England 
the  State  of  Rhode  Island  ought  to 
exhibit  a  relatively  small  increase  for  the 
half-decade  1885-90,  since  a  Prohibitory 
law  was  in  effect  during  three  years  of 
the  five ;  but  the  increase  in  that  period 
was  41,222,  or  13.5  per  cent.,  as  against 
27,753,  or  10  per  cent.,  in  the  half-decade 
1880-5,  when  license  was  the  law  unin- 
terruptedly. 

Of  the  AVestern  States  represented  in 
the  tables  it  is  observable  that  Iowa  and 
Kansas,  with  the  single  exception  of 
Missouri,  had  the  largest  populations  in 
1880.  Missouri's  superiority  in  that  year 
was  due  partly  to  tlie  fact  that  it  was  an 
older  State  than  any  of  the  others  and 
partly  to  the  great  population  of  such 
cities  as  St.  Louis,  Kansas  City  and  Si. 
Joseph :  505,903  of  its  inhabitants  in 
1880  were  embraced  in  cities  having 
above  4,000  inhabitants,  while  in  Kansas 
there  were  only  84,907  inhabitants  in 
such  cities  and  in  Iowa  201,800.  Natural 

»  Census  Bulletin  No.  16  (1890),  p.  7. 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.]                553  [Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 

circumstances  kept  Missouri  in  the  lead  lack  of  artificial  irrigation.     Tlioiisands 

during  the  decade  1880-90;  yet  with  all  of  farms  in  central  and  western  Kansas 

the  advantages  in  its  favor  it  shows  only  have   been   abandoned   for   this   reason. 

23.56  per  cent,    of   increase   as   against  (See  Census  Bulletin  N"o.  16  [1890],  p.  8.) 

43.27  per  cent,  in  the   Prohibition  State  The   annual    State  Censuses  of  Kansas 

of  Kansas.     Mere  percentages,  however,  give  the  following  totals   of  population 

are  misleading,  for  when  a  State  has  at-  for   1885  and   succeeding   years:    188.'), 

tained  a  development   greater  than  that  1,268,530;  1886,1,406,738;  1887,  1,514,- 

of  its  younger  neighbor  its  growth  (if  the  578;    1888,1,518,552;    1889,1,464,914. 

younger  commonwealth  presents  induce-  In  1890,  as  shown  by  the  Federal  Census, 

ments  to  immigrants)  is  quite  certain  to  there  was  a   further  decrease  of  37,818. 

be   smaller  in  percentage,  even  though  In  the  period  from  1880  to  1888  (during 

the   numerical   increase   may  be  larger,  which   the   enforcement   of  Prohibition 

Tlie  significant  fact  in  comparing  Kan-  had   constantly   become  more  rigid)  the 

sas  and  Missouri  is  that  the  former  has  population   increased    from    996,096    to 

had  nearly  as  large  a  numerical   increase  1,518,552.     In   face  of  such  figures  it  is 

as  the  latter,  notwithstanding  the  pres-  absurd  to  suppose  that  the  subsequent 

tige  that  such  centers  as  St.  Louis  and  decline  could  have  been  brought  about  by 

Kansas  City  give  to  Missouri  in  the  race  Prohibition.     Our  interpretation  of  the 

for  supremacy.  facts  is  the  interpretation  made   by   the 

The  same   distinctions    must    govern  State  officials  of   Kansas,  who  certainly 

comparisons  between  Iowa  and  Kansas  on  would   be   glad  to   remove   the  impres- 

the   one  hand  and  Nebraska,  Minnesota  sion,    if    jDossible,  that   crops   are    fail- 

and  the  Dakotas  on  the  other.     Here  the  ing  and  therefore  that  Kansas  is  losing 

oiler  States  are  Iowa  and  Kansas.     The  its  former   eminence  as  an  agricultural 

other    three  were   comparatively    undo-  State. 

veloped  in  1880.  Their  vast  unoccupied  Candid  inspection  of  Iowa's  Census  re- 
lands  offered  greater  possibilities  to  turns  is  equally  reassuring.  The  Prohibi- 
grcater  numbers.  Anyone  who  is  disin-  tory  law  took  eiiect  in  1885.  The  popula- 
clined  to  attach  much  importance  to  this  tion  during  the  years  1880-5  (license) 
explanation  will  recognize  its  weight  increased  129,365,  or  8  per  cent.,  but 
when  the  history  of  Oklahoma  Territory  during  1885-90  (Prohibition)  there  was  a 
is  recalled.  Oklahoma  is  a  ricli  region,  gain  of  157,916,  or  9  per  cent, 
but  no  richer  than  many  other  parts  of  As  a  specimen  of  the  flagrant  false- 
the  West ;  yet  when  it  was  thrown  open  hoods  propagated  by  the  liquor  advocates 
to  settlement  in  1889  its  virgin  fields  in  discussing  the  relations  of  Prohibition 
were  so  eagerly  coveted  that  more  than  to  population,  the  case  of  the  city  of 
60,000  people  took  residence  there  within  Leavenworth,  Kan.,  may  be  cited.  In 
a  year.  Besides,  the  Nebraska  cities  of  1889  the  statement  was  telegraphed  over 
Omaha  and  Lincoln  and  the  Minnesota  the  country  that  Leavenworth  had  lost 
cities  of  St.  Paul  and  Minneapolis  were  14,000  inhabitants  in  the  year  just  closed 
in  their  infancy  in  1880:  the  enormous  because  of  the  enforcement  of  the  Pro- 
growtli  that  these  places  enjoyed  in  the  bibitory  law.  This  report  was  on  the 
succeeding  10  years  is  almost  without  authority  of  the  Clerk  of  the  county, 
precedent.  The  Dakotas,  on  the  con-  Inquiry  proved  that  the  Clerk  and  other 
trary,  have  no  cities  comparable  with  local  officials  were  under  the  control  of 
Minnesota's  and  Nebraska's,  and  the  Da-  the  liquor  element.  For  years  they  had 
kota  increase  of  population  has  been  systematically  overstated  the  population 
almost  wholly  in  the  rural  districts,  of  Leavenworth.  In  1889  the  true 
While  very  large  it  is  numerically  less  figures  were  published,  and  as  they  were 
tiian  Kansas's.  14,000  smaller  than  those  for  1888  the 

Therefore  we  see  that  the  operation  of  blame  was  laid  to  Prohibition.     But  ac- 

natural  laws  of   development   fully   ac-  cording  to  municipal  returns  the  personal 

counts  for  the  larger  gains  made  by  Mis-  property   assessed   for   taxation    had    a 

souri,  Minnesota  and  Nebraska.  Another  larger  aggregate  value  in  1889  than  in 

vital  fact  is  to  be  mentioned.     In  Kan-  1888,  the  number  of  children  of  school 

sas  there  have  been  disastrous  crop  fail-  age  was  about  the  same  as  in  1888,  the 

ures,  caused  by  insufficient  rainfall  and  number  of  names  in  the  City  Directory 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


554 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


had  not  changed  materially  and  the  pros- 
perity of  the  city  had  advanced.' 

Benefits  to  tlte    Wage-Workers   and   the 
Poor. 

Under  this  head,  if  Prohibitory  legis- 
lation accomplishes  its  fundamental  j^ur- 
pose  of  closing  the  public  drinking- 
places  and  greatly  limiting  opportunities 
to  obtain  drink,  must  fall  its  crowning 
results.  The  wage-workers  and  the  poor 
support  the  saloons  to  their  own  bitter 
injury.  Constituting  a  great  majority  of 
the  people,  whatever  is  most  hurtful  to 
these  classes,  to  the  development  of  thrift, 
education,  good  habits,  good  citizenship 
and  a  satisfactory  home  life  among  them, 
cannot  fail  to  be  most  hurtful  to  the 
whole  community  and  all  its  interests. 
To  say  this  is  to  state  the  most  manifest 
of  truths.  The  question  whether  Pro- 
hibition may  not  be  an  unnecessary  or 
unwarranted  device  so  far  as  certain  in- 
dividuals or  even  certain  elements  of  the 
population  are  concerned,  does  not  affect 
the  proposition  that  if  no  drink  could 
be  had  the  condition  of  the  masses 
would  be  improved.  The  broadest  con- 
sequences of  effectual  Prohibition  must 
always  be  show^n  in  the  positive  good 
done  and  the  positive  harm  prevented 
among  the  multitude. 

In  what  has  already  been  written,  tes- 
timony incidental  to  this  topic  abounds. 
The  remarkable  blessings  of  Prohibition 
in  cities  like  Pullman  and  Saltaire, 
peopled  almost  exclusively  by  day-labor- 
ers; the  gratifying  decrease  of  arrests 
during  the  Prohibition  years  in  other 
typical  workingmen's  cities  like  Lowell, 
Lawrence,  Fall  River  and  Atlanta,  the 
practical  disappearance  of  pauperism 
wherever  Prohibition  is  strictly  enforced 
in  Kansas  and  other  States,  the  increased 
prosperity  of  tradesmen  under  well-exe- 
cuted Prohibitory  laws  everywhere,  are 
results  that  could  not  have  been  attained 
without  a  general  improvement  of  the 
working  classes. 

Chief-Justice  Ilorton  of  the  Supreme 

( -ourt  of  Kansas  says : 

"All  classes  in  Kansas  have  been  benefited 
by  Prohibition.  Its  beneficent  influence  has 
reached  rich  and  poor,  but  most  of  all  it  has 
(lelped  the  laboring  man.  .  .  .  Prohibition 
tlrove  out  the  robber  and  despoiler  of  the  poor. 
The  effect   of  the  passage   of   the  law  in  our 

>  See  the  Voice,  Sept.  19, 1889. 


manufacturing  towns  was  immediate.  The 
hand  of  the  liquor-seller,  before  stretched  out 
between  the  employer  ,and  the  employe,  dis- 
appeared from  the  pay-table.  Grocers,  bakers, 
dealers  in  clothing  noticed  a  change.  The 
money  came  to  them,  for  the  necessaries  of  life, 
that  before  had  been  expended  for  its  bane  and 
curse.  So  it  was  continued.  The  traps  before 
set  at  every  step  for  the  feet  of  the  laboring 
man  disapjieared.  The  father  is  no  longer 
allured,  with  the  consent  of  the  State,  to  squan- 
der the  money  of  his  wife  and  little  children. 
He  no  longer  takes  the  furnitm-e  or  the  scanty 
clothing  from  his  little  house,  and,  exchanging 
it  for  money  at  the  pawn-shop,  spends  the  pro- 
ceeds at  the  nearest  saloon.  Employers  have 
repeatedly  testified  to  the  benefits  which  came 
with  the  change.  However  numerous  may  be 
that  class  which  the  enemies  of  Prohibition 
gleefully  assert  exists,  who  send  hundreds  of 
miles  for  liquor  to  be  consumed  secretly  within 
the  State,  it  may  safely  be  assumed  that  the 
laboring  men,  the  men  who  earn  daily  wages 
by  the  toil  that  consumes  the  day,  do  not  go  to  the 
trouble  and  expense  of  sending  out  of  the  State 
that  they  may  start  a  home  saloon  of  which 
their  children  are  to  be  the  customers.  These 
thousands  of  workingmen,  the  bone  and  sinew, 
are  worth  to  the  State  all  that  Prohibition  may 
have  cost,  and  the  State  will  most  certainly 
continue  to  maintain  that  law,  which,  whatever 
it  may  be  to  the  rich,  is  the  salvation  of  the 
poor."^ 

The  following  is  a  part  of  the  speech 
made  by  Henry  W.  Grady  in  Atlanta, 
Nov.  ?),  1887,  after  a  year  and  one-half  of 
Prohibition  in  that  city  : 

"  In  getting  evidence  of  improvement  or  de- 
terioration in  a  city  you  must  go  to  the  work- 
ing classes.  Especially  is  this  true  of  Atlanta, 
because  this  is  the  third  city  in  the  United  States 
in  the  proportion  of  workers  to  population. 
Lawrence,  Mass.,  leads  with  51  per  cent,  of  her 
population  wage-earners,  Lowell  follows  with  48 
per  cent.,  and  Atlanta  and  Fall  Liver  tie  for 
third  place  with  47  per  cent.  Now  here  is  a 
class  of  people  representing  in  the  workers  of 
our  number  47  per  cent,  of  the  entire  population. 
Add  the  women  and  children  who  do  not  work, 
and  we  see  this  class  represents  66  or  70  per 
cent,  of  our  population.  If  this  class  is  ben- 
efited in  an  unspeakable  manner  by  the  untried 
experiment  of  Prohibition,  is  it  not  our  duty  to 
continue  this  experiment  that  the  greatest  good 
may  come  to  the  greatest  niuuber  V 

"  When  you  go  to  get  the  effect  of  a  new 
movement  for  good  or  evil,  where  do  you  go  ? 
Not  to  the  rich  and  idle,  because  j^ou  may  swell 
or  diminish  their  income  and  yet  not  change 
their  habits  ;  you  simply  diminish  the  hidden 
surplus.  Nor  to  the  middle  class,  because  when 
you  diminish  their  income  they  simply  pinch 
themselves  and  pinch  so  quietly  that  their  neigh- 
bors do  not  know  it,  or  swell  tlieir  incomes  and 
they  loosen  out  a  little  and  pass  something  up  to 
surplus.  You  cannot  tell  it  there  ;  but  go  to  the 
poorer  classes — the  men  who  labor  for  their  daily 

"  Speech  at  Lincoln,  Neb,,    Sept.  9,  1890.    (See  the 
Voice,  Sept.  18,  IS'JO.) 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


OO.) 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


bread,  and  whose  wages  barely  suffice  to  give 
it  to  them  ;  and  there  you  tind  the  tirst  signs  of 
a  good  or  evil  movement.  It  is  at  once  tlic 
truth  and  reproach  of  our  civilization  that  star- 
vation follows  so  close  on  labor  that  an  evil 
movement  is  detected  in  the  hollow  cheeks  of 
little  children  and  the  haggard  faces  of  women 
before  it  is  made  manifest  to  the  higher  classes. 

"Mr.  George  Adair  rents  houses  to  1,800  ten- 
ants. He  states  that  he  has  issued  in  the  last 
year  one  distress  warrant  where  he  issued  20  two 
years  ago.  [Applause.]  I  claim  to  be  an  in- 
telligent man  with  some  courage  of  conviction  ; 
but  I  pledge  you  my  word,  if  that  one  fact  were 
established  to  my  satisfaction,  I  would  vote  for 
this  thing  if  I  never  heard  another  word  on  this 
subject.  Have  you  thought  what  that  means — 
u  distress  warrant  V  It  means  eviction  ;  it  means 
the  very  thing  that  is  to-day  kindling  the  heart  of 
this  w^orld  for  poor  Ireland.  It  means  eviction  ! 
It  means  turning  woman  and  her  little  children 
out  of  the  home  that  covers  them,  and  to  which 
they  are  entitled.  I  was  astonished  at  Col. 
Adair's  statement.  Mr.  Tally,  who  rents  600  or 
800  houses,  says  :  '  I  used  to  issue  two  or  three 
distress  warrants — four  or  five — a  month.  I 
have  not  issued  a  single  one  in  18  mouths. '  [Ap- 
plause. ] 

"Now,  both  of  them  are  Prohibitionists.  Let 
me  try  you  with  Hurry  Krouse.  He  was  an 
anti-Prohibitionist.  He  said  :  '  My  distress  war- 
rants averaged  86  to  the  year,  and  I  have  not 
issued  one  in  12  months.'     I  said  : 

"  '  Then,  my  friend,  I  don't  carry  your  con- 
science, but  iiow  can  you  be  an  anti-Prohibi- 
tionist ? ' 

"'laiu't.  My  knowdedge  of  the  thing,  day 
by  day,  among  people  I  used  to  pester  and  evict, 
has  changed  my  convictions,  and  I  am  a  red- 
hot  Prohibitionist.' 

"  I  went  down  to  Mr.  Scott,  who  did  not  vote 
for  Prohibit  ion,  and  asked  him.  He  .said:  'I  have 
issued  as  many  as  25  distress  warrants  in  a 
month,  and  I  have  issued  6  in  the  last  18  months, 
and  5  were  to  get  people  out  of  houses  because 
they  were  obnoxious  to  the  neighbors.  I  have 
issued  one  single  distress  warrant  for  failure  to 
pay  rent.' 

"  I  said,   '  You  didn't  vote  for  Prohibition  ?  ' 

"He  said,  'I  did  not  believe  it  was  practi- 
cable. ' 

"I  asked,  '  What  do  you  think  now  ? ' 

"He  said,  '  I  am  going  to  vote,  and  vote  for 
Prohibition.'     [Applause.] 

"  Mr.  Roberts  was  a  Prohibitionist.  He  says  : 
'  My  testimony  is  the  same.  I  formerly  issued 
two  or  tliree  distress  warrants  every  month,  and 
I  have  not  issued  one  in  1 2  months. ' 

"Is  there  any  possible  answer  to  that  ?  Is 
there  any  industrial,  any  social,  any  economic 
revolution  that  has  been  worked  since  this  world 
began  that  would  account  for  the  diminution  in 
this  most  vicious  and  intolerable  of  legal  enact- 
ments ?  Have  you  thought  about  what  a  dis- 
tress warrant  is  ?  Have  you  ever  thought  about 
a  woman  being  turned  out  of  her  hou.se — the 
little  cottage  that  covers  her  and  her  children? 
Can  you  picture — you  who  live  in  comfortable 
liomes  filled  with  light  and  warmth  and  books 
and  joy, — can  you  think  of  these  people — human 
beings,    our    brothers    and    sisters, — the    poor 


mother,  brave  thovigh  her  heart  is  breaking, 
huddling  her  little  children  about  her,  and  the 
father,  weak  but  loving,  and  loving  all  the 
deeper  because  he  knows  his  weakness  has 
brought  them  to  this  want  and  degradation,  and 
little  children,  those  of  whom  our  Saviour  said  : 
'  Suffer  them  to  come  unto  me  and  forbid  them 
not,'  there  asking,  '  Manmm,  where  will  we 
sleep  to-night  ? ' — can  you  picture  that  and  then 
their  taking  themselves  up  and  the  woman  put- 
ting her  hand  with  undying  love  and  faith  in 
the  hand  of  the  man  she  swore  to  follow  through 
good  and  evil  report,  and  marching  up  and  down 
the  .street — this  pitiable  procession, — through  the 
unthinking  streets,  by  laughing  children  and 
shining  windows,  looking  for  a  hole  where,  like 
the  foxes,  they  may  hide  their  poor  heads  ?  My 
friends,  they  talk  to  you  about  personal  liberty, 
that  a  man  .should  have  the  right  to  go  into  a 
grogshop  and  see  this  pitiable  proces.siou — now- 
stopped — parading  up  and  down  our  streets 
again.  They  talk  to  you  about  the  shades  of 
Washington,  Monroe  and  Jefferson.  I  would 
not  giveone  happy,  rosy  little  woman,  uplifted 
from  that  degradation,  happy  again  in  her  home, 
with  the  cricket  chirping  on  her  hearthstone 
and  her  children  about  her  knee,  her  husband 
redeemed  from  drink  at  her  side — I  would  not 
give  one  of  them  for  all  the  shades  of  all  thfc 
men  that  ever  contended  since  Cataline  con- 
spired and  Ca?sar  fought  !   .  .  . 

"  I  have  talked  to  you  about  the  rent,  about 
the  liouse  that  a  man  and  his  wife  live  in;  I 
have  shown  you,  not  by  my  own  assertion,  but 
by  the  .statements  of  the  only  experts  in  the  city 
— the  real  estate  men,  wlio  for  years  have 
handled  from  8,000  to  4,000  houses,— I  have 
shown  you,  I  say,  that  where  20  suffered  before 
19  are  protected  under  '  Prohibition  that  don't 
prohibit.'  What  would  we  have  with  Prohibi- 
tion that  did  prohibit  ?  The  next  step  is  to  get 
our  employers  and  ask  their  testimony.  I  went 
to  Mr.  Boyd,  of  Van  Winkle  &  Co.,  and  he 
said,  '  Where  I  formerly  had  10  or  15  garnish- 
ments at  a  time  to  answer,  I  now  have  none. ' 

"The  garnishment,  next  to  the  distress  war- 
rant, is  the  most  iniquitous  form  of  debt  col- 
lection. It  means  that  the  law  lays  its  hand 
on  a  man's  wages  and  holds  them  in  its  grasp, 
though  his  little  children  may  clamber  about 
his  knees  and  cry  for  bread.  Now,  where 
there  were  twenty  necessary  then,  there  is 
one  now. 

"Mr.  Boyd  is  a  Prohibitionist;  let  me  give 
you  Grant  Wilkins.  He  is  a  man  of  profound 
convictions.  .  .  .  He  said  he  was  one  of  the 
most  violent,  if  that  word  may  be  used,  of  the 
anti-Prohibitionists.  He  said:  '  I  have  told  them 
I  was  not  going  to  attend  their  "  Anti"  meet- 
ings, that  I  did  not  intend  to  have  anything  to 
do  with  it  this  time.  I  came  to  that  conclusion 
simply  because  I  work  220  men,  and  I  see  what 
Prohibition  has  done  for  them,  and  I  believe  my 
duty  requires  I  should  let  it  alone.  My  foreman 
goes  to  their  homes  and  .sees  them;  they  live 
better,  their  houses  are  better,  they  have  shoes 
where  they  were  shoeless,  and  they  have  plenty 
to  eat  where  they  formerly  barely  lived.  I 
have  had  30  garnishments  at  once  in  my  shop, 
and  I  have  been  running  seven  months,  and  I 
have  not  answered  one  single  garnishment. "... 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


556 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


I  could  absolutely  weary  you  with  testimony 
like  that.  .  .  . 

"  Tiiere  are  839  more  children  in  attendance 
at  the  schools  this  year  than  last.  How  do  you 
account  for  that  ?  It  has  been  two  years  since 
Prohibition  was  adopted,  and  there  are  829  more 
children  in  the  schools.  That  means  one  of 
two  things,  and  you  can  take  either  horn  of  the 
dilemma:  either  there  are  more  people  here,  or 
there  are  more  people  able  to  send  to  school. 

"Take  the  fact  of  owning  houses.  ...  In 
the  last  two  years  there  have  been  687  citizens 
who  have  become  home-owners,  against  15o  in 
the  two  years  previous — citizens  owing  no  man 
and  owning  no  man  as  master,  wearing  the 
collar  of  no  faction,  free-born  American  citizens, 
not  quibbling  about  personal  liberty,  but  stand- 
ing with  wife  and  little  ones,  honest  and  in- 
dependent, above  penury  and  degradation  ! " 

Two  years  after  Atlanta  had  repealed 
her  Prohibitory  law — and  in  the  interval 
a  rigid  High  License  system  had  been 
in  force — the  Voice  submitted  a  series  of 
questions  to  a  list  of  Atlanta  tradesmen, 
physicians  and  real  estate  dealers,  made 
up  from  a  business  directory  with  no 
knowledge  of  their  opinions. 

To  the  inquiry  whether  sales  to  workingmen 
had  increased  or  decreased  since  the  return  of 
the  open  barrooms  there  were  reijlies  from  38 
retail  merchants,  of  whom  24  declared  emphat- 
ically that  they  had  decreased.  Many  of  these 
statements  were  highly  suggestive.  A  general 
merchandise  dealer  said:  "  A  decrease  of  20  per 
cent.;"  a  furniture  dealer  said:  "The  first 
Saturday  night  after  the  repeal  of  Prohibition 
we  had  a  decrease  of  |28  in  our  sales,  which 
are  now  about  one-half  what  they  were  to 
laboring  people  during  Prohibition  ;"  a  dealer 
in  f ami  ly  groceries  reported  '  'a  decrease  of  25  per 
cent. ;"  a  boot  and  shoe  dealer  asserted  that  his 
sales  to  workingmen  had  decreased  "about  one- 
half;"  a  dealer  in  coal  and  wood  said:  "When 
the  barrooms  M-ere  closed  I  sold  to  the  working 
people  at  the  rate  of  half  a  ton  at  a  time,  but 
now  they  buy  25  and  50  cents'  worth."  Of  the 
remaining  14  retailers  nine  wrote  that  the  vol- 
ume of  their  trade  with  workingmen  had  not 
changed  materially  since  the  return  of  the  bar- 
rooms, and  three  of  these  nine  were,  judging 
from  their  replies  to  other  questions,  personally 
prejudiced  against  Prohibition  and  presumably 
depended  somewhat  upon  saloon  patronage ; 
while  two  were  booksellers  and  binders.  There 
remain  five  retail  tradesmen  not  classified  above: 
of  these,  two  said  that  they  did  not  have  deal- 
ings with  the  working  classes  in  their  lines  of 
business,  one  that  trade  had  improved  but  that 
the  improvement  was  due  to  the  growth  of  the 
city  and  to  better  crops — not  to  the  saloons,  and 
two  that  their  sales  to  workingmen  had  in- 
creased. These  last  two — the  only  retailers  who 
had  been  positively  benefited  in  their  relations 
with  the  wage  classes  because  of  Prohibition! s  re- 
peal— were  both  liquor-dealers  :  one  of  them,  who 
combined  rumselling  with  groceries,  declared 
that  there  had  been  "about  200  per  cent,  in- 
crease "  in  his  business,  and  the  other,  a  plain 


saloon-keeper,  wrote:  "  ]My  sales  to  working- 
men  have  increased."  Answers  to  the  question 
from  three  merchants  doing  an  exclusively 
wholesale  business  were  received,  of  whom  two 
reported  a  decrease  and  one  said  that,  having 
little  to  do  with  the  workingmen,  he  could  not 
make  a  satisfactory  reply.  Thus  of  the  Atlanta 
merchants  responding  categorically,  yes  or  no,  26 
affirmed  that  their  sales  to  the  wage-earning 
citizens  had  fallen  off  since  the  return  to  license, 
and  only  ttoo  reported  an  i7icrease  of  such  sales — 
and  thete  tico  were  engaged  in  the  liquor  traffic. 

The  lepiies  given  by  the  tradesmen  to  the 
other  questions  of  the  Voice  were  of  the  same 
tenor.  It  was  asked  whether  the  number  of 
cash  sales  to  laborers  had  not  decreased  and  the 
credit  sales  correspondingly  increased,  and  of 
39  who  answered  28  made  affirmative  state- 
ments, nine  said  there  was  no  change  or  wrote 
indefinitely  and  the  two  liquor-dealers  were 
alone  in  reporting  that  their  cash  business  with 
wage-earning  customers  was  better.  "They 
do  not  ask  for  credit  but  pay  as  they  go,"  con- 
tentedly wrote  the  saloon-keeper — the  only 
man  in  the  list,  except  his  groceries-rum  col- 
league, who  had  found  that  license  had  im- 
proved the  cash  business.  The  testimony  was 
strong  to  the  effect  that  it  was  harder  to  make 
collections  than  it  had  been  in  the  Prohibition 
years,  that  "bad  debts"  were  more  numerous 
and  tliat  the  working  people  purchased  a 
cheaper  class  of  goods.  "The  working  people 
buy  cheaper  grades  of  goods,"  wrote  a  dry- 
goods  dealer.  "For  instance,  under  Prohi- 
bition they  bought  hosiery  worth  25  cents  and 
now  they  want  10  and  15  cents  hosiery  ;  for 
flannels  they  would  pay  35  to  50  cents  but  now 
they  pay  20  to  30  cents;  they  used  to  buy  shoes 
worth  $1.50  to  $2,  but  now  they  give  only  $1 
to  $1.50." 

Letters  were  received  from  15  Atlanta  physi- 
cians, of  whom  two-thirds  declared  that  in 
their  practice  among  the  working  people  they 
noticed  more  poverty  and  destitution  than  there 
had  been  when  the  Prohibitory  law  existed,  and 
the  majority  who  answered  at  all  said  that  it 
was  harder  than  it  had  formerly  been  to  collect 
bills  from  the  working  classes  and  that  these 
classes  had  fewer  of  the  comforts  of  life. 

Only  10  answers  came  from  real  estate  men. 
While  some  of  the  writers  were  clearly  anti- 
Prohibitionists,  the  replies  to  the  question,  "Are 
you  obliged  to  issue  more  or  fewer  distress  war- 
rants to  this  [working]  class  of  people  than  you 
did  under  Prohibition  ?"  were  very  significant. 
Two  ignored  the  question  altogether,  two  evaded 
it  by  saying  they  had  issued  no  distress  war- 
rants since  Prohibition  was  voted  down,  but  did 
not  state  whether  they  had  issued  any  during 
the  Prohibition  era,  one  said  he  had  issued  none 
in  several  years,  and  five  said  positively, 
"More."  "  Yes,  more  by  three  to  one,"  was  the 
assertion  of  one  dealer.  The  same  general  tes- 
timony was  given  by  the  real  estate  agents  in 
answer  to  the  questions  whether  it  was  not 
harder  to  collect  rents  from  the  laboring  men 
than  it  had  been  under  Prohibition  and  whether 
the  families  of  these  men  were  not  worse  housed 
and  less  comfortable. ' 

J  The  Voice,  Jan.  2  and  9,  1890. 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


557 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


With  the  same  impartiality  and  thor- 
ouglmess  the  Voice  canvassed  the  opin- 
ions of  business  men  and  other  repre- 
sentative and  observant  citizens  in  the 
State  of  Rhode  Island  eight  months  after 
the  Prohibition  repeal  of  June,  1889. 
Eighty  replies  were  received  to  the  ques- 
tion, "Do  you  think  the  general  social  and 
financial  condition  of  the  masses'  has 
been  benefited  or  otherwise  by  the  re- 
turn of  the  license  system  ?"  Fifty-six 
expressed  the  belief  that  it  had  not  been 
benefited  (many  saying  that  it  had  been 
seriously  injured),  five  said  that  they  ob- 
served little  or  no  difference,  ten  that 
they  were  unable  to  answer  and  nine  that 
they  saw  benefits.^  (In  Rhode  Island,  it 
will  be  remembered,  the  Prohibitory  law 
was  not  well  enforced.) 

To  give  further  illustrations  of  the 
beneficial  workings  of  Prohibition  and 
the  bad  effects  of  license  upon  the  wel- 
fare of  the  masses  would  be  to  draw  with 
more  or  less  discrimination  upon  a  fund 
of  information  that  is  inexhaustible.  It 
is  unnecessary.  The  detailed  evidences 
of  the  general  benefits  of  Prohibition, 
given  in  other  parts  of  this  article,  are 
sufficiently  plentiful;  and  to  reasonable 
minds  they  will  in  each  case  take  the 
place  of  specific  testimony  regarding  the 
improvement  of  the  poor,  so  apparent  is 
it  that  any  successful  anti-liquor  policy 
must  operate  peculiarly  for  the  elevation 
of  the  great  class  that  suffers  most  from 
drink. 

In  bringing  this  extended  review  to  a 
close  prominence  should  be  given  to  one 
conclusion  that  is  suggested  to  the  re- 
flecting person  at  each  stage  of  the  in- 
vestigation and  by  each  series  of  facts: 
it  is  not  as  a  mere  undertaking  for  the 
betterment  of  individual  morals,  habits 
or  happiness,  but  as  a  measure  of  public 
policy,  that  Prohibition  is  advocated  and 
its  results  are  to  be  judged.  The  drink 
traffic  is  damaging  to  individuals,  bitt  in 
each  instance  the  final  remedy  is  to  be 
applied  by  personal,  by  temperance  and 
by  religious  agencies;  if  the  State  makes 
such  work  easier  by  removing  the  temp- 
tation, so  much  the  better,  but  it  is  not 
the  direct  purpose  of  the  State's  action 
to  merely  correct  the  vices  or  the  misfor- 
tunes of  individuals.     The  traffic  injures 

»  The  Voice,  March  6, 1890. 


the  state,  and  on  this  ground  alone  Pro- 
hibition is  urged.  If  legislated  Prohibi- 
tion is  enforced  the  State  is  benefited  in 
every  essential  respect :  this  is  the  teach- 
ing of  reason  as  well  as  of  all  experience. 
And  the  advantages  do  not  end  with  the 
removal  of  tippling-places,  the  diminu- 
tion of  offenses  and  pauperism,  the  sav- 
ing of  public  money,  the  wider  distribu- 
tion of  private  accumulations,  the  im- 
provement of  many  branches  of  legiti- 
mate trade  and  the  promotion  of  virtue 
and  comfort  among  the  people.  The 
purification  of  politics  and  the  advance- 
ment of  the  cause  of  better  and  more 
intelligent  government  are  results  that 
may  also  be  hoped  for.  We  have  but  to 
examine  the  effects  of  Prohi'bition  in 
many  noteworthy  instances  to  be  assured 
of  this. 

The  most  serious  problem  of  adminis- 
trative government  now  before  the  peo- 
ple of  the  United  States  (excepting,  per- 
haps, the  problem  of  creditable  govern- 
ment in  the  cities)  is  that  arising  from 
the  race  question  at  the  South.  The 
difficulties  in  that  section  have  invariably 
been  lessened  if  not  wholly  ended  in 
localities  that  have  adopted  Prohibition 
and  scrupulously  enforced  it.  The  county 
of  Copiah,  in  Mississippi,  was  formerly 
notorious  for  its  bloody  race  conflicts. 
But  in  1884  the  State  Legislature  passed 
a  special  act  placing  Copiah  County 
under  Prohil)ition,  and  there  came  a 
change  so  marked  that  the  New  York 
Times  said,  July  1,  188G : 

"Copiah  has  become  the  most  orderly  and 
enlightened  county  in  Mississippi,  under  a  strict 
enforcement  of  her  Prohibition  laws.  Money 
that  went  formerly  to  pay  for  criminal  prose- 
cutions now  goes  to  keep  open  the  public 
schools."  '-^ 


2  The  best  judges  of  Southern  conditions  acree  that  the 
race  question  is  cst-entially  a  whislvey  question.  There  ia 
no  more  prominent  or  respected  orj;an  of  Southern  pub- 
lic opinion  than  the  St.  Louis  Daily  Repvbiic.  Tiie  Re- 
jruhlic  says  (Sept.  21,  1889): 

"  Wliile  there  is  no  election  on  hand,  while  we 
may  rea8onal)ly  expect  a  hearinsj  for  the  truth,  we 
wish  to  re-enforce  this  presentation  of  fact  by  con- 
densing into  one  word  the  chief  cause  of  all  'race 
troubles,'  of  neaily  all  crimes  committed  by  negroes  and 
against  them,  of  "the  negro's  poverty,  of  "his  failure  to 
secure  the  respect  of  respectable  people,  and  of  his  dis- 
orderly habits.  The  word  is 'whiskey.'  The  negro  who 
fets  into  trouble  with  a  white  man  is  generally  drunlc. 
f  he  is  not,  the  white  man  is.  They  [the  nesrroes]  spend 
every  day  for  whisicey  money  enough  to  endow  a  univer- 
sity and  to  found  a  hundred  schools.  And  if  this  money 
is  not  in  some  way  saved  for  schools  the  equivalent  of  it 
will  have  to  be  invested  in  police  clubs  and  militia 
ritles.    That  is  '  the  negro  problem.'  " 

The  Atlanta  Daily  Constitution,  also  among  the  fore- 
most journals  of  the  South,  adds  (Sept..  13,  1689): 

"  Mean  whiskey  makes  its  victims  of  both  races 
neglect  work,  and  when  men  are  idle  and  drunk  their 


Prohibition,  Benefits  of.] 


iaS 


[Prohibition,  Benefits  of. 


The  people  of  the  county  recognized 
the  blessings  of  the  law,  and  on  the  ques- 
tion of  its  repeal,  in  1886,  they  voted 
overwhelmingly  in  the  negative,  some 
localities  almost  unanimously  : — for  ex- 
ample, the  town  of  Wesson  opposed 
repeal  by  280  to  2  and  Crystal  Springs 
by  324  to  34.1  q^q  ^f  ^j^g  roots  of 
the  Southern  problem  unquestionably 
springs  from  the  illiteracy  and  lawless- 
ness of  certain  elements  of  the  whites, 
especially  in  the  mountain  regions. 
Rowan  County,  Ky.,  has  had  a  most  un- 
savory reputation  because  of  the  fre- 
quency of  murders  and  other  crimes 
there.  An  investigating  committee  of 
the  Legislature  of  Kentucky,  sent  to  in- 
quire into  the  situation  in  Rowan  County, 
said  in  its  report : 

"  During  all  the  social  chaos  since  August, 
1884,  spirituous  liquors  have  been  sold  with  and 
without  license  in  nearly  every  part  of  the 
county,  adding  fury  and  fire  and  venom  to  the 
ininds  and  hearts  of  murderers,  and  dragging 
into  the  terrible  vortex  of  drunkenness  and 
crime  and  murder  even  those  who  were  not 
originally  in  the  feuds,  the  proof  showing 
that  crimes  and  murders  were  committed  in  the 
various  precincts  in  proportion  to  the  immber 
of  places  where  whiskey  was  sold." " 

On  the  other  hand  the  mounta-u  coun- 
ties of  Kentucky  that  enforce  Prohibition 
are  practically  free  from  violence  and 
are  as  progressive  as  the  best  rural  cou7i- 
ties  of  the  country.  (For  confirmation 
of  this  see  the  Voice,  May  2,  1889.) 
Another  root  of  the  Southern  difficulties 
is  nourished  by  the  improvidence  of  the 
negroes.  These  people,  wherever  they 
have  seriously  tried  the  Prohibition 
remedy,  have  made  remarkable  advances. 
The  Georgia  county  of  Washington  is  a 
typical  black  county,  having  had  in  1880 
a  population  of  12,515  negroes  and  9,449 
whites.  Previously  to  1886  it  was  under 
the  license  system,  but  in  that  year  it 
voted  for  Prohibition.  The  public 
records  show  the  following  facts: 

"In  1885  there  were  1,849  colored  polls  in 
the  countv,  owning  5,886  acres  of  land  valued 
at  $19,31(3,  or  $3.28  per  acre,  and  that  the  total 
taxable  property  was  valued  at  $107,675,  or 
$58.23  to  each  colored  poll.  These  figures  rep- 
resent the  accumulated  savings  of  the  colored 
people  of  the  county  during  20  years  of  labor 

wrath  IS  easily  excited  and  very  slight  ])rovocation  leads 
to  violence.  Of  course  an  outrage,  a  misunderstanding 
and  certain  social  and  political  questions  sometimes  cause 
trouble  between  soiier  whites  and  blacks,  but  in  too 
many  instances  it  cannot  be  denied  that  whiskey  plays 
an  important  part  in  our  race  troubles.  This  phase  "of 
the  problem  deserves  serious  consideration." 
'  See  the  Voice,  July  8, 1886.    2  ibid,  May  10,  1888. 


under  a  liquor  license  system.  In  1888,  with 
1,813  colored  polls,  the  county  returned  11,690 
acres  of  liuid  owned  by  negroes,  this  land  being 
valued  at  $54,748,  or  $4.68  per  i.cre,  and  the 
total  taxable  property  of  the  colored  citizens 
was  valued  at  $149,*759,  or  $82.60  per  poll. 
Further  examination  of  the  Comptroller-Gen- 
eral's books  shows  that  the  number  of  acres 
owned  by  the  colored  people  was  5,886  at  the 
beginning  of  1885  (license),  6,001  at  the  be- 
ginning of  1886  (license),  6,046  at  the  beginning 
of  1887  (Prohibition)  and  11,690  at  the  beginning 
of  1888  (Prohibition).  Thus  in  a  single  year  of 
Prohibition  the  negroes  of  Washington  County 
had  gained  5,644  acres,  nearly  as  many  as  they 
had  acquired  in  the  whole  of  the  20  years  of 
license  ;  and  the  increased  value  of  their  lands 
per  acre  showed  that  they  had  noticeably  im- 
proved their  homes."  ■' 

It  might  be  proved  from  common  ex- 
perience that  the  solution  of  most  of  the 
other  serious  problems  of  local  economy 
and  local  government,  particularly  of 
those  gravest  problems  that  are  con- 
stantly developed  by  saloon  rule  and  bar- 
room politics  in  the  cities,  is  prevented 
under  every  system  of  license  and 
regulation,  but  in  Prohibition  com- 
munities is  satisfactorily  approached 
according  to  the  degree  of  enforcement. 
But  so  long  as  loyalty  to  Prohibition  is 
not  made  a  recognized  test  of  fealty 
by  party  organizations,  the  temptation 
to  use  the  law  for  partisan  advantage, 
by  tolerating  violations  committed  by 
party  henchmen,  is  strong.  Upon  this 
consideration  the  weightiest  political  ob- 
jection to  a  i^ersevering  trial  of  Prohibi- 
tion is  based.  Understanding  the  con- 
tempt or  unconcern  with  which  practical 
political  managers  regard  mere  principle, 
and  their  willingness  to  use  the  services 
of  the  worst  men,  many  good  citizens 
permit  forebodings  to  master  conscience 
and  inclinations,  and  accordingly  supply 
whatever  influence  is  needed  to  avert 
successful  results.  The  fear,  or  rather 
the  so-called  certainty,  of  non-enforce- 
ment in  the  large  cities,  is  the  one  thing 
that  gives  general  plausibility  to  the 
claim  that  Prohibition  is  still  in  its 
experimental  stages  and  of  "doubtful 
utility."  Yet  we  have  seen  that  this 
fear  is  very  mttcli  exaggerated  and  that 
there  is  no  element  of  certainty  to  con- 
firm it.  The  results  in  cities  like  Topeka. 
Greeley  and  Pullman  demonstrate  that 
absolute  success  is  possible;  in  cities  like 
Worcester,  Lowell,  Lawrence,  Cambridge, 

3  Ibid.  Jan.  3.  138!).    (Inaccuracies  in  some  of  the  fig- 
ures as  given  iu  the  Voice  have  been  corrected.) 


Prohibition  Party.] 


559 


[Prohibition  Party. 


I'rovidence,  Atlanta,  Ealeigh,  Charleston 
(W.  Vix.),  Rockford,  Sioux  City,  l)es 
isloines,  Leavenworth  and  Atchison,  that 
although  comparative  non-enforcement 
iiiay  ensue  it  may  be  believed,  even  under 
the  most  discouraging  circumstances, 
that  actual  benefits  will  be  reaped.  The 
expediency  of  making  a  trial,  however 
hazardous  seemingly,  becomes  less  ques- 
tionable when  it  is  remembered  that 
nothing  can  be  lost  by  an  exj^eriment, 
that  under  no  form  of  license  (if  un- 
assailed  testimony  is  to  be  trusted)  can 
the  evils  of  the  liquor  business  be  abated, 
and  that  the  erection  of  a  high  standard 
is  worth  something  to  humanity  and 
l)erhaps  may  be  worth  much  to  the  cause 
of  the  public  welfare.  When  the  ques- 
tion is  upon  the  adoption  of  general 
rather  than  local  Prohibition  there  are 
still  stronger  reasons  for  overcoming 
distrust.  It  can  no  longer  be  doubted 
that  general  Prohibitory  laws  have  done 
much  good  in  all  the  States  that  have 
maintained  them,  good  that  is  not  at  all 
clouded  by  comparative  local  failures, 
since  no  violations  can  by  any  possibility, 
even  locally,  increase  the  evils  fostered 
by  the  license  system.  And  this  brings 
us  to  the  expression  of  the  final  conclu- 
sion derived  from  our  study:  the  general 
results  of  Prohibition  are  beneficial, 
decidedly  so  when  the  Prohibition  is 
genuine  and  actual;  in  exceptional  and 
local  instances  the  results  are  unsatis- 
factory when  measured  with  the  fruits 
I'f  real  Prohibition,  but  far  from  un- 
(Hicouraging  when  compared  with  the 
effects  of  all  systems  of  license. 

Prohibition  Party.' — One  of  the 

initional  political  organizations  of  the 
United  States,  established  in  ISGD  on  the 
basis  of  uncompromising  opposition  to 
tlie  drink  traffic  and  to  all  parties  not 
liarmoniously  and  unmistakably  pledged 
against  that  traffic,  and  steadily  main- 
tained since  then  (though  with  occasional 
slight  changes  of  name).  Its  creed  is 
thoroughly  defined  in  the  "platforms" 
adopted  by  its  difi^erent  National  Con- 
ventions, all  of  which  are  given  without 
abridgment  in  this  article,  because  of 
the  historical  interest  attaching  to  them. 

'  The  editor  is  indebted  to  Hon.  James  Black  for  many 
of  the  historical  facts  (-ontained  in  this  article.  The 
votes  of  the  Prohibition  party  for  the  years  1860-88  are 
taken  from  the  "  Political  Prohibitionist."  Other  elec- 
licu  returns  are  from  the  World  und  Tribune  Almanacs. 


Its  policy  has  uniformly  been  in  accord 
with  its  aggressive  principles :  at  no  time 
has  there  been  a  general  disposition  to 
sacrifice  its  integrity  for  the  sake  of  a 
temporary  access  of  influence,  and  this 
fact  gives  it  a  unique  place  among  so- 
called  "  third "  parties,  for  even  the 
Abolition  or  Liberty  party  did  not  pre- 
serve its  distinct  identity  without  inter- 
ruption. The  strength  of  the  Prohibi- 
tion party  in  Presidential  campaigns  has 
never  exceeded  250,000,  but  its  aggregate 
vote  at  State  elections  has  reached  nearly 
300,000;  while  it  has  never  secured  a 
majority  for  its  candidates  except  in 
small  localities,  it  has  frequently  held 
the  balance  of  power  in  the  most  im.por- 
tant  States,  withstanding  desperate  at- 
tempts to  break  down  or  seduce  its  fol- 
lowing. The  results  of  its  agitation  are 
differently  interpreted,  some  believing 
that  they  have  been  positively  hurtful  to 
the  Prohibition  movement  and  others 
that  they  have  greatly  advanced  its  best 
interests  in  general  as  well  as  in  detail. 
This  much  is  not  contradicted :  the  party 
has  always  been  and  is  to-day  the  only  na- 
tional party  reliably  committed  to  Prohib- 
ition and  against  license ;  it  has  done  more 
than  has  been  accomplished  through  any 
other  purely  political  agency  to  keep  the 
issue  constantly  before  tlie  people ;  it  has 
often  been  a  menace  to  the  stronger 
organizations  and  has  disciplined  and 
chastened  them  in  not  a  few  instances;  it 
is  supported  by  a  large  majority  of  the  re- 
presentative Prohibition  leaders ;  ithas  en- 
gaged in  no  discreditable  intrigues  and  its 
(iharacteristic  methods  have  been  honora- 
ble and  straightforward ;  its  development 
has  unquestionably  been  attended  (from 
whatever  cause)  by  a  concentration  of 
organized  sentiment,  a  great  extension  of 
Prohibitory  territory  and  an  increasing 
eagerness  among  the  enemies  of  the  cause 
to  etfect  compromises. 

HISTORY. 

In  the  early  struggles  for  Prohibition 
(1850-60)  it  was  generally  agreed  that 
the  policy  should  stand  or  fall  in  accord- 
ance with  the  spontaneously-expressed 
will  of  the  people,  and  politicians  found 
few  inducements  to  manipulate  or  resist 
public  opinion,  for  the  liquor  traffic  was 
not  a  great  organized  political  power. 
The  question  whether  the  Maine  law 
should  be  adopted   in  a  State  was  sub- 


Prohibition  Party.] 


560 


[Prohibition  Party. 


mittecl  in  good  faith  to  the  electors  for 
decision,  and  an  affirmative  vote  was 
followed  by  the  desired  legislation,  which 
was  retained  on  the  statute-book  as  long- 
as  there  was  good  reason  for  believing 
that  a  majority  of  the  people — even 
thougli  a  passive  majority — would  ob- 
ject to  its  removal.  In  some  States  the 
Legislatures,  while  wishing  to  repeal  Pro- 
hibition and  having  full  authority  to 
arbitrarily  do  so,  were  so  considerate  and 
cautious  as  to  invite  the  impartial  and 
uninfluenced  judgment  of  the  people 
before  taking  the  step :  as  an  instance,  in 
Rhode  Island  the  Legislature  of  185b 
was  hostile  to  the  Prohibitory  law,  but 
would  not  venture  to  disturb  it  without 
popular  approval,  and  entirely  abandoned 
its  opposition  when  the  people,  at  the 
next  election,  gave  an  emphatic  negative. 
At  times,  as  in  New  York  and  Maine, 
there  were  noticeable  developments  of 
political  antagonism  and  conspiracy,  but 
these  were  exceptional.  Few  Prohibi- 
tionists realized  in  those  days  that  the 
good  cause  which  they  were  striving  to 
promote,  a  cause  proposing  nothing  but 
the  elevation  of  humanity,  would  ulti- 
mately be  sacrificed  without  mercy  by 
political  parties,  and  that  in  every  battle 
waged  in  its  behalf  the  prestige  of  party 
influence  would  be  with  the  foes  of 
morals  and  good  government  and  the  out- 
laws of  society.  In  the  Prohibition 
literature  of  that  period  we  find  little  to 
suggest  the  present  radical  tactics.  It  is 
considered  a  memorable  if  not  an  un- 
paralleled circumstance  that  Rev.  Charles 
F.  Deems  published,  before  the  war,  a 
newspaper  which  especially  urged  the 
importance  of  independent  political  ac- 
tion by  the  advocates  of  Prohibition. 
This  journal  was  printed  at  Greensburg, 
N.  C,  in  1854,  and  only  a  few  numbers 
were  issued. 

Origin  of  the  Party. — In  the  Civil  War 
(1861-5)  all  political  questions  save  the 
supreme  questions  arising  from  that  con- 
flict were  lost  sight  of.  The  liquor 
traffic  was  given  a  new  footing  by  the  In- 
ternal Revenue  legislation.  Brought 
into  political  prominence  and  schooled 
in  political  arts  by  its  close  relations  with 
the  Federal  Government,  the  liquor  ele- 
ment gradually  asserted  itself  in  State 
politics.  No  new  Prohibitory  measure 
was  enacted  at  the   North  during  the 


war.  Rhode  Island's  statute  was  re- 
pealed in  1863,  other  State  laws  were 
weakened  and  neai-ly  all  were  flagrantly 
violated.  Soon  after  the  restoration  of 
peace  it  became  evident  that  the  liquor- 
traffickers  were  bent  on  sweeping  away, 
by  political  operation,  all  the  Prohibitory 
legislation  of  the  Union.  In  Massachu- 
setts, the  most  populous  of  the  Prohibi- 
tion States,  the  rumsellers  made  an 
aggressive  political  canvass  in  1867,  re- 
sulting in  the  election  of  a  Legislature 
which  rescinded  the  law  the  next  year. 
In  Connecticut,  in  1867,  an  active  agita- 
tion for  repeal  was  begun.  In  the  same 
year  the  National  Brewers'  Congress  (at 
Chicago,  June  5,  1867)  adopted  the  fol- 
lowing resolution  : 

"  Wliereas,  The  action  and  influence  of  the 
temperance  party  is  in  direct  opposition  to  the 
principles  of  individual  freedom  and  political 
equality  upon  which  our  American  Union  is 
founded  ;  therefore 

"Resolved,  That  we  will  use  all  means  to 
stay  the  progress  of  this  fanatical  party,  and  to 
secure  our  individual  rights  as  citizens,  and  that 
we  will  sustain  no  candidate,  of  whatever  party, 
in  any  election,  who  is  in  any  way  disposed  to- 
ward the  total  abstinence  cause." 

These  and  other  evidences  of  serious 
political  dangers  aroused  the  Prohibi- 
tionists. As  early  as  February,  1867,  the 
State  Temperance  Convention  of  Penn- 
sylvania declared  that  "  if  the  adversa- 
ries of  temperance  shall  continue  to  re- 
ceive the  aid  and  countenance  of  present 
political  parties  we  shall  not  hesitate  to 
break  over  political  bands  and  seek  re- 
dress through  the  ballot-box.'^  The 
Grand  Lodge  of  Good  Templars  of  Penn- 
sylvania, at  Pittsburgh,  June  17,  1867, 
passed  a  similar  resolution,  and  the 
Right  Worthy  Grand  Lodge  of  Good 
Templars  (the  supreme  body  of  the 
Order),  in  session  at  Richmond,  Ind., 
May  28, 1868,  recommended  "to  the  tem- 
perance people  of  the  country  the  organ- 
ization of  a  national  political  party 
whose  platform  of  principles  shall  con- 
tain Prohibition  of  the  manufacture,  im- 
portation and  sale  of  intoxicating  liquor 
to  be  used  as  a  beverage."  Two  months 
later  (July  29  and  30,  1868)  the  sixth 
National  Temperance  Convention  (of 
the  series  beginning  with  the  Convention 
of  1833),  held  at  Cleveland,  0.,  made 
this  utterance : 

"Resolved,    That  temperance,    having    its 
political  as  well  as  moral  aspects  and  duties, 


Prohibition  Party.] 


561 


[Prohibition  Party. 


demands  the  persistent  use  of  the  ballot  for  its 
promotion,  .  .  .  and  we  exhort  the  friends  of 
temperance  by  every  practical  method,  in  their 
several  localities,  to  secure  righteous  political 
action  for  the  advancement  of  the  cause." 

The  Right  Worthy  Grand  Lodge  of 
Good  Templars,  when  it  convened  in 
1869  (at  Oswego,  K  Y.,  May  27),  ex- 
pressed the  opinion  "  That  we  esteem  the 
present  as  an  auspicious  period  in  the 
history  of  our  political  affairs  for  the  in- 
auguration of  this  movement,  and  there- 
fore recommend  the  calling  of  a  National 
Convention  for  the  purpose  at  an  early 
day."  On  this  occasion  a  meeting  of 
those  favoring  separate  political  action 
was  held,  with  Jonathan  H.  Orne  of 
Marblehead,  Mass.,  as  President,  and  J. 
A.  Spencer  of  Cleveland,  0.,  as  Secre- 
tary. The  duty  of  preparing  a  call 
for  a  National  Convention  to  organize  a 
National  Prohibition  party  was  assigned 
to  a  committee  of  five,  composed  of  Rev. 
John  Russell  of  Detroit,  Mich.,  Prof. 
Daniel  Wilkins  of  Bloomington,  111.,  J. 
A.  Spencer  of  Cleveland,  0.,  John  N. 
Stearns  of  New  York  and  James  Black 
of  Lancaster,  Pa.  The  call  was  duly 
issued,  as  follows: 

"To  the  Friends  of  Temperance,  Law  and  Order 
in  the  United  States  : 

"The  moral,  social  and  political  evils  of  in- 
temperance and  the  non-enforcement  of  the 
liquor  laws  are  so  fearful  and  prominent,  and 
the  causes  thereof  are  so  intrenched  and  pro- 
tected by  governmental  authority  and  party  in- 
terest, that  the  suppression  of  these  evils  calls 
upon  the  friends  of  temperance  ;  and  the  duties 
connected  with  home,  religion  and  public  peace 
demaiKl  that  old  political  ties  and  associations 
shall  be  sundered,  and  a  distinct  political  party, 
with  Prohibition  of  the  traffic  in  intoxicating 
drinks  as  the  most  prominent  feature,  should 
be  organized. 

"The  distinctive  political  issues  that  have  for 
years  past  interested  the  American  people  are 
now  comparatively  unimportant,  or  fully  settled, 
and  in  this  aspect  the  time  is  auspicious  for  a 
tlecided  and  practical  effort  to  overcome  the 
dread  power  of  the  liquor  trade. 

"  The  undersigned  do  therefore  earnestly  in- 
vite all  friends  of  temperance  and  the  enforce- 
ment of  law,  and  favorable  to  distinct  political 
action  for  the  promotion  of  the  same,  to  meet 
in  general  mass  convention  in  the  city  of 
Chicago,  on  Wednesday,  the  1st  day  of  Sep- 
tember, 1869,  at  11  o'clock  a.  m.,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  organizing  for  distinct  political  action 
for  temperance. 

"All  churches,  Sunday-schools  and  temper- 
ance societies  of  all  names  are  requested  to 
send  delegates,  and  all  persons  favorable  to  this 
movement,  are  invited  to  meet  at  the  time  and 
place  above  stated. 


"  R.  M.  Foust  (Philadelphia,  Pa.),  J.  H.  Orne 
(Marblehead,  Mass.),  Joshua  Wadsworth  (Cin- 
cinnati, O.),  S.  W.  Hodges  (Boston,  Mass.), 
.J.  A.  Spencer  (Cleveland,  O.),  R.  C.  Bull 
(Philadelphia,  Pa.),  H.  D.  Cushing  (Boston, 
Mass.),  Rev.  Peter  Stryker.  D.D.  (Philadelphia, 
Pa.),  .Joshua  Nve  (Waterville,  Me.),  Rev.  Sam- 
uel McKean  (Cambridge,  N.  Y.),  T.  M.  Van 
Court  (Chicago,  111.),  Rev.  J.  G.  D.  Stearn.s 
(Clearwater,  Minn.),  William  Harijreaves, 
M.D.  (Reading,  Pa.),  D.  W.  Gage  (Am^es,  la.). 
Rev.  J.  C.  Stoughton  (Chicago,  111.),  P.  Mason 
(Somerville,  N.  J.),  Rev.  Edwin  Thompson 
(Boston,  Mass.),  Rev.  Elnathan  Davis  (Fitch- 
burg,  Mass.),  Ebenezer  Bowman  (Taunton, 
Mass.),  B.  E.  Hale  (Brooklyn,  N.  Y.),  J.  F. 
Forbes  (Cincinnati,  ().),  Samuel  Foljambe 
(Cleveland,  O.),  L.  B.  Silver  (Salem,  O.),  O.  P. 
Downs  (Warsaw,  Ind.),  G.  N.  Jones  (Chicago, 
111.),  Dr.  C.  H.  Merrick  (Cleveland,  O.),  Jay 
Odell  (Cleveland,  O.),  Rev.  William  C.  flen- 
drickson  (Bristol,  Pa.),  Enoch  Passmore  (Ken- 
nett  Square,  Pa.),  Neal  Dow  (Portland,  Me.). 
Rev.  John  Russell  (Detroit,  Mich.),  James  Black 
(Lancaster,  Pa.),  Charles  Jewett  (Pomona, 
Tenn.),  Rev.  James  B.  Dunn  (Boston,  Mass.), 
Rev.  George  Lansing  Tavlor  (New  York  City), 
John  O'Dounell  (Lowvflle,  N.  Y.).  Rev.  Wil- 
liam M.  Thayer  (Franklin,  Mass.),  Rev.  N.  E. 
Cobleigh,  D.D.  (Atheu.s,  Tenn.),  Peterlield 
Trent,  M.D.  (Richmond,  Va.),  .J.  N.  Stearns 
(New  York  City),  Rev.  William  Hosmer 
(Auburn,  N.  Y.),'Rev.  S.  H.  Piatt  (Brooklyn, 
N.  Y.),  S.  T.  Montgomery  (Indianapolis,  Ind.), 
Rev.  G.  H.  Ball  (Buffalo,  N.  Y.),  George  P. 
Burwell  (Cleveland,  O.),  G.  N.  Abbey  (Cleve- 
land, O.),  Luther  S.  Kauffman  (Minersville, 
Pa.),  A.  T.  Proctor  (Cleveland,  O.),  George  8. 
Tambling,  Jr.  (Cleveland,  O.),  H.  V.  Horton 
(Cincinnati,  O.),  Rev.  Moses  Smith  (Xenia,  O.), 
Gen.  J.  S.  Smith  (Kingston,  N.  Y.),  T.  P.  Hunt 
Wilkesbarre,  Pa.),  D.  R.  Pershing  (Warsaw, 
Ind.),  George  Gabel  (Philadelphia,  Pa.),  Wil- 
liam H.  Fries  (Chfton,  Pa.),  S.  J.  Coffin  (Eastoa, 
Pa.)." 

From  1869  to  1872.— The  organizing 
Convention  met  in  Farwell  Hall, 
Chicago,  on  the  specified  day  (Sept.  1, 
1869),  with  nearly  500  delegates  in  at- 
tendance, from  the  States  of  California,. 
Connecticut,  Delaware,  Indiana,  Illinois^ 
Iowa,  Kansas,  Missouri,  Minnesota, 
Massachusetts,  Maine,  Michigan,  New 
Jersey,  New  York,  Ohio,  Pennsylvania^ 
Tennessee,  Vermont  and  Wisconsin,  and 
the  District  of  Columbia.  John  Rtissell  of 
Michigan  was  Temporary  Chairman, 
James  Black  of  Pennsylvania  was  Per- 
manent Chairman,  and  J.  A.  Spencer  of 
Ohio  was  Secretary.  It  was  voted  to 
publish  an  address  to  the  people  of  the 
United  States,  prepared  by  Hon.  Gerrit 
Smith  of  New  York.  At  first  it  was  de- 
cided to  call  the  new  organization  the 
Anti-Dramshop  party,  bitt  the  Conven- 
tion finally  named  it  the  National  Pro- 


Prohibition   Party.] 


563 


[Prohibition  Party. 


liibition  party.  The  following  is  the 
text  of  the  platform  of  principles 
adopted : 

"Whereas,  Protection  and  allegiance  are  re- 
ciprocal duties,  and  every  citizen  wlio  yields 
obedience  to  the  just  commands  of  his  Govern- 
ment is  entitled  to  the  full,  free  and  perfect 
protection  of  that  Government  in  tlie  enjoyment 
of  personal  security,  personal  liberty  and  pri- 
vate property  ;  and 

"  Whereds,  Tlie  traffic  in  intoxicating  drinks 
greatly  impairs  the  personal  security  and  per- 
sonal liberty  of  a  large  mass  of  citizens,  and 
renders  private  property  insecure  ;  and 

"  Whereas,  The  existing  parties  are  hope- 
lessly unwilling  to  adopt  an  adequate  policy  on 
this  question  ;  therefore 

"We,  in  National  Convention  assembled,  as 
citizens  of  this  free  Republic,  sharing  the  duties 
and  responsibilities  of  its  Government,  in  dis- 
charge of  a  solemn  duty  we  owe  to  our  coun- 
try and  our  race,  unite  in  the  following  declara- 
tion of  principles  : 

"1.  That  while  we  acknowledge  the  pure 
patriotism  and  profound  statesmanship  of  those 
patriots  who  laid  the  foundations  of  this  Gov- 
ernment, securing  at  once  the  rights  of  the 
States  severally,  and  their  inseparable  union  by 
the  Federal  Constitution,  we  would  not  merely 
garnish  the  sepulchers  of  our  republican  fathers, 
but  we  do  hereby  renew  our  solenui  pledges  of 
fealty  to  the  imperishable  principles  of  civil  and 
religious  liberty  embodied  in  the  Declaration  of 
American  Independence  and  our  Federal  Con- 
stitution. 

' '  2.  That  the  traffic  in  intoxicating  beverages  is 
a  dishonor  to  Christian  civilization,  inimical  to 
the  best  interests  of  society,  a  political  wrong  of 
unequalled  enormity,  subversive  of  the  ordinary 
objects  of  government,  not  capable  of  being 
regulated  or  restrained  by  any  system  of  license 
whatever,  but  imperatively  demanding  for  its 
suppression  effective  legal  Prohibition,  both  by 
State  and  National  legislation. 

"3.  That  in  view  of  this,  and  inasmuch  as 
the  existing  political  parties  either  oppose  or 
ignore  this  great  and  paramount  question,  and 
absolutely  refuse  to  do  anything  toward  the 
suppression  of  the  rum  traffic,  which  is  robbing 
tlie  nation  of  its  brightest  intellects,  destroying 
internal  prosperity  and  rapidly  undermining  its 
very  foundations,  we  are  driven  by  an  imperative 
sense  of  duty  to  sever  our  connection  with  these 
political  parties  and  organize  ourselves  into  a 
National  Prohibition  party,  having  for  its  pri- 
mary object  tlie  entire  suppression  of  the  traffic 
in  intoxicating  drinks. 

"4.  That  while  we  adopt  the  name  of  the 
National  Prohibition  party,  as  expressive  of  our 
])rimary  object,  and  while  we  denounce  all  re- 
pudiation of  the  public  debt  and  pledge  fidelity 
to  the  principles  of  the  Declaration  of  Inde- 
pendence and  the  Federal  Constitution,  we  deem 
it  not  expedient  at  present  to  give  prominence 
to  other  political  issues. 

"  5.  That  while  we  lecognize  the  good  provi- 
dence of  Almighty  God  in  supervising  the  in- 
terests of  this  nation  from  its  establishment  to 
the  present  time,  we  would  not,  in  organizing 
our  party  for  the  legal  prohibition  of  the  liquor 


traffic,  forget  that  our  reliance  for  ultimate  suc- 
cess must  be  upon  tlie  same  omnipotent  arm. 

"  G.  That  a  Central  Executive  Committee,  of 
one  from  each  State  and  Territory  and  the 
District  of  Columbia,  be  appointed  by  the 
Chair,  wliose  duty  it  shall  be  to  take  such  ac- 
tion as,  in  their  judgment,  will  best  promote  the 
interests  of  the  party." 

At  the  fall  elections  of  18G9  Ohio  was 
the  only  State  returning  votes  for  the 
Prohibition  party  as  a  distinct  organiza- 
tion, G79  being  reported  from  that  State. 
But  Maine  and  Minnesota  each  cast  votes 
for  "Republican-Prohibition"  candi- 
dates— the  former  4,743  and  the  latter 
1,761. 

In  1870  support  was  received  at  the 
the  polls  in  six  States,  as  follows :  Illi- 
nois, 3,712;  Massachusetts  (Lieutenant- 
Governor),  8,692;  Michigan,  2,170;  New 
Hampshire,  1,167;  New  York,  1,459; 
Ohio,  2,812— total,  20,012.  In  Massa- 
chusetts the  Prohibition  candidate  for 
Governor  this  year  was  Wendell  Phil- 
lips, and,  being  indorsed  by  the  Labor 
party  and  indepeiident  Repttblicans,  he 
polled  21,946  votes — many  more  than 
were  cast  for  the  other  candidates  of  the 
Prohibitionists.  Yet  the  distinctive  Pro- 
hibition vote  of  that  State — nearly  8,700 
— was  large  when  it  is  remembered  that 
this  was  the  first  year  in  which  the  party 
took  the  field ;  it  was  cast  as  a  protest 
against  the  repeal  of  the  Massachusetts 
Prohibitory  law  in  1868  and  the  beer- 
exemption  clauses  of  the  re-enacted  stat- 
ute of  1869.  There  is  notliing  specially 
interesting  in  the  developments  in  other 
States  in  1870,  except  that  in  New  York 
the  candidate  for  Governor  was  Myron 
H.  Clark,  who  had  been  elected  Governor 
on  the  Maine  law  issue  in  1854.^ 


'  Governor  Clnrk's  election  was  geeured  in  this  way: 
Tbe  New  York  Leajislature  of  185'J  pat^sed  a  Proliibitory 
law,  wliicli  Governor  Horatio  Seymour  (Dem.)  vetoed. 
This  Veto  aroused  strono;  feeling,  and  the  State  Tem- 
perance Cdnventiou  which  met  at  Auburn.  Sept.  'J9.  1853, 
di'cidcd  to  take  the  question  into  politics,  declaring  in 
its  resolutions:  '■  We  advocate  and  will  labor  for  the 
enactra'ntof  a  law  prohibiting  the  iriifflc  in  intoxicating 
beverages.  .  .  .  We  regard  the  enactment  of  such  a 
liiw  as  the  greatest  and  most  vital  issue  in  State  politics, 
and  we  cannot  subordinate  this  question  to  any  oth'T 
nor  defer  its  settlement  to  any  more  convenient  season. 
.  .  .  We  ask  a  Legislature  that  will  enact  such  a  law, 
a  Governor  who  will  approve  and  magistrates  and  other 
officers  who  will  enforce  it."  The  re-enactment  of  the 
vetoed  bill  was  a  leading  issue  in  the  election  for 
Governor  in  ]8r)4,  and  the  vote  was  as  follows :  Myron 
H.  (lark  (Wliig.  Temp.,  Free  Dem.  and  Rep.,  on  a  strong 
Prohibition  platform),  15fi.804;  Horatio  Seymour  iDem., 
on  an  anti  Prohibition  platform),  l.'iti,49.j;  Ullmaii  (Know- 
Nothing,  person:illy  opposed  to  Proliibition.  tliough  tlie 
platform  of  his  i)arty  was  silent  in  regard  to  the  ques- 
tion),I'i2,2s2  ;  Bronson  (Hardshell  Dem  .  opposed  to  Prohi- 
bition), 35,850- Clark's  plurality,  309.  The  Prohibitory  bill 
was  jiassed  again  by  the  Legislature  of  18."i5,  and 
Governor  Clark  signed  it.  but  after  it  had  been  in  force 
tor  a  few  months  it  was  pronounced  uncoustitutional  in 


Prohibition  Party.] 


5G3 


[Prohibition  Party. 


Only  a  few  of  the  States  held  elections 
in  1871.  Five  returned  Prohibition 
votes:  Massachusetts,  H, 598;  New  Hanip- 
Bhire,  314;  New  York,  1,820;  Ohio,  4,084, 
and  Pennsylvania,  3,186 — total,  16,002. 
In  Massachusetts  Judge  Eobert  C.  Pit- 
man headed  the  ticket,  and  by  retaining 
nearly  the  whole  of  the  previous  year's 
strength  demonstrated  to  the  politicians 
that  the  new  movement  was  founded  on 
something  more  serious  than  a  momen- 
tary outburst.  In  New  York  the  party 
took  the  name  of  "Anti-Dramshop." 
In  Pennsylvania  it  appeared  for  the  first 
time. 

From  1872  to  1876.— The  first  National 
Nominating  Convention  was  held  on 
Washington's  Birthday  (Feb.  22)  in 
1872,  at  Columbus.  0.  It  was  called  to 
order  by  Rev.  John  Russell,  Chairman  of 
the  National  Committee,  and  the  States 
of  California,  Indiana,  Illinois,  Iowa, 
Kentucky,  Massachusetts,  Michigan, Min- 
nesota, New  Hampshire,  New  Jersey, 
New  York,  Ohio,  Pennsylvania  and 
West  Virginia,  with  the  District  of  Co- 
lumbia, were  represented  by  delegates. 
The  officers  were:  Temporary  Chairman, 
Henry  Fish  of  Michigan;  Permanent 
Chairman,  S.  B.  Chase  of  Pennsylvania; 
Secretaries,  Elroy  M.  Avery  of  Ohio,  G. 
F.  McFarland  of  Pennsylvania  and  J. 
W.  Nichols  of  Illinois.  James  Black  of 
Pennsylvania  and  John  Russell  of  Michi- 
gan were  unanimously  nominated  for 
President  and  Vice-President,  respect- 
ively, and  this  platform  was  adopted: 

"Resolved,  That  we  reaffirm  the  following 
resolutions  adopted  by  the  National  Prohibition 
Convention,  held  at  Chicago,  Sept.  2,  1869: 

^'^Wliereas,  Protection  and  allegiance  are  reciprocal 
duties,  and  every  citizen  who  yields  obedience  to  the  just 
commands  of  tlie  (Tovernnient  is  entitled  to  the  full,  free 
and  perfect  protection  of  that  Government  in  the  enjoy- 
ment of  personal  security,  personal  liberty  and  private 
property;  and 

"  '  Whereas,  The  traffic  in  intoxicatins;  drinks  greatly 
impairs  the  personal  security  and  personal  liberty  of  a 
large  mass  of  citizens,  and  renders  private  property  inse- 
cure; anc^ 

"'  Whereas,  All  other  political  parties  are  hopelessly 
nnwilling  to  adopt  an  adequate  policy  on  this  question; 
therefore 

"  '  We,  in  National  Convention  assembled,  as  citizens  of 
this  free  Republic,  sharing  the  duties  and  responsibilities 
of  its  Government,  in  discharge  of  a  solemn  duty  we  owe 
to  our  country  and  our  race,  unite  in  the  following  decla- 
ration of  principles: 

"  '  1.  That  while  we  acknowledge  the  pure  patriotism 
and  profound  statesmanship  of  those  patriots  vvho  laid 
the  foundations  of  this  Government,  securing  at  once  the 
rights  of  the  States  severally,  and  their  inseparable  union 


certain  provisions  by  the  Court  of  Appeals.  The  Legisla- 
ture of  185(5  was  the  first  oue  in  New  York  t'lat  the 
Republican  party  controlled  in  both  branches,  and  it 
passed  a  license  law.  (See  the  '•Political  Prohibi- 
tionist for  1887,"  p.  lUO.) 


hy  the  Federal  Constitntion,  we  would  not  merely  garnish 
the  sepulchers  of  our  republican  fathers,  but  we  do 
hereby  renew  our  solemn  pledges  of  fealty  to  the  im- 
perishable principles  of  civil  and  religious  liberty  em- 
bodied in  the  Declaration  of  American  Independence  and 
our  Federal  Constitution. 

"  •  2.  That  the  traffic  m  intoxicating  beverages  is  a 
dishonor  to  Christian  civilization,  inimical  to  the  best  in- 
tere-^ts  of  societv,  a  political  wrong  of  unequalled  enormity, 
subversive  of  the  ordinary  objects  of  government,  not 
capable  of  being  regulated  or  restrained  by  any  system  of 
license  whatever,  but  imperatively  demanding  for  its  sup- 
pression effective  legal  Prohibition  by  both  State  and 
National  legislation.' 

"3.  That  while  we  recognize  the  good  provi- 
dence of  Almighty  God  in  supervising  the  in- 
terests of  this  nation  from  its  establishment  to 
the  present  time,  having  organized  our  party 
for  the  legal  Prohibition  of  the  liquor  traffic, 
our  reliance  for  success  is  upon  the  same  omni- 
potent arm. 

"4.  That  there  can  be  no  greater  peril  to  the 
nation  than  the  existing  party  competition  for 
the  liquor  vote  ;  that  any  party  not  openly  op- 
posed to  the  traffic,  experience  shows,  will  en- 
gage in  this  competition,  will  court  the  favor  of 
the  criminal  classes,  will  barter  away  the  public 
morals,  the  purity  of  the  ballot,  and  every  ob- 
ject of  good  government,  for  party  success. 

"5.  That  while  adopting  national  political 
measures  for  the  Prohibition  of  the  liquor  traffic, 
we  will  continue  the  use  of  all  moral  means  in 
oTir  power  to  persuade  men  away  from  the  in- 
jurious practice  of  using  intoxicating  beverages. 

'  ■  ().  That  we  invite  all  persons,  whether  total 
abstainers  or  not,  who  recognize  the  terrible  in- 
juries inflicted  by  the  liquor  traffic,  to  unite 
with  us  for  its  overthrow,  and  to  secure  thereby 
peace,  order  and  the  protection  of  persons  and 
property. 

"7.  That  competency,  honesty  and  sobriety 
are  indispensable  qualifications  for  holding  pub- 
lic office. 

"8.  That  removals  from  public  service  for. 
mere  difference  of  political  opinion  is  a  practice 
opposed  to  sound  policy  and  just  principles. 

"9.  That  fixed  and  moderate  .salaries  should 
take  the  place  of  official  fees  and  perquisites  ; 
the  franking  privilege,  sinecures,  and  all  unnec- 
essary offices  and  expenses  should  be  abolished, 
and  every  possible  means  be  employed  to  pre- 
vent corruption  and  venality  in  office  ;  and  by  a 
rigid  system  of  accountability  from  all  its  offi- 
cers, and  guards  over  the  public  treasury,  the 
utmost  economy  should  be  practiced  and  en- 
forced in  every  department  of  the  Government. 

"  10.  That  we  favor  the  election  of  President, 
Vice-President  and  United  States  Senators  by 
direct  vote  of  the  people. 

"  11.  That  we  are  in  favor  of  a  sound  national 
currency,  adequate  to  the  demands  of  business 
and  convertible  into  gold  and  silver  at  the  will 
of  the  holder,  and  the  adoption  of  every  meas- 
ure compatible  with  justice  and  the  public 
safety,  to  appreciate  our  present  currency  to 
the  gold  standard. 

"13.  That  the  rates  of  inland  and  ocean 
postage,  of  telegraphic  communication,  of  rail- 
road and  water  transportation  and  travel,  should 
be  reduced  to  the  lowest  practicable  point,  by 
force  of  laws  Avisely  and  justly  framed,  with 
reference  not  only  to  the  interest  of  capital  em- 
ployed but  to  the  higher  claim  of  the  general 
good. 


Prohibition  Party.] 


5G4 


[Prohibition  Party. 


"13.  That  an  adequate  public  revenue  being 
necessary,  it  may  properly  be  raised  by  impost 
duties  and  by  an  equitable  assessment,  upon  the 
property  and  legitimate  business  of  the  countrj'; 
nevertheless  we  are  opposed  to  any  discrimina- 
tion of  capital  against  labor,  as  well  as  to  all 
monopoly  and  class  legislation. 

"  14.  That  the  removal  of  the  burdens,  moral, 
physical,  pecuniary  and  social,  imposed  by  the 
traffic  in  intoxicating  drinks  will,  in  our  judg- 
ment, emancipate  labor  and  practically  thus 
promote  labor  reform. 

"  15.  That  tlie  fostering  and  extension  of 
common  schools  under  the  care  and  support  of 
the  State,  to  supply  the  want  of  a  general  and 
liberal  education,  is  a  primary  duty  of  a  good 
government. 

"16.  That  the  right  of  suffrage  rests  on  no 
mere  circumstance  of  color,  race,  former  social 
condition,  sex  or  nationality,  but  inheres  in  the 
nature  of  man  ;  and  when  from  any  cause  it 
lias  been  withheld  from  citizens  of  our  country 
who  are  of  suitable  age  and  mentally  and  mor- 
ally qualified  for  the  discharge  of  its  duties,  it 
should  be  speedily  restored  by  the  people  in 
their  sovereign  capacity.  ' 

"17.  That  a  liberal  and  just  policy  should  be 
pursued  to  promote  foreign  ilnmigration  to  our 
shores,  always  allowing  to  the  naturalized  citi- 
zens equal  rights,  privileges  and  protection 
under  the  Constitution  with  those  who  are 
native-born." 

The  following  table  gives  the  Presi- 
dential vote  of  the  party  in  1872  and  the 
vote  at  State  elections  in  187;5,  1874  and 


States. 


Pbesi- 

DENT, 
1872. 


fJalifortiia 

Connecticut 

Illinois  

Kansas 

Massachusetts 

Michiijan |   1, 

Minnesota 

Nebraska 

New  Hampshire 

New  York 

Oliio t   3, 

I'ennsylvania |    1,' 

Wisconsin    


205 


271 


200 
201 
100 
680 


Totals I    5,607 


187.3. 


2,541 


1,0.'50 

l",779 
.S,272 

10,081 


18,723 


1874. 


1875. 


4,960 
516 

2,277 

3',9;^7 

l',.346 

2,100 

11.768 

7,815 

4,632 


39,351 


356 
2,932 


9,124 

1,666 

'773 

11,103 

2,.593 

13,244 

460 

42,185 


Popular  vote  for  President  in  1872:  Grant  (Rep.), 
3.^97,070;  Greeley  (Liberal  Rep.  and  Dem.».  2.834,079; 
O'Couor  istraioht  Dem.),  2i),4U8  ;  Black  (Proh  ),  5,607. 

In  the  campaign  of  1872  the  Prohibi- 
tionists made  no  efforts  to  secure  votes. 
Electoral  tickets  were  nominated  in  only 
six  States.  Even  Massachusetts,  which 
had  given  the  party  thousands  on  State 
issues  in  1870  and  1871,  refused  to  recog- 
nize it  as  a  national  organization.  The 
candidacy  of  Horace  Oreeley,  whose  Pro- 
lubition  record  was  well-known,  and  the 


'  This  resolution  pave  rise  to  prolonged  debate.  A 
motion  was  made  to  strUic  out  the  word  •"  sex,"  but  only 
22  voted  in  support  of  it. 


Raster  resolution  of  the  Republicans 
(see  Republican  Party),  probably  oper- 
ated to  reduce  the  natural  strength  of 
Black  and  Russell.  In  this  year,  at  the 
State  elections,  1,542  votes  were  obtained 
in  (yonnecticut  and  478  in  New  Hamp- 
shire. 

The  returns  for  1873  have  several  in- 
teresting features.  Connecticut  cast 
2,541  Prohibition  votes,  the  rise  of  the 
party  there  being  due  to  the  repeal  of  the 
Prohibitory  law  in  1872.  In  Massachu- 
setts the  formidable  vote  of  former  years 
was  wholly  wiped  out :  this  is  explained 
by  the  action  of  the  Legislature,  in  the 
spring  of  1873,  in  putting  an  end  to  the 
exemption  of  beer  and  tlius  restoring  the 
effectiveness  of  the  Prohibitory  law.  In 
New  York  there  was  a  noticeable  increase, 
caused  probably  by  Governor  Dix's  veto 
of  the  Local  Option  bill  in  that  year  and 
the  consequent  repudiation  of  a  pledge 
made  by  the  Republican  party.  In  Ohio 
the  large  vote  of  10.081  was  an  indica- 
tion of  the  rising  sentiment  that  Hamed 
out  a  few  months  later  in  the  Woman's 
Crusade. 

The  year  1874  was  a  notable  one  in 
American  politics.  In  consequence  of 
the  panic  of  1873  and  a  general  dissatis- 
faction with  Grant's  Administration  the 
Democrats  secured  a  large  majority  in 
the  House  of  Representatives  at  the  Con- 
gressional elections.  There  was  a  loosen- 
ing of  party  ties,  from  which  the  new 
party  profited.  The  number  of  States 
contributing  votes  to  it  was  increased  to 
nine.  Special  influences  were  at  work  in 
several  States.  In  Connecticut  and  New 
York  the  discontent  of  the  Prohibition- 
ists expressed  at  the  polls  in  the  preced- 
ing year  was  emphasized.  In  Pennsylva- 
nia the  avowed  purpose  of  the  liquor 
element  to  choose  a  Legislature  that 
would  destroy  the  Local  Option  law 
stimulated  the  radical  Prohibitionists. 
In  Ohio,  despite  the  Woman's  Crusade 
and  the  submission  of  a  Ijicense  Amend- 
ment to  the  Constitution,  there  was  a 
decline;  but  the  vote  was  large,  con- 
sidering that  only  unimportant  State 
officers  were  chosen  in  1874  and  that  the 
License  Amendment  }dot  was  a  device  of 
the  Democratic  party  and  therefore 
brought  much  temperance  support  to  the 
Republican  ticket. 

Comparatively  few  States  held  elec- 
tions in  1875,  but  the  Prohibition  jiarty 


Prohibition  Party.] 


5G5 


[Prohibition  Party. 


had  a  following  in  nine  States,  and  its 
aggregate  vote  reached  the  respectable 
figure  of  42,185.  Of  this  vote  more 
than  33,000  came  from  New  York,  Penn- 
sylvania and  Massachusetts.  The  resent- 
ment of  the  temperance  people  in  New 
York  was  unabated.  In  Pennsylvania 
the  co-operation  of  the  Eepublicans  with 
the  Democrats  in  repealing  the  Local 
Ojition  act  brought  thousands  of  recruits 
to  the  Prohibition  party.  The  reappear- 
ance of  the  party  in  Massachusetts  was 
occasioned  by  the  repeal  of  the  Prohibi- 
tory law  in  that  year.  In  Connecticut  a 
disposition  was  shown  to  accept  the 
situation. 

Throughout  these  early  years  of  inde- 
pendent political  agitation,  and  for 
nearly  ten  years  more,  there  was  practi- 
cally no  general  acceptance  of  the  claims 
of  the  National  Prohibition  party.  Oper- 
ations were  confined  to  separate  States, 
and  the  results  gained,  while  promising 
in  a  number  of  cases,  were  temporary  and 
were  not  followed  up.  The  election  re- 
turns frequently  describe  the  Prohibition 
votes  of  this  period  as  "  Temperance  "  or 
"  Anti-Dramshop."  In  Rhode  Island  the 
Prohibition  question  changed  the  face  of 
politics  for  several  years.  A  Legislature 
and  a  Governor  friendly  to  Prohibition 
were  chosen  in  1874,  and  a  Prohibitory 
law  was  accordingly  enacted.  A  con- 
spiracy to  annul  it  was  immediately  in- 
stituted, and  the  parties  were  split  into 
factions  for  and  against  repeal.  In  1875, 
on  the  question  of  repeal,  three  candi- 
dates for  Governor  were  nominated,  and 
the  candidate  committed  to  the  reten- 
tion of  the  measure  (Howard,  Republi- 
can and  Prohibitionist)  received  a  plu- 
rality, but  the  liquor  men  carried  the 
Legislature  and  seated  an  anti-Prohibi- 
tion Governor.  The  political  complica- 
tions growing  out  of  the  developments  of 
1875  continued  until  1880,  and  in  each 
year  the  Prohibition  element  polled  a 
heavy  vote,  ranging  above  6,000. 

Renewed  interest  in  the  general  aspects 
of  the  party  cause  was  shown  in  1875, 
when  a  National  Conference  of  the  Pro- 
hibition party  was  held  at  Sea  Cliff,  N.  Y. 
(July  13).  S.  B.  Chase  of  Pennsylvania 
presided. 

From  1876  to  1880.— More  than  100 
delegates,  representing  the  States  of  Con- 
necticut,   Illinois,    Kansas,     Kentucky, 


Michigan,  Minnesota,  Massachusetts, 
New  Jersey,  New  York,  Ohio,  Pennsyl- 
vania and  Wisconsin,  were  in  attendance 
at  the  second  National  Nominatina:  Con- 
vention,  wdiich  met  in  Cleveland  on  the 
17th  of  May,  1876.  Gen.  Green  Clay 
Smith  of  Kentucky  was  the  Temporary 
Chairman  and  Rev.  II.  A.  Thompson  of 
Ohio  the  Permanent  Chairman ;  the  Sec- 
retaries were  Charles  P.  Russell  of  Mich- 
igan and  J.  0.  Brayman  of  Illinois. 
Green  Clay  Smith  of  Kentucky  Avas 
nominated  for  President  and  Gideon  T. 
Stewart  of  Ohio  for  Vice-President.  An 
address  to  the  people  of  the  L'nited 
States,  prepared  by  John  Russell,  was 
adopted  and  the  publication  of  it  was 
ordered.  James  Black  of  Pennsylvania 
was  made  Chairman  and  John  Russell  of 
Michigan  Secretary  of  the  National  Com- 
mittee. "  The  National  Prohibition  Re- 
form Party  "  was  substituted  for  the  old 
name.     The  platform  was  as  follows : 

"The  Prohibition  Reform  party  of  the  United 
States,  organized  in  tlie  name  of  the  people  to 
revive,  enforce  and  perpetuate  in  the  Govern- 
ment the  doctrines  of  tlie  Declaration  of  Inde- 
pendence, submit  in  this  Centennial  year  of  the 
Republic  for  the  suffrages  of  all  good  citizens 
the  following  platform  of  national  reforms  and 
measures  : 

"1.  The  legal  Prohibition  in  the  District  of 
Columbia,  the  Territories  and  in  every  other 
place  subject  to  the  laws  of  Congress,  of  the  im- 
poitation,  exportation,  manufacture  and  traffic 
of  all  alcoholic  beverages,  as  high  crimes  against 
society  ;  an  Amendment  of  the  National  Con- 
stitution to  render  these  Prohibitory  measures 
tmiversal  and  permanent,  and  the  adoption  of 
treaty  stipulations  with  foreign  Powers  to  pre- 
vent the  importation  and  exportation  of  all  alco- 
holic beverages. 

"2.  The  abolition  of  class  legislation  and  of 
special  privileges  in  the  Government,  and  the 
adoption  of  equal  suffrage  and  eligibility  to 
office  without  distinction  of  race,  religious  creed, 
property  or  sex. 

"3.  The  appropriation  of  the  public  lands  in 
limited  quantities  to  actual  settlers  only  ;  the  re- 
duction of  the  rates  of  inland  and  ocean  postage, 
of  telegraphic  communication,  of  railroad  and 
Avater  transportation  and  travel  to  the  lowest 
practical  point  "by  force  of  laws,  wisely  and 
justly  framed,  with  reference  not  only  to  the  in- 
terests of  capital  employed  but  to  the  higher 
claims  of  the  genei'al  good. 

"4.  The  suppression,  by  law,  of  lotteries  and 
gambling  in  gold,  stocks,  produce  and  every 
form  of  money  and  property,  and  the  penal  in- 
hibition of  the  use  of  the  public  mails  for  ad- 
vertising schemes  of  gambling  and  lotteries. 

"5.  The  abolition  of  those  foul  enormities, 
polygamy  and  the  social  evil,  and  the  protection 
of  purity,  peace  and  happiness  of  homes  by 
ample  and  efficient  legislation. 


Prohibition  Party.] 


5GG 


[Prohibition  Party, 


"  6.  The  national  observance  of  the  Christian 
Sabbath,  established  by  laws  prohibiting  ordi- 
nary labor  and  business  in  all  departments  of 
public  service  and  private  employments  (works 
of  necessity,  charity  and  religion  excepted)  on 
that  day. 

"7.  The  establishment  by  mandatory  pro- 
visions in  National  and  State  Constitutions,  and 
by  all  necessary  legislation,  of  a  system  of  fiee 
public  schools  for  the  universal  and  forced  edu- 
cation of  all  the  youth  of  the  land. 

"  8.  The  free  use  of  the  Bible,  not  as  a  ground 
of  religious  creeds,  but  as  a  text-book  of  purest 
morality,  the  best  liberty  and  the  noblest  litera- 
ture, in  our  public  schools,  that  our  children 
may  grow  up  in  its  light  and  that  its  spirit  and 
principles  may  pervade  our  nation. 

"  9.  The  separation  of  the  Government  in  all 
its  departments  and  institutions,  including  the 
jHiblic  schools  and  all  funds  for  their  mainte- 
nance, from  the  control  of  every  religio\is  sect  or 
other  association,  and  the  protection  alike  of  all 
sects  by  equal  laws,  with  entire  freedom  of  re- 
ligious faith  and  worship. 

"10.  The  introduction  into  all  treaties,  here- 
after negotiated  with  foreign  Governments,  of  a 
provision  for  the  amicable  settlement  of  interna- 
tional ditficulties  by  arbitration. 

"11.  The  abolition  of  all  barbarous  modes 
aiul  instruments  of  punishment  ;  the  recogni- 
tion of  the  laws  of  God  and  the  claims  of 
humanity  in  the  discipline  of  jails  and  prisons, 
and  of  that  higher  and  wiser  civilization  worthy 
of  our  age  and  nation,  which  regards  the  re- 
form of  criminals  as  a  means  for  the  prevention 
of  crime. 

'"'  12.  The  abolition  of  executive  and  legisla- 
tive patronage,  and  the  election  of  President, 
Vice-President,  United  States  Senators,  and  of 
all  civil  otHcers,  so  far  as  practicable,  by  the 
direct  vote  of  the  people. 

"13.  The  practice  of  a  friendly  and  liberal 
policy  to  immigrants  from  all  nations,  the 
guaranty  to  them  of  ample  protection  and  of 
equal  rights  and  privileges. 

"  14.  The  separation  of  the  money  of  Govern- 
ment from  all  banking  institutions.  The  Na- 
tional Government  only  should  exercise  the 
high  prerogative  of  issuing  paper  money,  and 
that  should  be  subject  to  prompt  redemption  on 
demand,  in  gold  and  silver,  the  only  equal  stand- 
ards of  value  recognized  by  the  civilized 
world. 

"15.  The  reduction  of  the  salaries  of  public 
officers  in  a  just  ratio  with  the  decline  of  wages 
and  market  prices,  the  abolition  oi  sinecures,  un- 
necessary offices  and  official  fees  and  perquisites; 
the  practice  of  strict  economy  in  Government  ex- 
penses, and  a  free  and  thorough  investigation 
into  any  and  all  alleged  abuses  of  public  trusts." 

Without  resources  or  encouragement, 
the  party  conducted  no  canvass  in  18iG. 
This  was  the  exciting  Tilden-Hayes  year, 
and  electors  were  especially  unwilling  to 
break  away  from  their  old  parties.  But 
the  Prohibition  vote,  though  light,  was 
distributed  over  18  States,  twice  as  many 
States  as  had  furnished  support  in  any 


former  year.     The 
cers  in   18 7G  were: 


votes  for  State  offi- 
Kansas,  393;  Massa- 


chusetts (Proh.  and  Greenb.),  12,274  ; 
Michigan,  874  ;  New  Hampshire,  425  ; 
New  York,  3,412  ;  Ohio,  1,8G3— total, 
19,241. 

Below  are  the  votes  by  States  for  Presi- 
dent in  187G  and  State  candidates  in 
1877,  1878  and  1879 : 


Popular  vote  for  President  in  1876:  Tilden  (Dem.). 
4.2S5.993  :  Hayes  iRepj,  4,033,'.)o0  ;  Cooper  (Greeub.), 
81,737;  Smitli  (Proh.),  9,737. 

The  intention  of  continuing  the  na- 
tional struggle  was  shown  in  1877,  when 
a  National  Conference  of  the  party  was 
held  in  New  York  City  (Sept.  2G  and  27). 

The  elections  of  1877  were  signalized 
by  votes  of  10,545  in  Iowa  (a  State  that 
had  ignored  the  movement)  and  1G,354  in 
Massachusetts.  Iowa's  action  proved  to  be 
of  far-reaching  importance;  the  bold  step 
taken  by  her  Prohibitionists  alarmed 
the  Reptil)lican  leaders  and  prejiared 
the  way  for  the  Constitutional  Amend- 
ment agitation  and  the  subsequent  sub- 
mission and  legislation.  (See  p.  105.) 
The  Massachusetts  temperance  people 
made  a  stronger  jirotest  than  they  had 
done  before  against  the  repeal  of  the 
Prohibitory  law.  Judge  Pitman  being 
again  their  candidate  for  Governor. 
New  Jersey  for  the  first  time  voticlisafed 
votes  for  the  party  Prohibitionists.  In 
Pennsylvania  the  failure  to  regain  ground 
indicated  that  the  revolt  of  1875  was  to 
be  without  effect.  New  Y'^ork  and  Ohio, 
while  not  touching  the  marks  registered 
in  former  years,  showed  a  disposition  to 
steadily  maintain  the  party  organization, 
a  disposition  that  was  adhered  to  in  these 
States,  as  well  as  in  Pennsylvania,  in 
1878  and  1879. 


Prohibition  Party.] 


567 


[Prohibition  Party. 


The  aggregate  votes  of  the  party  were 
smaller  in  1878  and  1879  than  they 
had  been  in  any  year  (excepting  1876) 
since  1873.  There  was  a  subsidence  in 
all  the  important  States  excepting  Illi- 
iiois,  Michigan  and  Minnesota.  In  Con- 
necticut the  vote  sank  below  that  given 
at  the  State  election  of  1873.  In  Iowa 
the  election  of  1878  was  for  minor  State 
officers  and  the  Prohibitionists  did  not 
participate  in  it,  but  in  1879,  at  the  Gu- 
bernatorial and  legislative  elections,  while 
not  holding  their  strength  of  1877  they 
again  convinced  the  political  managers 
that  it  would  be  unwise  to  resist  their 
demands. 

From  1880  to  1884.— The  third  Na- 
tional Nominating  Convention,  at  Cleve- 
land, June  17,  1880,  contained  142  dele- 
gates from  the  States  of  Arkansas,  Con- 
necticut, Iowa,  Massachusetts,  Michigan, 
Minnesota,  New  Jersey,  New  York,  Ohio, 
Pennsylvania,  West  Virginia  and  Wiscon- 
sin. Rev.  H.  A.  Thompson  of  Ohio  pre- 
sided as  Temporary  Chairman  and  Rev. 
A.  A.  Miner,  D.D.,  of  Massachusetts,  as 
Permanent  Chairman,  with  Mrs.  Mary 
A.  Woodbridge  of  Ohio,  Mrs.  Mattie 
McClellan  Brown,  George  Erwin  of  Penn- 
sylvania, D.  P.  Sagendorph  of  Michigan, 
Mrs.  E.  M.  J.  Cooley  of  Wisconsin  and 
Mrs.  A.  J.  Gordon  of  Massachusetts  as 
Secretaries.  Neal  Dow  of  Maine  was 
nominated  for  President  and  Rev.  H.  A. 
Thompson  of  Ohio  for  Vice-President. 
Below  is  the  platform : 

' '  The  Prohibition  Reform  party  of  the  United 
States,  organized  in  the  name  of  the  people  to 
revive,  enforee  and  perpetuate  in  the  Govern- 
ment the  doctrines  of  the  Declaration  of  Inde- 
pendence, submit  for  the  suffrages  of  all  good 
citizens  the  following  platform  of  national  re- 
forms and  measures  : 

"1.  In  the  examination  and  discussion  of  the 
temperance  question  it  has  been  proven,  and  is 
an  accepted  truth,  that  alcoholic  drinks,  whether 
fermented,  brewed  or  distilled,  are  poisonous 
to  the  healthy  human  body,  the  drinking  of 
which  is  not  only  needless  but  hurtful,  neces- 
sarily tending  to  form  intemperate  habits,  in- 
creasing greatly  the  number,  severity  and  fatal 
termination  of  diseases,  weakening  and  derang- 
ing the  intellect,  polluting  the  affections,  hard- 
ening the  heart  and  corrupting  the  morals, 
depriving  many  of  reason  and  still  more  of  its 
healthful  exercise,  and  aimually  bringing  down 
large  numbers  to  untimely  graves,  producing  in 
the  children  of  many  who  drink  a  predisposition 
to  intemperance,  insanity  and  various  bodily 
and  mental  diseases,  causing  a  diminution  of 
strength,  feebleness  of  vision,  fickleness  of  pur- 
pose and  premature  old  age,  and  producing  to 


all  futTire  generations  a  deterioration  of  moral 
and  physical  character.  The  legalized  impor- 
tation, manufacture  and  sale  of  intoxicating 
drinks  minister  to  their  uses  and  teach  the 
erroneous  and  destructive  sentiment  that  such 
use  is  right,  thus  tending  to  produce  and  per- 
petuate the  above-mentioned  evils.  Alcoholic 
drinks  are  thus  the  implacable  enemy  of  man 
as  an  individual. 

"3.  That  the  liquor  traffic  is  to  the  home 
equallj'  an  enemy,  proving  a  disturber  and  a 
destroyer  of  its  peace,  prosperity  and  happiness, 
taking  from  it  the  earnings  of  the  husband.,  der 
priving  the  dependent  wife  and  children  of 
essential  food,  clothing  and  education,  bringing 
into  it  profanity  and  abuse,  setting  at  naught 
the  vows  of  the  marriage  altar,  breaking  up  the 
family  and  sundering  children  from  parents, 
and  thus  destroying  one  of  the  mo3t  beneficent 
institutions  of  our  Creator,  and  removing  the 
sure  foundation  for  good  government,  national 
prosperity  and  welfare. 

"3.  Tiiat  to  the  community  it  is  equally  aii 
enemy,  producing  demoralization,  vice  and 
wickedness  ;  its  places  of  sale  being  often  re- 
sorts for  gambling,  lewdness  and  debauchery, 
and  the  hiding  places  of  those  who  prey  upon 
society,  counteracting  the  efficacy  of  religious 
effort  and  of  all  means  for  the  intellectual  ele- 
vation, moral  purity,  social  happiness  and  the 
eternal  good  of  mankind,  without  rendering 
any  counteracting  or  compensating  benefits, 
being  in  its  influence  and  effect  evil  and  only 
evil,  and  that  continually. 

"4.  That  to  the  State  it  is  equally  an  enemy, 
legislative  inquiry,  judicial  investigation  and 
the  official  reports  of  all  penal,  reformatory  and 
dependent  in.stitutions  showing  that  the  manu- 
facture and  sale  of  such  beverages  is  the  pro- 
moting cause  of  intemperance,  crime  and 
pauperism,  of  demands  upon  public  and  private 
charity  ;  imposing  the  larger  part  of  taxation, 
thus  paralyzing  thrift,  industry,  manufacture 
and  commercial  life,  which  but  for  it  would  be 
imnecessary  ;  disturbing  the  peace  of  the  streets 
and  highways  ;  filling  prisons  and  poorhouses  ; 
corrupting  politics,  legislation  and  the  execution 
of  the  laws :  shortening  lives,  diminishing 
health,  industry  and  productive  power  in 
manufactiu'e  and  art  ;  and  is  manifestly  unjust 
as  well  as  injurious  to  the  community  upon 
Avhich  it  is  imposed,  and  contrary  to  all  just 
views  of  civil  liberty,  as  well  as  a  violation  of  a 
fimdamental  maxim  of  our  common  law  to  use 
your  own  property  or  liberty  so  as  not  to  injure 
others. 

' '  5.  That  it  is  neither  right  nor  politic  for  the 
State  to  afford  legal  protection  to  any  traffic  or 
system  which  tends  to  waste  the  resources,  to 
corrupt  the  social  habits  and  to  destroy  the 
health  and  lives  of  the  people  ;  that  the  impor- 
tation, manufactiu'e  and  sale  of  intoxicating 
beverages  is  proven  to  be  inimical  to  the  true 
interests  of  the  individual,  the  home,  the  com- 
numity,  the  State,  and  destructive  to  the  order 
and  welfare  of  society,  and  ought,  therefore,  to 
be  classed  among  crimes  to  be  prohibited. 

"6.  That  in  this  time  of  profound  peace  at 
home  and  abroad  the  entire  separation  of  the 
general  Government  from  the  drink  traffic,  and 
its  Prohibititjn  in  the  District  of  Columbia,  the 


Prohibition  Party.] 


5G8 


[Prohibition  Party. 


T«?rrit()ries  and  in  all  places  and  ways  over 
which  (under  the  Constitution)  Congress  has 
control  or  power,  is  a  political  issue  of  first  im- 
portance to  the  peace  and  prosperity  of  the 
nation.  There  (-an  be  no  stable  peace  and  pro- 
tection to  personal  liberty,  life  or  property  until 
secured  by  National  and  State  Constitutional 
Prohibition  enforced  by  adequate  laws. 

"7.  That  all  legitimate  industries  require 
deliverance  from  taxation  and  loss  which  the 
liquor  traffic  imposes  upon  them,  and  financial 
or  other  legislation  can  not  accomplish  so  much 
to  increase  production  and  cause  demand  for 
labor,  and  as  a  result,  for  the  comfort  of  living, 
as  the  suppression  of  this  traffic  would  bring  to 
thou.sands  of  homes  as  one  of  its  blessings. 

"8.  That  the  administration  of  Government 
and  the  execution  of  the  laws  being  by  and 
through  political  parties,  we  arraign  the  Republi- 
can party,  which  has  Ijeen  in  continuous  power 
in  the  nation  for  20  years,  as  being  false  to  its 
duty,  as  false  to  its  loudly -proclaimed  princi- 
ples of  '  equal  justice  to  all  and  special  favors  to 
none,'  and  of  protection  to  the  weak  and  de- 
pendent ;  and  that  through  moral  cowardice  it 
has  been  and  is  unable  to  correct  the  mischief 
which  the  trade  in  liquor  has  constantly  inflicted 
\ipon  the  industrial  interests,  commerce  and 
soc'ial  happiness  of  the  people.  On  the  con- 
trary, its  subjection  to  and  complicity  with  the 
liquor  interest  appears  :  (1)  By  the  facts  that 
5,653  distilleries,  2,830  breweries,  and  175,266 
places  of  sale  of  the  poisonous  liquors,  involving 
an  annual  waste,  direct  and  indirect,  to  the  na- 
tion of  $1,500,000,000,  and  a  sacrifice  of  100,000 
lives,  have  under  its  legislation  grown  up  and 
been  fostered  as  a  legitimate  source  of  revenue  ; 
(2)  That  during  its  history  six  Territories  have 
been  organized  and  five  Slates  admitted  into  the 
Union  with  Constitutions  provided  and  ap- 
proved by  Congress,  but  the  Prohibition  of  this 
debasing  and  destructive  traffic  has  not  been  pro- 
vided for,  nor  even  the  people  given  at  the  time 
of  admission  the  power  to  forbid  it  in  any  one 
of  them  ;  (3)  That  its  history  further  shows  tha_t 
not  in  a  single  instance  has  an  original  Prohibi- 
tory law  been  enacted  in  any  State  controlled  by 
it,  while  in  four  States  so  governed  the  laws 
found  on  its  advent  to  power  have  been  re- 
pealed ;  (4)  That  at  its  National  Convention  of 
1872  it  declared  as  a  part  of  its  party  faith  that 
'  it  disapproves  of  a  resort  to  unconstitutional 
laws  for  the  purpose  of  removing  evils  by  inter- 
ference with  the  right  ncit  surrentlered  by  the 
people  to  either  State  or  National  Government, ' 
which  the  author  of  this  plank  says  '  was  adopt- 
ed by  the  Platform  Committee  with  the  full  and 
explicit  understanding  that  its  purpose  was  the 
discountenancing  of  all  so-called  temperance 
(Prohibitory)  and  Sunday  laws  ; '  (5)  That  not- 
withstanding the  deep  interest  felt  by  the  people 
diu-ing  the  last  quadrennium  in  the  legal  sup- 
jjression  of  the  drink  curse,  shown  by  many 
forms  of  public  expression,  this  party  at  its 
last  National  Convention,  held  in  Chicago 
during  the  present  month,  in  making  new 
promises  by  its  platform,  says  not  one  word  on 
this  ({ucstion,  nor  holds  out  any  hope  of  relief. 

"9.  That  we  arraign  also  the  Democratic 
party  as  unfaithful  and  unworthy  of  reliance  on 
this  question  ;  for  although  not  clothed  with 


power,  but  occupying  the  relation  of  the  opposi- 
tion party  during  20  years  past,  strong  in  num- 
ber and  organization,  it  has  allied  itself  with  the 
liquor-traffickers  and  has  become  in  all  the 
States  of  the  Union  their  special  political  de- 
fenders. In  its  National  Convention  in  1876,  as 
an  article  of  its  political  faith,  it  declared 
against  Prohibition  and  just  laws  in  restraint  of 
the  trade  in  drink  by  saying  it  was  opposed  to 
what  it  was  pleased  to  call  '  all  sumptuarj'  laws.' 
The  National  party '  has  been  dumb  on  the 
question. 

"  10.  That  the  drink-traffickers,  realizing  that 
history  and  experience,  in  all  ages,  climes  and 
conditions  of  men  declare  their  business  de- 
structive of  all  good,  and  finding  no  support 
from  the  Bible,  morals  or  reason,  appeal  to  mis- 
applied law  for  their  justification,  and  entrench 
themselves  behind  the  evil  elements  of  political 
party  for  defense,  party  tactics  and  party  in- 
ertia having  become  the  battling  forces  protect- 
ing this  evil. 

"11.  That  in  view  of  the  foregoing  facts  and 
history,  we  cordially  invite  all  voters,  without 
regard  to  former  party  affiliation,  to  unite  with 
us  in  the  use  of  the  ballot  for  the  abolition  of 
the  drink  system  now  existing  under  the 
authority  of  our  National  and  State  Govern- 
ments. We  also  demand  as  a  Tight  that  women, 
having  in  other  respects  the  privileges  of 
citizens,  shall  be  clothed  with  the  ballot  for 
their  protection,  and  as  a  rightful  means  for  a 
proper  settlement  of  the  liquor  question. 

"12.  That  to  remove  the  apprehensions  of 
some  who  allege  that  loss  of  public  revenue 
would  follow  the  suppression  of  the  drink 
trade,  we  confidently  point  to  the  experience  of 
government  abroad  and  at  home,  which  shows 
that  thrift  and  revenue  from  consiuiiption  of 
legitimate  manufactures  and  commerce  have  so 
largely  followed  the  abolition  of  the  drink  as  to 
fully  supply  all  loss  of  liquor  taxes. 

"  13.  That  we  recognize  the  good  providence 
of  Almighty  God,  who  has  preserved  and  pros- 
pered us  as  a  nation,  and,  asking  for  his  spirit 
to  guide  us  to  ultimate  success,  we  will  look  for 
it,  relying  upon  his  omnipotent  arm." 

Votes  of  1880-3 : 


Statks. 


•California 

Connecticut 

Illinois 

Iowa 

Kentucky 

Maine 

Mascachupetts  .. . 

Micliigan 

Minnesota 

New  Uanii)6liire. 

New  Jersey 

New  Yorl< 

Ohio 

Pennsylvania. . . . 
Kliode  Island. . . . 
Wisconsin 


Totals. 


Pres., 

1880. 

1881. 

1882. 

1883. 

61 

5,772 

409 

1,034 

44;i 

.... 

11,344 

.592 

2.58 

4,392 

93 

.... 

387 

(82 

1,040 

2,137 

1,881 

042 

12,774 

5,854 

13.950 

28() 

708 

>  •  •  > 

4,934 

180 

345 

191 

2.004' 

4,1.53 

1,517 

4,445 

25,783 

18,816 

2,616 

16,597 

12.202 

8.362 

1,319 

4,,507 

5.196 

6,602 

20 

2.53 

.... 

69 

7,002 

13,800' 

9,678 

47,326 

90,250 

58.688 

'  Acicregates  on  Congr  f  smeu. 

Popular  vote  for  President  in  1880:  Garfleld  (Rep.K 
4.454.416  ;  Hancock  (Dcm  ),  4,444,952  ;  Weaver iGreenb.i, 
308,578  ;  Dow  (Proh. ),  9,678. 


>  Another  name  for  the  Greenback-Labor  party. 


Prohibition  Party.] 


5G9 


[Prohibition  Party. 


Sixteen  States  gave  votes  in  1880  as 
against  18  in  1876.  Again  the  party  was 
too  feeble  to  make  a  formal  campaign. 
Just  before  the  election  the  report  was 
widely  pnblished  that  Mr.  Dow  had  with- 
drawn. To  announce  the  retirement  of 
Prohibitionist  nominees  is  always  a  favor- 
ite device  of  not  over-scrupulous  politi- 
cians. Votes  for  State  candidates  in 
1880:  Connecticut,  488;  Massachusetts, 
1,059;  Michigan,  1,114;  'New  Jersey, 
195;  Ohio,  2,815;  Pennsylvania,  1,898— 
total,  7,489.  (It  is  probable,  however, 
that  this  list  does  not  include  all  the 
States  that  ran  tickets.) 

The  years  1881  and  1882  mark  a  new 
epoch  in  the  history  of  the  national  or- 
ganization. At  the  Lake  Bluff  Convoca- 
tion (held  near  Chicago)  in  August,  1881, 
some  of  the  influential  Prohibition  lead- 
ers who  had  not  been  very  actively  iden- 
tified with  the  party  or  had  held  aloof 
from  it  decided  to  secure,  if  possible,  a 
more  vigorous  championship  and  a 
stronger  support  for  it.  George  W.  Bain 
of  Kentucky,  A.  J.  Jutkins  of  Illinois, 
Miss  Frances  E.  AVillard  of  Illinois  and 

R.  W.  Nelson  of  Illinois  were  appointed 
a  committee  to  organize  a  so-called 
"  Home  Protection  party  "  as  "a  political 
party  whose  platform  is  based  on  Consti- 
tutional and  statutory  Prohibition  of  the 
manufacture  and  sale  of  alcoholic  bever- 
ages in  the  State  and  nation."  A  call  for 
a  National  Convention,  joined  in  by  the 
others  interested,  was  issued,  and  the 
body  met  in  Farwell  Hall,  Chicago,  Aug. 
23  and  24,  1882,  341  delegates  being  pres- 
ent from  22  States.  Theodore  1).  Ka- 
uouse  of  Wisconsin  presided  and  Mrs. 
Mary  A.  Woodbridge  of  Ohio  was  Secre- 
tary. A  new  name,  the  "  Prohibition 
Home  Protection  Party,"  was  adopted, 
and  the  National  Committee  Avas  reor- 
ganized with  Gideon  T.  Stewart  of  Ohio 
as  Chairman,  A.  J.  Jutkins  of  Illinois  as 
Secretary  and  Samuel  D.  Hastings  of 
Wisconsin  as  Treasurer.  The  platform 
adopted  was  comparatively  brief.  It  was 
as  follows: 

"All  questions  not  of  a  national  character  be- 
long to  the  party  within  the  several  States  and 
Territories  to  define  its  views,  policy  and  action 
respecting  them,  not  inconsistent  with  this  na- 
tional platform. 

' '  We  declare  in  favor  of  the  following  na- 
tional principles  and  measiires,  to  be  incorpo- 
rated in  the  National  Constitution  and  enforced 
by  Congress  and  the  Goverument ; 


"1.  The  prohibition,  as  public  crimes,  of  the 
importation,  exportation,  manufacture,  sale  and 
supply  of  all  alcoholic  beverages. 

"2.  The  prohibition  of  all  taxation,  license, 
regulation  and  legal  sanction  in  any  form  of 
these  or  anj"  other  public  crimes. 

"3.  The  civil  and  political  equality  and  en- 
franchisement of  women.  This  reform,  so  far 
as  concerns  the  States  severally,  is  remitted  to 
the  party  in  those  States. 

"4.  The  abolition  of  polygamy. 

"5.  The  abolition  of  executive,  judicial  and 
legislative  patronage,  and  election  of  all  officers 
by  the  people  as  far  as  practicable,  and  civil  ser- 
vice reform  in  other  appointments. 

"  6.  The  abolition  of  sinecures  and  unneces- 
sary offices. 

"  7.  The  universal  and  enforced  education  of 
the  youth  of  the  nation  (including  instruction  in 
regard  to  the  effects  of  alcohol  on  the  hunian 
body),  with  ample  provision  for  the  support  of 
an  adequate  and  etticient  system  of  free  public 
schools  in  all  the  States  and  Territories. 

"  8.  The  preservation  of  the  public  lands  for 
homes  for  the  people,  and  their  division  iu 
limited  portions  to  actual  settlers  only. 

"9.  The  abolitio-L  of  all  monopolies,  class 
legislation  and  special  privileges  from  Govern- 
ment injurious  to  the  equal  rights  of  citizens. 

"10.  The  control  of  railroad  and  other  cor- 
porations, to  prevent  abuses  of  power  and  to 
protect  the  interests  of  labor  and  commerce." 

There  was  substantial  growth  at  the 
State  elections  of  1881,  1882  and  1883, 
the  more  encouraging  because  it  was  the 
consequence  of  steadily  rising  sentiment 
more  than  of  j^assing  discontent  in  j)ar- 
ticular  States.  In  California,  Illinois, 
Kentucky,  Michigan,  Minnesota,  New 
Jersey,  New  York,  Ohio,  Pennsylvania 
and  Wisconsin  the  advances  made  were 
progressive  steps  toward  further  gains 
in  subsequent  years.  In  several  States 
that  held  elections  in  all  the  three  years 
the  vote  fluctuated:  in  Michigan  it  de- 
clined in  1882  and  rose  again  in  1S83 ;  in 
New  York  it  reached  the  maximum  point 
in  1882;  in  Ohio  it  was  highest  in  1881 
and  lowest  in  1883.  But  the  general  ten- 
dancy  was  upward.  For  the  first  time 
there  were  signs  that  the  party,  instead 
of  being  a  mere  temporary  refuge  for 
bolters,  was  taking  permanent  root,  that 
men  of  influence  and  practical  sj)irit  were 
identifying  themselves  with  it  through- 
out the  Union,  and  that  at  last  the  doc- 
trine, "'  Prohibition  with  a  party  behind 
it,"  was  to  command  general  attention 
and  seriously  disturb  political  condi- 
tions. But  in  some  States  the  votes  cast 
in  these  years  were  swollen  by  sjoecial 
causes.  In  New  York,  in  1882,  the  un- 
precedented total  of  25,783  (for  A.  A.  Hop- 
kins for   Governor)  came  largely   from 


Prohibition  Party.] 


570 


[Prohibition  Party. 


unconverted  Repnl^licans,  whose  sole  rea- 
son for  acting  with  the  Prohibitionists 
was  dissatisfaction  witli  the  management 
of  their  party.  (This  was  the  year  in 
which  Grover  Cleveland  obtained  his 
remarkable  plurality  of  192,000  for  Gov- 
ernor of  New  York.)  The  sudden  de- 
velopment of  the  party  in  California  in 
1882,  with  a  strength  of  5,772,  is  ac- 
counted for  chiefly  by  the  personal  popu- 
larity of  its  leader,  R.  H.  McDonald. 

From  1884  to  1888.— The  Nominating 
Convention  of  1884  was  called  to  meet  at 
Pittsburgh,  May  21.  But  it  was  desired 
by  some  of  the  new  leaders,  and  by  many 
who  had  not  fully  made  up  their  minds, 
to  make  a  final  test  of  the  tendencies  of 
the  other  political  parties  before  enter- 
ing the  field.  The  date  was  changed  to 
July  23,  and  prominent  representatives  of 
the  movement  were  sent  to  the  Repub- 
lican National  Convention  (at  Chicago, 
June  5)  and  the  Democratic  National 
Convention  (at  Chicago,  July  10)  to 
appeal  to  those  bodies  to  favorably  recog- 
nize the  temperance  question  as  one  of 
the  political  issues  of  the  day.  The 
Platform  Committees  of  the  two  Con- 
ventions, after  listening  Avith  scant  cour- 
tesy to  the  advocates,  ignored  their  re- 
quests. Many  Avho  had  hoped  that  the 
Republican  or  the  Democratic  party 
Avould  take  up  the  cause  in  due  time 
were  now  convinced  of  the  hostility  of 
both  these  organizations,  and  when  the 
Prohibition  Convention  assembled  at 
Pittsburgh  on  the  23d  of  July  it  was 
evident  that  a  profound  impression  had 
been  made  on  the  country.  Thirty-one 
States  and  Territories  (including  the 
District  of  Columbia)  sent  405  accredited 
delegates,  the  only  ones  not  represented 
being  the  States  of  Colorado,  Delaware, 
Florida,  Iowa,  Mississippi,  Nevada,  North 
Carolina,  South  Carolina,  Vermont  and 
Virginia,  and  the  Territories  of  Idaho, 
Montana,  New  Mexico,  Utah,  Washing- 
ton and  Wyoming,  The  Convention 
chose  as  its  officers  William  Daniel  of 
Maryland  for  Temporary  Chairman, 
Samuel  Dickie  of  Michigan  for  Perma- 
nent Chairman  and  Mary  A.  AVoodbridge 
of  Ohio,  Charles  S.  Carter  of  the  Dis- 
trict of  Columbia,  S.  Cairns  of  Missouri, 
C.  A.  Hovey  of  NeAV  Hampshire  and  L. 
S.  Freeman  of  New  York  for  Secretaries. 
John  P.  St.  John,  ex-Governor  of  Kansas, 


was  unanimously  nominated  for  Presi- 
dent and  William  Daniel  of  Maryland 
for  Vice-President.  The  name  of  the 
party  was  once  more  changed,  the  origi- 
nal name  of  "  Prohibition  Party  "  being 
restored.  John  B.  Finch  of  Nebraska 
was  placed  at  the  head  of  the  National 
Committee,  with  A.  J.  Jutkins  and  J.  A. 
Van  Fleet  (both  of  Illinois)  as  Secretaries 
and  Samuel  D.  Hastings  of  Wisconsin  as 
Treasurer;  the  temperance  women  were 
given  special  representation  in  the  Com- 
mittee by  the  selection  of  Miss  Frances 
E.  Willard  of  Illinois  and  Mrs.  Stewart 
of  Ohio  as  members-at-large.  The  plat- 
form follows  : 

"1.  The  Prohibition  party,  in  National  Con- 
vention assembled,  acknowledge  Almighty  God 
as  the  rightful  sovereign  of  all  men,  from  whom 
the  just  powers  of  government  are  derived  and 
to  whose  laws  human  enactments  should  con- 
form as  an  absolute  condition  of  peace,  prosper- 
ity and  happiness. 

"  2.  That  the  importation,  manufacture,  sup- 
ply and  sale  of  alcoholic  beverages,  created  and 
maintained  by  the  laws  of  the  National  and 
State  Governments  during  the  entire  history  of 
such  laws,  are  everywhere  shown  to  be  the  pro- 
moting cause  of  intemperance,  with  resulting 
crime  and  pauperism,  making  large  demands 
upon  public  and  private  charity;  imposing  large 
and  unjust  taxation  for  the  support  of  penal  and 
sheltering  institutions,  upon  thrift,  industry, 
manufactures  and  commerce;  endangering  the 
public  peace;  desecrating  th*  Sabbath ;  corrupt- 
ing our  politics,  legislation  and  administration 
of  the  laws;  shortening  lives,  impairing  health 
and  diminishing  productive  industry;  causing 
education  to  be  neglected  and  despised;  nulli- 
fying the  teachings  of  the  Bible,  the  church 
and  the  school,  the  standards  and  guides  of  our 
fathers  and  their  children  in  the  founding  and 
growth  of  our  widely-extended  country;  and 
which,  imperilling  the  perpetuity  of  our  civil 
and  religious  liberties,  are  baleful  fruits  by 
which  we  know  that  these  laws  are  contrary  to 
God's  laws  and  contravene  our  happiness.  We 
therefore  call  upon  our  fellow-citizens  to  aid  in 
the  repeal  of  these  laws  and  in  the  legal  sup- 
pression of  this  baneful  liquor  traffic. 

"  3.  During  tlie  24  years  in  which  the  Repub- 
lican party  has  controlled  the  general  Govern- 
ment and  many  of  the  States,  no  effort  has 
been  made  to  change  this  policy.  Territories 
liave  been  created.  Governments  for  them  es- 
tablished, States  admitted  to  the  Union,  and  in 
no  instance  in  either  case  has  this  traffic  been 
forbidden  or  the  peop.e  been  permitted  to  pro- 
hibit it.  That  there  are  now  over  200,000  dis- 
tilleri(,'s,  breweries,  wholesale  and  retail  dealers 
in  their  products,  holding  certificates  and  claim- 
ing the  authority  of  Government  for  the  con- 
tinuation of  the  business  so  destructive  to  the 
moral  and  material  Avelfare  of  the  people,  to- 
getlier  witli  the  fact  that  they  have  turned  a 
clcaf  eur  to  remonstrance  and  petition  for  the 
correction  of  this  abuse  of  cl\'il  government,  is 


Prohibition  Party.] 


D  I  1 


[Prohibition  Party. 


conclusive  that  the  Republican  party  is  insensi- 
ble to  or  impotent  for  the  redress  of  these 
wrongs,  and  should  no  longer  be  entrusted  with 
the  powers  and  responsibilities  of  government. 
Although  this  party  in  its  late  National  Conven- 
tion was  silent  on  the  liquor  question,  not  so  its 
candidates,  Messrs.  Blaine  and  Logan.  Within 
the  year  past  Mr.  Blaine  has  recommended  that 
tiie  revenue  derived  from  the  liquor  tratiic  be 
distributed  among  the  States;  and  Senator  Logan 
has,  by  bill,  proposed  to  devote  these  revenues 
to  the  support  of  the  public  schools.  Thus 
both  virtually  recommend  the  perpetuation  of 
the  Iratlic,  and  that  the  States  and  their  citizens 
become  partners  in  the  liquor  crime. 

"4.  That  the  Democratic  party  has  in  its 
national  deliverances  of  party  policy  arrayed 
itself  on  the  side  of  the  drink-makers  and 
sellers  by  declaring  against  the  policy  of  Pro- 
hibition under  the  false  name  of  'svmiptuary 
laws ;'  that  when  in  power  iu  many  of  the 
States  it  has  refused  remedial  legislation,  and 
that  in  Congress  it  has  obstinicted  the  creation 
of  a  Commission  of  Inquiry  into  the  effects  of 
this  traffic,  proving  that  it  should  not  be  en- 
trusted with  power  and  place. 

"5.  That  there  can  be  no  greater  peril  to  the 
nation  than  the  e.xisting  competition  of  the 
Republican  and  Democratic  parties  for  the 
liquor  vote.  Experience  shows  that  any  party 
not  openly  opposed  to  the  traffic  will  engage  in 
this  competition,  will  court  the  favor  of  the 
criminal  classes,  will  barter  the  public  morals, 
the  purity  of  the  ballot  and  every  trust  and  ob- 

J'ect  of  good  government  for  party  success, 
^atriots  and  good  citizens  should,  therefore, 
immediately  withdraw  from  all  connection  with 
these  parties. 

"  6.  That  we  favor  reforms  in  the  abolition  of 
all  sinecures  with  useless  offices  and  officeis,  and 
in  elections  by  the  people  instead  of  appoint- 
ments by  the  President  ;  that  as  competency, 
honesty  and  sobriety  are  essential  qualifications 
for  office,  we  oppose  removals  except  when 
absolutely  necessary  to  secure  effectiveness  in 
vital  issues  ;  that  the  collection  of  revenues  from 
alcoholic  liquors  and  tobacco  should  be  abol- 
ished, since  the  vices  of  men  are  not  proper  sub- 
jects of  taxation  ;  that  revenue  from  customs 
duties  should  be  levied  for  the  support  of  the 
Government  economically  administered,  and  iu 
such  manner  as  will  foster  American  industries 
and  labor;  that  the  public  lands  should  be  held 
for  homes  for  the  people,  and  not  bestowed  as 
gifts  to  corporations,  or  sold  in  large  tracts 
for  speculation  upon  the  needs  of  actual  settlers; 
that  grateful  care  and  support  should  be  given 
to  our  soldiers  and  sailors  disabled  in  the  service 
of  their  country,  and  to  their  dependent  widows 
and  orphans  ;  that  we  repudiate  as  un-American 
and  contrary  to  and  subversive  of  the  principles 
of  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  that  any 
person  or  people  should  be  excluded  from  resi- 
dence or  citizenship  who  may  desire  the  bene- 
fits which  our  institutions  confer  upon  the  op- 
pressed of  all  nations  ;  that  while  these  are 
important  reforms,  and  are  demanded  for  purity 
of  administration  and  the  welfare  of  the  people, 
their  importance  sinks  into  insignificance  when 
compared  with  the  drink  trafiic,  which  now 
tmnually  wastes   $800,000,000    of    the    wealth 


created  by  toil  and  thrift,  dragging  down 
thousands  of  families  from  comfort  to  poverty, 
filling  jails,  penitentiaries,  insane  asylums, 
hospitals  and  institutions  for  dependency,  im- 
pairing the  health  and  destroying  the  lives  of 
thousfinds,  lowering  intellectual  vigor  and  dull- 
ing the  cunning  hand  of  the  artisan,  causing 
bankruptcy,  insolvency  and  loss  in  trade,  and 
by  its  corrupting  power  endangering  the  per- 
petuity of  free  institutions;  that  Congress  should 
exercise  its  undoubted  power  by  prohibiting  the 
manufacture  and  sale  of  intoxicating  beverages 
in  the  District  of  Columbia,  the  Territories  of 
the  United  States  and  all  places  over  which  the 
Government  has  exclusive  jurisdiction ;  that 
hereafter  no  State  should  be  admitted  to  the 
Union  until  its  Constitution  shall  expressly  and 
forever  prohibit  polygamy  and  the  manufacture 
and  sale  of  intoxicating  beverages,  and  that 
Congress  shall  submit  to  the  States  an  Amend- 
ment to  the  Constitution  forever  prohibiting  the 
importation,  exportation,  manufacture  and  sale 
of  alcoholic  drinks. 

"7.  We  earnestly  call  the  attention  of  the 
mechanic,  the  miner  and  manufacturer  to  the 
investigation  of  the  baneful  effects  upon  labor 
and  industry  of  the  needless  liquor  business. 
It  will  be  found  the  robber  who  lessens  wages 
and  profits,  foments  discontent  and  strikes,  and 
the  destroyer  of  family  welfare.  Labor  and  all 
legitimate  industries  demand  deliverance  from 
the  taxation  and  loss  which  this  traffic  imposes  ; 
and  no  tariff  or  other  legislation  can  so  healthily 
stimulate  production,  or  increase  the  demand 
for  capital  and  labor,  or  insure  so  much  of  com- 
fort and  content  to  the  laborer,  mechanic  and 
capitalist  as  would  the  suppression  of  this 
traffic. 

"8.  That  the  activity  and  co-operation  of  the 
women  of  America  for  the  promotion  of  tem- 
perance has  in  all  the  history  of  the  past  been  a 
strength  and  encouragement  which  we  grate- 
fully acknowledge  and  record.  In  the  later 
and  present  phase  of  the  movement  for  the 
Prohibition  of  the  traffic,  the  purity  of  pinpose 
and  method,  the  earnestness,  zeal,  intelligence 
and  devotion  of  the  mothers  and  daughters  of 
tlie  Woman's  Christian  Temperance  Union  have 
been  eminently  blessed  of  God.  Kansas  and 
Iowa  have  been  given  them  as  '  sheaves  '  of  re- 
joicing, and  the  education  and  arousing  of  the 
public  mind,  and  the  now  prevailing  demand 
for  the  Constitutional  Amendment,  are  largely 
the  fruit  of  their  prayers  and  labors.  Sharing 
in  the  efforts  that  shall  bring  the  question  of 
the  abolition  of  this  traffic  to  the  ptjlls,  they 
shall  join  iu  the  grand  '  Praise  God,  from  whom 
all  blessings  flow,'  when  by  law  victory  shall 
be  achieved. 

"9.  That,  believing  in  the  civil  and  the  polit- 
ical equality  of  the  sexes,  and  that  the  ballot  in 
the  hands  of  woman  is  her  right  for  protection 
and  would  prove  a  powerful  ally  for  the  aboli- 
tion of  the  liquor  traffic,  the  execution  of  the 
law,  the  promotion  of  reform  in  civil  affairs, 
the  removal  of  corruption  in  public  life,  we 
enunciate  the  principle  and  relegate  the  practi- 
cal outw^orking  of  this  reform  to  the  discretion 
of  the  Prohibition  party  in  the  several  States 
according  to  the  condition  of  public  sentiment 
in  those  States, 


Prohibition  Party.] 


57: 


[Prohibition  Party. 


"10.  That  we  gratefully  acknowledge  the 
presence  of  the  divine  spirit  guiding  the  coun- 
sels and  granting  the  success  which  has  been 
vouchsafed  in  the  progress  of  the  temperance 
reform  ;  and  we  earnestly  ask  the  voters  of 
these  United  States  to  make  the  principles  of 
the  above  declaration  dominant  in  the  Govern- 
ment of  the  nation." 

With  the  Presidential  campaign  of 
1884  the  National  Prohibition  party 
ceased  to  be  a  merely  nominal  organiza- 
tion and  began  its  active  career.  A  head- 
quarters was  opened  at  Chicago  and  an 
energetic  canvass  Avas  made.  Mr.  St. 
John  and  numerous  other  able  speakers 
addressed  large  audiences  in  many  States. 
Mr.  Finch,  as  Chairman  of  the  National 
Committee,  developed  great  executive 
talent,  shrewdness,  tact,  judgment  and 
foresight.  He  set  before  himself  the 
object  of  winning  the  largest  possible 
vote  in  the  States  of  greatest  political 
importance,  in  order  to  give  strategic 
position  to  the  party.  New  York,  as  the 
pivotal  State,  received  chief  attention. 
The  work  was  so  effective  that  the  most 
strenuous  efforts  were  made  to  counter- 
act it  by  the  politicians  whose  interests 
were  endangered.  These  efforts  were 
eminently  unscrupulous;  the  Republican 
National  Committee  even  entered  form- 
ally into  a  scheme  to  procure  Mr.  St. 
John's  withdrawal  by  bribery.^  After 
the  election  this  undertaking  was  laid 
bare,  and  though  the  most  malignant 
charges  were  made  against  Mr.  St.  John 
it  was  proved  that  he  was  above  sus- 
picion. The  opposing  political  leaders 
did  not  venture  to  meet  the  issues  for 
wdiich  the  Prohibitionists  stood.  The 
Democrats,  it  is  true,  very  frankly  de- 
clared against  their  policy  whenever 
representative  Democratic  opinion  was 
sought,  but  without  discussing  the  prin- 
ciples involved.  The  Republicans  evaded 
tlie  question,  and  the  most  noteworthy 
attempt  to  answer  the  interrogations  wath 
which  they  were  ceaselessly  plied  was 
Mr.  Blaine's  deprecating  assertion  that 
Prohibition  should  be  regarded  as  a  State 
issue  and  should  not  have  a  place  in 
national  politics.     (See  p.  109.) 

The  party  was  strengthened  by  co-oper- 
ation from  certain  elements  of  voters  who 
conscientiously  opposed  both  Mr.  Cleve- 
land and  Mr.  Blaine  on  grounds  of  person- 
ality, and  who,  recognizing  in  Mr.  St. 
John   a   pure   man  and  in  his  cause  a 

>  See  the  "  Political  Prohibitiouist  for  1888,"  p.  34. 


movement  of  good  aspirations,  sustained 
the  Prohibition  ticket  because  (from 
their  points  of  view)  no  other  acceptable 
one  was  presented.  Prominent  among 
citizens  of  this  class  were  Dr.  Howard 
Crosby,  Judge  Noah  Davis,  Dr.  Theodore 
L.  Cuyler  and  Henry  H.  Faxon.  The 
influential  New  York  Independent  advo- 
cated Mr.  St.  John's  candidacy.  In 
Massachusetts,  New^  York  and  Vermont 
the  number  of  •'  independent  "  allies  was 
especially  large. 

Among  those  who  had  stood  before 
the  public  for  years  as  the  foremost 
champions  of  temperance  reform  the 
sentiment  in  behalf  of  St.  John  seemed 
to  be  overwhelming.  Of  course  there 
were  important  exceptions:  men  like 
Dr.  Daniel  Dorchester  and  women  like 
Mrs.  J.  Ellen  Foster  Avere  antagotiistic. 
Even  Neal  Dow,  who  had  been  the  can- 
didate of  the  party  in  1880,  was  known 
to  prefer  Mr.  Blaine."  But  as  a  class  the 
best-known  leaders  of  temperance 
opinion  Avere  so  nearly  united  for  the 
ticket  that  exceptions  excited  remark. 
On  the  other  hand  there  Avas  no  such 
strength  and  concert  of  feeling  among 
those  prominent  citizens  who,  while  not 
at  the  front  in  the  anti-liqtior  agitation, 
Avere  yet  sincere  sympatliizers  with  it  : 
these  individuals  were  generally  unwill- 
ing to  sacrifice  their  lifelong  political 
affiliations.  Most  of  the  temperance 
organizations  took  netitral  ground,  leav- 
ing their  members  free  to  vote  as  they 
chose  ;  for  these  organizations  existed 
for  edttcational  and  social  rather  than  for 
political  purposes.  But  many  of  the 
AVomait's  Christian  Temperance  Unions, 
foUoAving  tlie  example  of  their  national 
organization  (Avliich  had  done  so  much  to 
concentrate  the  demand  for  faithful 
political  support  of  Prohibition)  gave 
cordial  encouragement.  Highly  im- 
portant Avas  the  help  that  came  from  the 
churches.  Here  again  there  was  nothing 
like  unanimity,  and  there  is  no  dottbt 
that,  counting  the  clergymen  of  all  de- 
nominations, a  large  majority  Avere 
(avoAvedly  or  unavoAvedly)  opposed  to 
the  movement;  but  considering  the  in- 
tensity of  the  dislike  and  even  hatred 
Avith  Avhich  the  "  third "  party  was  re- 
garded in  most  communities  it  is  remark- 
able that  so  enthusiastic  and  so  aggress- 

2  Mr.  Dow,  however,  soon  returned  to  the  Prohibition 
party. 


Prohibition  Party.] 


5(3 


[Prohibition  Party. 


ive   a  championship  was  accorded  by  a 
very  large  element  of  ministers. 

This    memorable    campaign     brought 
fresh    vigor   to   the    Prohibition   press. 
The  first  number  of  the  Voice  was  issued 
"^Sept.    35,    1884.     After    the    November 
election  it  was  suspended  until  the  1st  of 
January,    188r),    and   since  that  date  its 
publication  has  been  continued  without 
interruption,  under  the  general  supervi- 
sion of  I.  K.  Funk,  D.D.,  and,  for  the  most 
of  the  time,  the  directing  editorship  of 
Mr.    E.    J.    Wheeler.     The    newspaper 
organs  of  the  party  that  were  in  exist- 
ence  previously   to   1884  illustrated  the 
difficulties  and  hardships  against  which 
the   pioneers   of   the   cause    contended. 
They  also  displayed  the  zeal,  the  singular 
perseverence  and  tenacity  and  the  devo- 
tion that  made  larger  results   possible. 
There  was  in  those  days  no  permanent 
constituency  of  voters  from  which  a  sup- 
port sufficient  to  maintain  an  expensive 
periodica]  advocating   political  Prohibi- 
tion   could    be    reliably   drawn;  conse- 
quently  most   of   the  journals   of    that 
period   were   local  in  scope,   circulation 
and  influence.    The  first,  unquestionably, 
to  formally  urge  the  creation  of  a  dis- 
tin(5tive   Prohibition  party,  was  the  Pe- 
niiisular  Herald,  published  and  edited  by 
Rev.  John  Russell  and  his  son,  Charles 
P.    Russell,    in   Detroit,    Mich.     It   was 
established  at  Romeo,  Mich.,  in  1864,  as 
a  temperance  paper,  and  removed  to  De- 
troit in  186G      Early  in  18(57  it  began  to 
show  reasons  for  the  Prohibition  party 
plan.     In    187;)    it    passed    into    other 
hands.     The  Delaware  Signal,  also  par- 
ticularly    deserving    of    mention,    was 
started  in  1873,  at  Delaware,  0.,  and  for 
many  years   was  conducted  by  Thomas 
Evans,  Jr.,  one  of  the  noblest  of  Ohio's 
Prohibitionists;  in  188G  it  was   merged 
with  the  New  Era  (Springfield,  0).   The 
National  Liberator,  another  early  news- 
paper of  the  party,  was  in  1884  consoli- 
dated with  the  Lever  (which  up  to  that 
time  had  been  a  Republican  temperance 
paper,   published  at  Grand  Rapids  and 
afterward  at  Detroit) ;  the  navf  journal, 
called  the  Lever  and  National  Liberator, 
under   the  management   of  J.   A.   Van 
Fleet,  was  issued  at  Chicago  and  became 
one  of  the  chief  defenders  of  the  new 
idea.      The    National    Reformer    (New 
York),  edited  by  A.  A.  Hopkins  and  W. 
McK.  Gatchell,  was  at  the  head  of  the 


Eastern  newspapers  committed  to  the 
programme ;  it  was  absorbed  by  the  Voice 
soon  after  the  campaign  of  1884.  The 
Witness  of  New  York,  a  general  religious 
weekly  with  a  great  circulation,  won  the 
lasting  gratitude  of  the  party  Prohibi- 
tionists by  espousing  their  principles  in 
the  St.  John  fight  and  adhering  to  them 
afterward;  the  popular  New  York 
I^ioneer  (George  R.  Scott,  editor)  was  an 
outgrowth  of  the  Witness.  To  even 
enumerate  the  noticeably  intelligent  and 
useful  Prohibition  journals  that  have 
sprung  up  since  1884  would  be  a  difficult 
task,  which  does  not  come  within  the 
scope  of  an  article  treating  of  outlines 
rather  than  minutiae.  It  is  enough  to  say 
that  the  number  of  these  periodicals  has 
steadily  increased,  and  is  now  probably 
in  the  neighborhood  of  250,  and  that 
among  them  are  fully  a  score  of  excep- 
tionally strong  and  aggressive  sheets,  of 
national  and  State  importance. 

The  following  are  the  votes  cast  for 
the  Prohibition  candidates  in  the  four 
years  beginning  with  1884: 


States. 


Presi- 
dent, 
1884. 


Alabama 

California 

Colorado 

Connecticut 

Delaware 

Florida 

Cieoriiia 

lllinoiH 

Indiana 

Iowa 

Kansas 

Kentucky 

Louisiana 

Maine 

Maryland 

Massachusetts. . . 

Michii,'an 

Minnesota 

Missouri 

Nebraska 

New  Hampshire. 

New  Jersey 

New  York 

North  Carolina. . 

Ohio 

Oregon 

Pennsylvania .. . . 

Rhode  Island 

Tennessee 

Texas 

Vermont 

Virsjinia 

West  Viriiinia. . . 
Wisconsin  


Totals 150,626 


61.3 

2,960 

761 

2,30.T 

64 

73 

168 

12,074 

3.028 

1,472 

4,495 

3,139 

328 

2,160 

2,837 

9,923 

18,403 

4,684 

2,153 

2,899 

1,570 

6,153 

84,999 

454 

11,069 

492 

15,283 

928 

1,1.31 

3,534 

1,752 

1.38 

939 

7,656 


1885. 


1,405 
39,40,5 


2,146 

4,714 

14,708 


4,445 

30,867 

28.681 

15,047 
1,200 


1886.    i     1887. 


151,223 


766 
6,432  : 
3..597' 
4,699  I 
7,835 

243' I 

19,766 

9,185 

518 

8.094 


3,873 
7,195 
8,251 

25,179 
8.966 
3,504 
8.175 
2,137 

19,808 

36.437 
4,1072 

28,982 
2,753' 

32,458 
2,585 

19,186 
1,541 

1,492 
17,089 


309 
8,390 


4,416 
10,945 
18,500 


7,359 

12,6062 
41,8.50 

29,706 

18,471 
1.895 


294,863    154,465 


'  Agsrerjates  on  Congressmen. 

"  Aggret^ates  on  members  of  Legislatures. 

Popular  vote  for  President  in  1884  :  Cleveland  (Dem.), 
4,874."98fi;  Blaine  (Rep.),  4.8.51,981;  Butler  (Greenb.), 
175,370;  St.  John  (,Proh.),  150,636. 

Thirty-four  of  the  38  States  yielded 
votes  in  1884,  the  missing  States  being 


Prohibition  Party.] 


574 


[Prohibition  Party. 


Arkansas,  Mississippi,  Nevada  and  South 
Carolina.  This  was  the  first  year  in  the 
history  of  the  party  in  which  it  had  an 
appreciable  following  in  the  South:  of 
the  16  States  constituting  the  so-called 
"Solid  South,"  13  gave  votes  to  St.  John 
aggregating  15,500.  There  was  a  marked 
advance  throughout  the  principal  States 
of  the  North.  New  York  decided  the 
Presidential  election  in  favor  of  Cleve- 
land, but  by  a  very  small  plurality 
(1,047) ;  and,  assuming  that  the  acces- 
sions to  the  Prohibition  party  came 
chiefly  from  the  Republicans,  it  is  evi- 
dent that  the  result  in  the  country  at 
large  would  have  been  reversed  if  no 
Prohibition  ticket  had  been  run.  In 
other  close  States  (Connecticut  and  New 
Jersey)  the  Prohibitionists  also  held  the 
balance  of  power.  In  several  instances 
the  votes  for  State  officers  were  signi- 
ficant: Missouri  gave  John  A.  Brooks 
(candidate  for  Governor)  10,426,  and  in 
Michigan  David  Preston,  the  prominent 
banker,  received  22,207;  in  Massachu- 
setts the  State  ticket  was  headed  by  the 
distinguished  Julius  H.  Seelye,  President 
of  Amherst  College,  but  his  vote  was 
only  8,581,  considerably  less  than  St. 
John's,  proving  that  the  Presidential 
candidate  was  supported  in  Massachu- 
setts by  many  citizens  who  did  not 
accept  the  creed  of  the  party. 

The  defeat  of  l^laine  caused  an  out- 
burst of  Republican  wrath  against  the 
Prohibitionists,  akin  to  the  violent  abuse 
that  was  heaped  on  the  Abolitionists  40 
years  before,  when  their  action  in  the 
State  of  New  York  deprived  Henry  Clay 
of  the  Presidency.  A  few  days  after  the 
election  the  New  York  Tribune  printed 
an  editorial  entitled  *'  Intemperate  Tem- 
perance Men,"  arraigning  the  partisans 
of  St.  John.  Bitter  persecutions  fol- 
lowed. The  Prohibition  leader  was 
burned  or  hanged  in  effigy  throughout 
the  country,  ministers  who  had  supported 
him  were  dismissed  from  their  pulpits, 
business  men  were  boycotted  and  saloons 
were  brought  back  to  Local  Option 
towns.  These  manifestations  of  intoler- 
ance became  less  frequent  as  time  passed, 
but  in  all  the  succeeding  years  the  Pro- 
hibitionists suffered  from  incendiary  and 
scurrilous  attacks.  The  temper  of  a 
large  element  of  Republicans  was  char- 
acteristically expressed  by  Mr.  Murat 
Halstead  in   the  Cincinnati  Commercial 


Gazette,  July  4,  1887 :  "  The  Republicans 
have  made  a  mistake  in  not  fighting  the 
St.  John  frauds  with  fire  and  brimstone, 
clubs,  pitchforks  and  butcher-knives." 

Preparations  were  speedily  made  for 
continuing  the  agitation.  A  National 
Conference  was  held  in  New  York, 
Jan.  7  and  8,  1885.  It  was  decided  to 
make  special  efforts  to  develop  the  party 
at  the  South,  in  promotion  of  one  of  its 
cardinal  ideas,  that  a  non-sectional  politi- 
cal organization  was  one  of  the  impera- 
tive needs  of  the  day.  Accordingly 
several  of  the  best  speakers  (notably 
A.  A.  Hopkins  and  Rev.  C.  H.  Mead) 
were  placed  in  the  Southern  States  and 
sent  there  to  renew  the  work  in  subse- 
quent years.  Attention  was  given  to 
the  strengthening  of  both  the  National 
and  State  Committees  of  the  party. 
Special  organizations  were  created,  the 
most  important  being  the  National  Pro- 
hibition Bureau  (organized  in  November, 
1885,  with  Gen.  Clinton  B.  Fisk  as  Presi- 
dent and  W.  McK.  Gatchell  as  Secre- 
tary), the  National  Inter-Collegiate  Pro- 
hibition Association  (organized  by  Mr. 
Walter  Tiiomas  Mills  but  abandoned 
after  some  months),  the  Junior  Prohi- 
bition Clubs  and  the  National  You'iig 
Men's  Prohibition  Association.  The 
Bureau  undertook  to  make  engagements 
for  speakers  and  performed  valuable 
service,  but  since  its  work  legitimately 
belonged  to  the  National  Committee  it 
was  discontinued  in  1889.  The  death  of 
John  B.  Finch  in  October,  1887,  was  a 
heavy  blow  to  the  party.  His  place  as 
Chairman  was  filled  in  November  of  the 
same  year  by  the  selection  of  Samuel 
Dickie  of  Michigan. 

Throughout  the  four  vears  follow- 
ing  the  St.  John  campaign  there  wiis 
an  increasing  realization  of  the 
value  of  solidification  and  discipline. 
Every  exertion  was  made  to  strengthen 
the  national  organization,  and  the  im- 
provement of  the  party's  position  and 
prospects  in  the  States  was  sought  not 
for  State  purposes  but  for  the  advance- 
ment of  the  national  cause.  Great  gen- 
erosity was  exhibited  by  individual  Pro- 
hibitionists, and  while  funds  were  never 
overabundant  the  financial  resources  at 
the  disposal  of  the  managers  became 
ampler  with  each  year. 

The  vote  polled  in  1885  was  cheering. 
In  11  States  a  strength  was  shown  that 


Prohibition  Party.] 


575 


[Prohibition  Party. 


exceeded  St.  John's  in  the  entire  Union. 
]5at  a  large  part  of  the  Kentucky  vote 
of  nearly  40,000  did  not  belong  prop- 
erly to  the  Prohibition  party  :  the  Re- 
publicans made  no  nominations  in  1887, 
and  a  great  many  of  them  supported  the 
Prohibition  candidate  (Judge  Fontaine 
T.  Fox)  rather  than  accept  the  Demo- 
cratic ticket  or  abstain.  It  is  probable 
that  the  normal  "  straight  "  Prohibition 
vote  of  Kentucky  in  this  year  did  not 
exceed  5,000,  and  if  this  is  true  the 
aggregate  in  the  11  States  was  not  above 
116,000.  Very  encouraging  was  the  ad- 
vance in  Ohio  from  11,0G9  to  28,081, 
gained  by  the  aggressive  canvass  of 
A.  B.  Leonard,  D.D.,  the  candidate  for 
Governor. 

In  1886  there  were  general  elections, 
and  the  party  was  represented  in  the 
returns  from  29  States  (Arkansas,  Geor- 
gia, Kentucky,  Louisiana,  Mississippi, 
Nevada,  South  Carolina,  Tennessee  and 
Virginia  being  the  nine  States  where  no 
Prohibition  candidates  were  run,  the 
failure  to  nominate  being  caused  in  most 
cases  by  the  fact  that  no  State  offi- 
cers, Init  only  Members  of  Congress,  were 
to  be  chosen).  The  balance  of  power  was 
held  in  14  States,  as  follows  :  California, 
Colorado,  Connecticut,  Delaware,  Indiana, 
Michigan,  Minnesota,  New  Hampshire, 
New  Jersey,  New  York,  Ohio,  Oregon, 
West  Virginia  and  Wisconsin.  In  the 
South  the  total  was  increased  to  44,328. 
Congressional  candidates  were  in  the  field 
in  209  districts.  The  marked  progress  in 
Michigan,  New  Jersey  and  Pennsylvania 
was  due  to  the  leadership  of  Samuel 
Dickie,  Clinton  B.  Fisk  and  Charles  S. 
AVolfe. 

In  1887,  with  11  States  contributing 
to  the  support  of  the  party,  the  record  of 
1885  was  surpassed.  The  most  inter- 
esting results  were  in  New  York,  which 
repeated  the  gain  that  had  been  made 
each  year  since  1883,  and  in  Ohio,  which 
again  increased  the  Leonard  vote. 

From  1888  to  1891.— After  the  election 
of  1884  it  was  a  common  remark  among 
the  advocates  of  the  Prohibition  party 
that  they  had  "  elected  their  issue  "  to  a 
conspicuous  place  in  national  politics. 
Their  hope  was  that  it  would  soon  be 
made  the  dividing  issue,  and  that  a  re- 
construction of  parties  would  be  accom- 
plished.    Many   believed  that    the    ex- 


pected result  would  come  to  pass  at  the 
Presidential  contest  of  1888.  But  the 
rising  interest  in  the  tariff  discussion 
interfered  with  their  plans.  The  aggres- 
sive low  tariff  message  sent  by  President 
Cleveland  to  Congress  in  December,  1887, 
plainly  showed  that  the  coming  battle 
would  be  fought  on  the  lines  there 
drawn.  From  the  fervor  with  which  the 
President's  attitude  was  defended  and 
the  vigor  with  which  it  was  attacked  it 
might  have  been  foreseen  that  the  con- 
sideration of  other  questions  would  be 
postponed  until  the  tariff  controversy 
should  be  definitely  adjusted.  Results 
demonstrated  that  the  confident  Prohibi- 
tionists undervalued  the  influence  of  the 
tariff  issue.  It  administered  a  check  to 
their  movement  whose  effects,  while  not 
immediately  apparent,  were  recognized 
after  the  election  of  1888. 

The  party  held  its  National  Conven- 
tion at  Indianapolis  on  the  30th  and  31st 
of  May.  Forty-two  States  and  Terri- 
tories, and  the  District  of  Columbia,  sent 
regularly-chosen  delegates,  numbering 
1,029 ;  the  States  of  Mississippi  and  South 
Carolina,  and  the  Territory  of  Wyoming, 
were  not  represented.  The  Temporary 
Chairman  was  Rev.  H.  A.  Delano  of 
Connecticut;  Permanent  Chairman,  John 
P.  St.  John  of  Kansas;  Secretaries,  Sam 
AV.  Small  of  Georgia,  J.  B.  Cranfill  of 
Texas,  Mrs.  Mattie'  McClellan  Brown  of 
Ohio  and  G.  F.  Wells  of  Minnesota.  By 
voluntary  subscriptions  a  campaign  fund 
in  excess  of  125,000  was  raised.  Samuel 
Dickie  was  continued  as  Chairman  and 
Samuel  D.  Hastings  as  Treasurer  of  the 
National  Committee,  and  J.  B.  Hobbs  of 
Illinois  was  made  Secretary.  The  nomi- 
nations for  President  and  Vice-Presi- 
dent were  given,  respectively,  to  Gen. 
Clinton  B.  Fisk  of  New  Jersey  and 
John  A.  Brooks  of  Missouri.  The  fol- 
lowing is  the  platform : 

"  The  Prohibition  party,  in  National  Conven- 
tion assembled,  acknowledging  Almighty  God 
as  the  source  of  all  power  in  government,  do 
hereby  declare  : 

"1.  That  the  manufacture,  importation,  ex- 
portation, transportation  and  sale  of  alcoholic 
beverages  should  be  made  public  crimes,  and 
prohibited  as  such. 

"2.  That  such  Prohibition  must  be  secured 
through  Amendments  to  our  National  and  State 
Constitutions,  enforced  by  adequate  laws 
adequately  supported  by  administrative  author- 
ity ;  and  to  this  end  the  organization  of  the  Pro- 


Prohibition  Party.] 


570 


[Prohibition  Party. 


hibition  party  is  imperatively  demanded  in  State 
and  Nation. 

"3.  That  any  form  of  license,  taxation  or 
regulation  of  the  liquor  traffic  is  contrary  to 
good  government  ;  that  any  party  which  sup- 
ports regulation,  license  or  taxation  enters  into 
alliance  with  such  traffic  and  becomes  the  act- 
ual foe  of  the  State's  welfare,  and  that  we 
arraign  the  Republican  and  Democratic  parties 
for  their  persistent  attitude  in  favor  of  the 
license  iniquity,  whereby  they  oppose  the  de- 
maud  of  the  people  for  Prohibition, and,  through 
open  complicity  with  the  liquor  crime,  defeat 
the  enforcement  of  law. 

"  4.  For  the  immediate  abolition  of  the  Inter- 
nal Revenue  system,  whereby  our  National 
Government  is  deriving  support  from  our  great- 
est national  vice. 

"5.  That  an  adequate  public  revemie  being 
necessary,  it  may  properly  be  raised  by  import 
duties  ;  but  import  duties  should  be  so  reduced 
that  no  surplus  shall  be  accumulated  in  the 
Treasury,  and  that  the  burdens  of  taxation  shall 
be  removed  from  foods,  clothing  and  other  com- 
forts and.  necessaries  of  life,  and  imposed  on 
such  articles  of  import  as  will  give  protection 
both  to  the  manufacturing  employer  and  pro- 
ducing laborer  against  the  competition  of  the 
world. 

"6.  That  the  right  of  suffrage  rests  on  no 
mere  circumstance  of  race,  color,  sex  or  nation- 
ality, and  that  where,  from  any  cause,  it  has 
been  withheld  from  citizens  who  are  of  suitable 
age,  and  mentally  and  morally  qualilied  for  the 
exercise  of  an  intelligent  ballot,  it  should  be 
restored  by  the  people  through  the  Legislatures 
of  the  several  States,  on  such  educational  basis 
as  they  may  deem  wise. ' 


'  There  was  a  ])iotraoterl  controversy  over  this  declara- 
tion, both  in  the  Committee  on  Kesolutions  and  in  the 
Convention.  Woman  SulTrage  had  long  been  adisturbins; 
question  in  the  party.  From  the  first  the  principle  of 
Woman  Suffrage  had  been  Indorsed  in  the  platforms,  and 
emphasis  had  been  given  to  former  utterances'  after  the 
reorganization  of  1882  and  the  alliance  with  the  Woman's 
Christian  Temperante  Union.  It  was  generally  felt  that 
the  party  owed  much  of  its  growth  to  the  assistance 
coming  from  this  important  body  of  women.'  and  there 
was  a"dis]iosition  to  grant  all  tiiat  was  desired  by  its 
leaders.  This  sympathetic  tendency  was  strengthened  by 
a  belief,  entertained  by  a  very  large  element  of  Prohibi- 
tionists, that  the  demand  for  the  ballot  for  women  had  a 
righteous  basis,  and  that  the  Prohibition  cause  would  be 
much  stronger  at  the  i)olls  if  the  women  were  permitted 
to  vote.  But  the  party  contained  a  factor  of  anti- 
Woman  Suffragists  and  a  larger  factor  opposed  on 
grounds  of  expediency  to  championship  of  the  move- 
ment.    These  factors  had  able  leaders. 

In  the  Committee  on  Resolutions  Miss  Frances  K. 
Willard,  President  of  the  National  Woman's  Christian 
Temperance  Union,  insisted  on  a  renewal  of  the  Woman 
Suffrage  plank  of  1884  and  an  additional  declaration  in 
behalf  of  a  Woman  SuffraL'e  Amendment  to  the  Federal 
Constitution.  The  opposition  contended  for  strict  neu- 
trality. After  long  discussion  the  resolution  given  above 
was  framed  as  a  compromise,  and  a  paragraph  was  added 
at  the  end  of  the  platform  to  soothe  the  anti-Suffragists. 
But  John  M.  Olin  of  Wisconsin  brought  in  a  minority 
resoUition,  as  follows: 

"  We  believe  that  the  right  of  equal  suffrage  to  woman 
is  one  that  should  be  settled  by  the  several  States  accord- 
ing to  the  public  sentiment  in  those  States;  and  we 
l)romise  as  a  party  that  as  rapidly  as  we  come  into  power 
we  will  submit  this  question  to  a  vote  of  the  people  in  the 
several  States  to  be  settleil  by  them  at  the  ballot-box." 

The  decision  was  then  left  with  the  t'onvention.  which, 
after  a  fervid  and  t)rilliant  debate  (for  which  see  the 
Voice,  .June  7,  I8881,  re.iected  the  Olin  resolution. 
Twenty-eight  votes  were  counted  in  support  of  it. 


"7.  That  civil  service  appointments  for  all 
civil  offices,  chiefly  clerical  in  their  duties, 
should  be  based  upon  moral,  intellectual  and 
physical  qualifications,  and  not  upon  party  ser- 
vice or  party  necessity. 

'•  8.  For  the  abolition  of  polygamy  and  the 
establishment  of  uniform  laws  governing  mar- 
riage and  divorce. 

"  9.  For  prohibiting  all  combinations  of  cap- 
ital to  control  and  to  increase  the  cost  of  prod- 
ucts for  popular  consumption. 

•'10.  For  the  preservation  and  defense  of 
the  Sabbath  as  a  civil  institution,  without  op- 
pressing any  who  religiously  observe  the  same 
on  any  other  than  the  first  day  of  the  week. 

"It.  That  arbitration  is  the  Christian,  wise 
and  economical  method  of  settling  national  dif- 
ferences, and  the  same  method  should,  by  judi- 
cious legislation,  be  applied  to  the  settlement 
of  disputes  between  large  bodies  of  employes 
and  their  employers  ;  that  the  abolition  of  the 
saloon  would  remove  the  burdens  moral,  physi- 
cal, pecuniary  and  social,  which  now  oppress 
labor  and  rob  it  of  its  earnings,  and  would 
prove  to  be  a  wise  and  successful  way  of  pro- 
moting labor  reform,  and  we  invite  labor  and 
capital  to  iniite  with  us  for  the  accomplishment 
thereof  ;  that  monopoly  in  laud  is  a  wrong  to 
the  people,  and  the  public  lands  should  be  re- 
served to  actual  settlers  ;  and  that  men  and 
women  should  receive  equal  wages  for  equal 
work. 

"  12.  That  our  immigration  laws  should  be 
so  enforced  as  to  prevent  the  introduction  into 
our  country  of  all  convicts,  inmates  of  other  de- 
pendent institutions,  and  others  physically  inca- 
pacitated for  self-support,  and  that  no  person 
should  have  the  ballot  in  any  State  who  is  not  a 
citizen  of  the  United  States. 

"13.  Recognizing  and  declaring  that  Pro- 
hibition of  the  liquor  traffic  has  become  the 
dominant  issue  in  national  politics,  we  invite  to 
full  party  fellowship  all  those  who,  on  this  one 
dominant  issue,  are  with  us  agreed,  in  the  full 
belief  that  this  party  can  and  will  remove  sec- 
tional dilferenccs,  promote  national  tmity,  and 
insure  the  best  welfare  of  our  entire  land." 

Additional  Resolutions. 

"  Resot-ved,  That  we  hold  that  men  are  bom 
free  and  equal,  and  should  be  made  secure  in  all 
their  civil,  legal  and  political  rights. 

"  Resoi-ved,  That  we  condemn  the  Demo- 
cratic and  Republican  parties  for  persistently 
denving  the  right  of  self-government  to  the 
600,000  people  of  Dakota." 

Groat  energy  and  zeal  characterized 
the  Fisk  and  Brooks  campaign.  The  Na- 
tional Committee  had  its  headquarters  in 
New  York,  and  all  the  chief  States  were 
systematically  canvassed.  The  expenses 
of  the  Committee  (as  shown  by  an  item- 
ized statement)  aggregated  133,397.96.* 
The  }^(iice  raised  from  its  readers  funds 
that  enabled  the  publishers  to  send  that 
paper  to  the  60,000  clergymen  of  the 
country  and  (for  several  weeks)  to  500,000 

«  Political  Prohibitionist  for  1889.  p.  24. 


Prohibition  Party.] 


577 


[Prohibition  Party. 


farmers.  The  attacks  upon  the  party  were 
more  artfully  managed  than  in  any 
])revious  contest.  Tiie  Anti-)Saloon  Re- 
l)ublicans,  who  had  made  organized 
efforts  since  188G  to  win  back  the  Prohi- 
bition vote  to  the  liepublican  party, 
<jperated  a  campaign  bureau,  and  a 
"  Woman's  Kepublican  League,"  headed 
by  Mrs.  J.  Ellen  Foster,  made  special  at- 
tempts to  counteract  the  political  in- 
tiuence  of  the  Woman's  Christian  Tem- 
perance Union.  In  New  York  the 
Republican  candidate  for  Governor  con- 
ducted an  active  campaign  on  the  High 
License  issue  and  appealed  with  remark- 
able urgency  for  temperance  support, 
the  object  being  (as  he  admitted  after- 
ward) to  save  the  national  ticket  of  his 
party  by  breaking  the  ranks  of  the  Pro- 
hibitionists. The  Boutelle  resolution  of 
the  National  Republican  platform  (see 
Republican  Pakty)  was  accepted  by 
many  temperance  people  as  justifying 
continued  action  with  the  Republicans. 
The  weapons  of  persecution  and  slander 
were  also  freely  used:  numerous  Prohi- 
bition meetings  were  dispersed  and  other 
outrages  were  committed.  It  was  per- 
sistently charged,  as  usual,  that  the  Pro- 
hibition party  was  in  alliance  with  the 
iJemocrats  and  was  sustained  by  Demo- 
cratic money.  The  New  York  Tribune, 
after  giving  utterance  to  this  charge,  was 
challenged  by  Chairman  Dickie  to  sub- 
stantiate it,  and  although  Mr.  Dickie 
oifered  to  pay  $5,000  upon  the  presenta- 
tion of  proof  that  would  be  satisfactory 
to  fair-minded  Republicans,  the  Tribune 
submitted  no  proof  and  did  not  even 
notice  the  challenge.' 

In  every  State  but  South  Carolina 
there  were  ballots  for  Fisk  and  Brooks. 
While  the  total  was  less  than  at  the  State 
elections  of  18SG  the  effort  to  diminish 
the  importance  of  the  party  had  utterly 
failed.  The  shrinkage  in  New  York  has 
already  been  explained;  the  loss  of 
12,000  in  New  Jersey  and  nearly  as  many 
in  Pennsylvania  was  accounted  for  by 
the  unsteadiness  of  the  temporary  con- 
verts of  1886  and  the  strong  feeling  on 
the  tariff  question.  But  the  comparative 
firmness  of  the  party  in  States  like  Ohio, 
Massachusetts,  Michigan  and  Connec- 
ticut, notwithstanding  the  fierce  and  in- 
sidious assaults,  and  the  gains  in  Indi- 
ana, Nebraska,    Illinois  and    especially 

'  Ibid,  p.  39. 


Minnesota,  raised  hopes  for  the  future. 
To  the  Presidential  vote  of  LS88  should 
be  added  local  votes  in  Territories — 1,3156 
in  Dakota,  148  in  Montana  and  1,137  in 
Washington, — bringing  the  total  up  to 
252,500.  The  Congressional  vote  (2i» 
States)  Avas  242,977,  and  the  vote  for 
State  candidates  (22  States)  was  218,044. 
Votes  of  1888,  1889  and  1890: 


States. 


Alabama 

Arkansas 

California 

Colorado 

Connecticut 

Delaware 

Florida 

Georj:ia 

Illinois 

Indiana 

Iowa 

Kansas 

Kentucky 

Louisiana 

Maine 

Maryland 

Massachusetts . . . 

MicluKan 

Minnesota 

Mississippi 

Missouri 

Montana 

Nebraska 

Nevada 

New  Hampshire. 

New  Jersey 

New  York 

North  Carolina. . 

Ohio 

Oregon 

Pennsylvania 

Khode"  Island. .. . 

Tennessee 

Texas 

Vermont 

Virsinia 

Washington 

West  Virginia. . . 
Wisconsin 


Presi- 

1 

dent. 

1889.1 

1890.2 

1888. 

mz 

.... 

1,380 

614 

.... 

5,701 

10,073 

2.191 

2,218 

1,089 

4.i'34 

3,413 

400 

250 

417 

.... 

1,808 

.... 

21,69.5 

22,.306 

9.881 

12,106 

.S,550 

1,353 

1,646 

6.779 

1.2.30 

5.225 

3,3.51 

4,;mo 

160 

2.691 

2.981 

4,767 

3,741 

3,927 

8.701 

15,108 

1.3,554 

20.942 

16.380 

28.651 

15,.316 

8,424 

218 

4,539 

'.)88 
389 

9,429 

5,821 

3,676 

41 

.... 

1,594 

1,375 

7,9-39 

6.8,53 

8,425 

30,231 

26,763 

33,621 

2.787 

24,3.56 

26,504 

23,837 

1,677 

2,856 

20.947 

22,401 

10,108 

1,251 

1,346 

1,830 

5,969 

11,082 

4,749 

1,986 

1,460 

1,161 

1,682 



2,126 
2,819 

1,084 

.  ■  >  . 

898 

14,277 

11,246 

249,945 

131,839 

239,783 

'  Compiled  from  the  World  and  Tribune  Almanacs. 
2  Compiled  by  the  Editor  of  the  Voice. 

Popular  vote  for  President  in  1888:  Cleveland  (Dem.), 
5,.536.242;  Harrison  (Kep.1,  5,440,708;  Fisk  (Prob.), 
249,945;  Streeter  (Union  Labor),  146,836;  Cowdrey  (United 
Labor),  3,073;  Curtis  (American),  1,591;  all  others,  9,845. 

In  the  unimportant  contests  of  1889 
gains  in  some  States  were  offset  by  losses 
in  others :  the  most  satisfactory  results 
were  the  advances  in  Massachusetts, 
Ohio  and  Pennsylvania,  and  the  most 
discouraging  one  was  a  further  decline  in 
New  York.  In  1890  the  overwhelming 
defeat  of  the  Repul)licans,  attributed 
chiefly  to  their  [McKinley]  tariff  legisla- 
tion, indicated  anew  that  the  opportunity 
to  divide  the  country  for  and  against 
Prohibition  would  be  deferred  until  the 
tariff  issue  should  be  settled.  But  the 
party  retained  its  respectable  strength  in 
all   "sections   of  the  country,  and    the 


Prohibition   Party.] 


578 


[Prohibition  Party. 


growth  in  sncli  States  as  Indiana,  Ten- 
nessee, Michigan,  New  York  and  New 
Jersey  was  proof  of  unwavering  con- 
stancy. 

The  national  organization  has  been 
steadily  at  work  since  1888.  Mr.  Dickie 
has  remained  at  its  head.  Mr.  Hobl:)s 
was  succeeded  as  Secretary  by  John 
Lloyd  Thomas.  The  lines  of  principle 
and  policy  as  laid  down  in  1888  have  not 
been  changed.  A  National  Conference 
was  held  in  Louisville,  Feb.  13  and  14, 
1889,  at  which  new  plans  and  methods 
were  discussed  and  the  partisans  and 
opponents  of  the  Woman  Sulfrage  plank 
exchanged  opinions,  but  no  departure 
was  taken. 

KESULTS. 

Since  the  Prohibition  party  has  not 
risen  to  joower  in  any  State  and  has  never 
secured  a  foothold  in  Congress  it  has 
acted  on  public  policy  only  in  an  indirect 
manner.  No  original  legislation  has  been 
passed  by  it,  and  its  representatives  have 
not  been  charged  with  administrative 
res]3onsibility. 

There  is  much  controversy  as  to  the 
general  tendency  of  the  influence  that  it 
has  exercised.  With  great  heat  the  ene- 
mies of  the  party  declare  that  it  is  "power- 
less for  good  but  powerful  for  evil,"  that 
it  spreads  and  perpetuates  dissensions 
among  the  friends  of  temperance,  alien- 
ates or  discourages  political  leaders  who 
are  favorably  inclined,  belittles  the  Pro- 
hibition cause  in  the  public  estimation 
by  its  failure  to  control  more  than  a 
liandful  of  votes,  defeats  sympathizers 
and  elects  friends  in  many  close  consti- 
tuencies, etc.  All  these  criticisms  seem 
to  have  an  element  of  justice — provided 
separate  instances  are  examined  without 
regard  for  general  bearings.  But  such 
conclusions  are  not  so  readily  suggested 
when  a  broad  view'  is  taken. 

Let  us  look  first .  at  the  Prohibition 
States — those  that  have  had  Proliibitory 
laws  for  part  or  all  of  the  time  since  the 
party  was  founded. 

In  MasmrJiusetts  the  miserable  conse- 
quences of  the  license  act  of  1868  devel- 
oped so  vigorous  a  demand  for  its  repeal 
(see  p.  528)  that  the  Prohibition  statute 
was  re-enacted  in  18G9.  Yet  the  new 
uieasure  (as  amended  in  1870)  was  fatally 
defective,  for  it  excepted  malt  liquors. 
The   temperance  leaders,  with  ujen  like 


Wendell  Phillips  and  Judge  Pitman  at 
their  head,  instantly  organized  a  Pro- 
hibition party  which  polled  large  votes 
at  the  State  elections  of  1870  and  1871 : 
in  1873  the  Legislature  eliminated  the 
beer-exemption  provision.  Moreover,  the 
improved  law  was  enforced  with  signal 
success.  (See  pp.  528-9.)  The  new  party 
then  disappeared,  and  no  candidates 
were  presented  iu  its  name  in  1872,  1873 
and  1874.  Therefore  "^he  destruction  of 
the  measure  in  1875  could  not  have  been 
occasioned  in  any  degree  by  "  third 
party  "  interference. 

In  Connecticut  the  Prohibitory  law 
was  removed  from  the  statutes  before 
the  Prohibition  party  had  an  existence 
in  that  State. 

In  Rhode  Island  the  enactment  of  the 
law  of  1874  was  brought  about  by  power- 
ful pulilic  seiitiment.  There  was  no 
Prohibition  party  to  "divide  the  friends 
of  the  cause,"  yet  the  act  went  under  in 
a  single  year.  The  Republican  Prohi- 
bitionists made  a  factional  endeavor  to 
save  it  and  afterward  to  restore  it,  bolt- 
ing their  party  repeatedly  and  thus  set- 
ting an  instructive  precedent.  The  Con- 
stitutional Amendment  of  1886,  like  the 
law  of  1874,  was  enacted  in  obedience  to 
the  earnest  desire  of  the  people.  In  the 
momentous  political  struggles  of  1887, 
1888  and  1889  the  Prohibition  party  was 
never  an  important  factor,  for  its  vote 
was  always  less  than  2,000.  It  could  not 
have  been  responsible  for  the  repeal  of 
1889.  It  is  more  probable  that  the  in- 
significance of  the  distinctive  Prohibition 
vote  quieted  all  misgivings  that  the  polit- 
ical conspirators  might  have  had  and 
emboldened  them  to  fulfill  the  desires  of 
the  liquor  element. 

In  Mlchifian  the  Prohibitory  laAv  was 
so  weak  that  its  repeal  (1875)  was  hardly 
a  loss  to  the  cause.  It  is  a  coincidence 
that  the  Prohibition  party  was  also  weak. 
Its  operations  did  not  give  the  politicians 
concern,  and  the  fact  that  they  repealed 
the  measure  instead  of  strengthening  it 
cannot  be  explained  by  blaming  the 
"third  "  party. 

In  Maine  there  was  no  independent 
Prohibition  vote  of  any  consequence 
until  1884  ;  in  1886  this  vote  was  in- 
creased. In  1887  the  most  important 
amendments  (providing  for  prima  facie 
evidence  and  raising  penalties)  that  had 
been  added  to  the  Maine  law  in  manv 


Prohibition  Party.]  579  [Prohibition  Party. 

years  were  enacted.  The  campaigns  of  the  Prohibition  ticket  in  1877.  (See 
tlie  Prohibition  party  have  been  ener-  p.  105.)  After  the  Amendment  had  been 
getically  conducted  in  Maine,  chiefly  on  annulled  by  the  Supreme  Court  a  dis- 
the  issue  of  the  enforcement  of  the  law  position  to  ignore  the  will  of  the  people 
and  for  the  cultivation  of  national  Pro-  was  manifested  by  the  partisan  managers, 
hibition  sentiment,  but  there  are  no  but  at  an  imposing  assemblage  of  the 
signs  that  the  agitation  has  injured  the  Prohibitionists  of  the  State  it  was  delib- 
support  of  the  law.  On  the  other  hand  erately  declared  that  a  political  revolt 
there  has  been  a  positive  improvement,  would  follow  if  the  desired  legislation 
The  party,  however,  has  no  considerable  were  not  granted,  and  this  put  an  end  to 
influence  in  Maine,  and  Republican  all  j)lots.  There  is  no  doubt  that  the 
supremacy  is  not  threatened  by  it.  This  fear  of  a  Prohibition  rising  operated  to 
may  or  may  not  help  to  account  for  the  deter  the  Republican  leaders  from  mak- 
violations  permitted  in  certain  cities —  ing  concessions  to  the  liquor-sellers  at 
violations  that  bring  the  policy  into  dis-  the  legislative  session  of  1889. 
credit  and  greatly  weaken  fhe  influence  In  South  Dakota  the  work  which  led 
which  Maine's  example  should  have  for  up  to  the  successful  Amendment  cam- 
the  general  advancement  of  Prohi-  paign  of  1889  was  inaugurated  with  the 
bition.  formation  of  the  Prohibition  party  and 
In  Vermont  also  the  Prohibition  party  the  canvass  made  under  the  auspices  of 
is  feeble.  The  law,  too,  is  relatively  that  party  in  the  winter  of  1888-9.  The 
feeble  (at  least  so  far  as  penalties  are  certainty  that  a  formidable  Prohibition 
concerned),  and  its  enemies  are  aggressive  party  would  take  the  field  unless  the 
and  hopeful.  Republicans  should  espouse  the  move- 
In  ISfew  Hampshire  for  years  the  ment  was  the  chief  cause  of  the  accept- 
statute  has  been  less  satisfactory  than  ance  of  the  issue  by  the  Republican  State 
that  of  any  other  Prohibition  State.  Convention.  (See  p.  126.) 
Beer  was  formerly  exempted  and  the  In  the  license  and  Local  Option  States 
manufacture  is  still  permitted.  The  we  find  that,  as  a  rule,  the  most  notable 
dominant  party,  being  able  to  retain  the  concessions  (or  attempted  concessions)' 
temperance  vote  without  perfecting  the  to  temperance  demands  have  been  made 
measure,  has  performed  little  work  of  where  the  Prohibition  party  has  reached 
value.  For  ten  years  up  to  1884  the  important  development.  The  "  third "  ■ 
Prohibition  party  scarcely  had  an  ex-  party  vote  of  more  than  16,000  in  Massa- 
istence  in  New  Hampshire.  The  most  chusetts  in  1877  was  responded  to,  soon 
useful  enforcement  amendment  (pro-  afterward,  by  the  enactment  of  the  most 
viding  for  injunction)  was  added  in  comprehensive  Local  Option  act  of  the 
1887,  the  year  after  the  Prohibition  vote  Union.  Contrast  this  act  with  the 
reached  its  highest  point.  weaker  one  of  Connecticut,  a  State  in 
In  Kansas  the  Constitutional  Amend-  which  the  Prohibitionists  were  slow  to 
niBut  was  unexpectedly  adopted,  and  resort  to  independent  tactics.  In  Georgia, 
for  five  years  the  statute  built  upon  it  where  nearly  all  the  counties  are  under 
was  not  satisfactorily  executed.  During  Prohibition  in  consequence  of  local  ma- 
nearly  the  whole  of  that  period  there  jorities,  there  has  been  no  Prohibition 
was  no  Prohibition  party  in  the  State,  party,  and  no  progress  has  been  made 
Tlie  growth  of  the  organization  was  not  beyond  Local  Option.  Similar  comments 
attended  by  disasters  but  by  a  uniformly  may  be  made  on  the  situation  in  several 
increasing  stringency  of  enforcement,  other  Southern  States.  The  most  im- 
It  is  not  claimed  that  the  success  of  the  portant  era  of  liquor  legislation  since 
law  since  1884  is  to  be  credited  to  the  ac-  the  Civil  War  is  that  beginning  with 
tivity  of  the  Prohibition  party,  but  (to  say  1884,  the  year  in  which  the  national 
the  least)  the  work  of  the  party  has  not  vote  of  the  Prohibitionists  first  assumed 
been  detrimental  to  the  cause  in  Kansas,  considerable  proportions.^  It  is  true 
In  the  case  of  Iowa  it  is  demonstrable  most  of  this  legislation  is  of  a  compromise 
that  the  submission  of  the  Constitutional  nature  and  of  little  real  value,  but  it 
Amendment,  which  led  to  its  adoption  reflects  a  growth  of  interest  that  is  re- 
and  to  the  passage  of  the  present  statute,  markable. 

was  a  direct  result  of  the  large  vote  given  >  see  the  "  Political  Prohibitionist  for  1888,"  p.  01. 


Prohibition  Party.] 


580 


[Public  Sentiment. 


Far  from  dividing  the  temperance 
forces  or  reducing  their  organized 
strength,  the  growth  of  the  Prohibition 
party  has  been  accompanied  by  a  great 
increase  in  the  membership  of  all  tem- 
perance societies,  a  deepening  of  convic- 
tion and  a  harmonizing  of  purpose. 

Yet  it  is  said  that  friendly  individuals 
associated  with  other  parties,  men  of 
high  character  and  sincere  devotion  to 
the  temperance  reform — sometimes  men 
who  would  do  much  of  practical  value 
for  the  Prohibition  movement  if  chosen 
to  official  position,  are  made  to  suffer  by 
the  indiscriminate  warfare  which  the 
Prohibition  party  wages,  while  the  votes 
drawn  off  from  these  deserving  candi- 
dates decide  elections  in  favor  of  disrep- 
utable men,  subservient  tools  of  the 
saloon.  Thus  (it  is  asserted)  the  chance 
of  accomplishing  positive  good,  even 
though  local  and  temporary  good,  is 
thrown  away  for  the  sake  of  upholding  a 
faction  that  cannot  possibly  achieve  suc- 
cess. But  most  of  these  complaints  are 
based  on  assumptions  that  experience 
does  not  justify :  individual  "  good  men  " 
who  accept  nominations  from  license 
parties  are  nearly  always  under  restraints 
that  destroy  their  capabilities  and  neu- 
tralize their  intentions.  In  view  of  the 
bitter  disappointments  that  have  so  fre- 
quently attended  fusions  and  indorse- 
ments, and  the  probability  that  an  ad- 
vantage gained  by  such  methods  will  be 
of  brief  duration,  it  is  felt  by  the  Pro- 
hibitionists to  be  more  important  to 
maintain  their  organization  and  their 
high  standard  than  to  enter  into  shifting 
or  experimental  alliances  against  the 
solid  forces  of  the  rum  power.  Besides, 
the  discipline  of  defeat  is  not  necessarily 
unwholesome  in  its  influence  upon  halt- 
ing friends.  And  if  the  general  effect  of 
separate  party  action  is  to  promote  the 
larger  interests  of  the  cause  (as  the  ad- 
vocates of  the  party  fully  believe),  there 
are  strong  reasons  for  uniformity  of  ac- 
tion. 

In  the  Northern  States  the  accessions 
to  the  party  come  principally  from  the 
Republicans,  in  the  Southern  States  from 
the  Democrats.  Conditions  have  pre- 
vented general  development  in  the  South : 
the  intense  earnestness  with  which  a 
large  majority  of  the  whites  in  that  sec- 
tion insist  upon  maintaining  the  Demo- 
cratic  party,  under  existing  social  and 


political  conditions,  operates  against  a 
wide  acceptance  of  the  propaganda  there. 
To  obtain  some  indication  of  the  relative 
representation  of  former  Republicans  and 
former  Democrats  in  the  party,  the  Voice, 
in  1888,  solicited  correspondence  from  its 
readers.  Cards  were  received  from  2,429 
voting  members  of  the  Prohibition  party, 
of  whom  1,856  were  former  Republicans, 
468  were  former  Democrats,  50  were  for- 
mer Greenbackers,  19  had  been  Indepen- 
dents and  36  had  never  voted  any  other 
ticket  than  the  Prohibition.  Less  than 
200  replies  were  from  the  South. ^ 

Protestant  Episcopal  Church. — 

No  official  action  touching  the  temper- 
ance question  is  taken  by  this  denomina- 
tion. But  the  Church  Temperance  So- 
ciety (see  p.  81)  has  the  approval  of  the 
Bishops,  At  the  General  Convention  of 
the  House  of  Bishops  in  Philadelphia  in 
1883,  the  following  declaration  was  sub- 
mitted and  signed : 

"  Inasmuch  as  intemperance  is  an  evil  of  such 
magnitude  as  to  call  for  special  effort  for  its 
suppression,  in  the  interests  of  social  order,  of 
morality  and  of  religion;  and 

''Inasmuch  as  the  Society  known  as  the 
Church  Temperance  Society  recognizes  the 
grace  of  God  as  the  only  sufficient  remedy  for 
such  an  evil,  the  church  of  God  as  the  only- 
sufficient  instrument  for  its  suppression,  and  the 
word  of  God  as  the  only  sufficient  guide  in  the 
prosecution  of  temperance  reform ;  and 

' '  Inasmuch  as  the  said  Society  rests  upon  the 
Scriptural  principle  that  temperance  is  the  law 
of  the  gospel  and  total  abstinence  a  rule  of  ex- 
pediency, a  measure  of  necessity  or  an  act  of 
self-abnegation  in  certain  cases,  thus  avoiding 
any  breach  of  the  great  law  of  Christian  liberty ; 
and 

''Inasmuch  as  the  said  Society  during  the 
past  two  years  and  a  half  has  borne  faithful 
witness  to  these  important  principles  and  has 
labored  zealously  in  the  pursuit  of  its  great 
aims, 

"We.  Bishops  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church  of  the  United  States,  hereby  express 
our  cordial  sympathy  with  the  Church  Tem- 
perance Society  and  commend  its  work  to  the 
attentive  consideration  of  the  whole  church." 

In  1890  60  of  the  63  Bishops  were 
among  the  Vice-Presidents  of  the  Church 
Temperance  Society. 

Public  Sentiment. — Among  the  Mo- 
hammedan nations,  where  the  voice  of  in- 
stinct is  supported  by  religious  precepts 
and  legal  statutes,  public  opinion  is 
almost   unanimous   in   recognizing    the 

I  The  Voice,  July  12,  18S8. 


Public  Sentiment.] 


581 


[Rechabites. 


evils  of  the  alcohol  vice  and  the  necessity 
for  the  suppression  of  the  liquor  tratfic. 
True  science  has  never  failed  to  second 
the  protests  of  nature,  and  among  the 
twelve  principal  nations  of  Christendom 
the  opposition  to  the  outrage  of  the 
poison  traffic  may  be  said  to  be  strictly 
proportioned  to  the  degree  of  general  in- 
telligence. Still  it  is  well  to  recognize 
the  full  extent  of  the  adverse  bias,  and 
the  prejudice  against  the  enactment  of 
Prohibitory  laws  may  be  traced  to  the 
influence    of    the    following     principal 


agencies 


1.  Government  Abettors. — In  several 
countries  of  continental  Europe  the  traffic 
in  alcoholic  liquors  is  directly  encouraged 
by  Governments  deriving  a  large  percent- 
age of  their  revenues  from  the  sale  of  in- 
toxicating beverages  and  thus,  as  it  were, 
coining  gain  from  the  misery  of  their  tax- 
paying  subjects.  In  Russia,  as  the  trav- 
eller Kohl  informs  us,  villagers  refusing  to 
join  the  topers  of  the  public  tavern  are 
liable  to  be  "  denounced  as  bad  patriots, 
because  the  Government  of  our  father, 
tlie  Czar,  gets  its  main  income  from  the 
sale  of  vodka." 

2.  Literary  Influences. — By  means  of 
pamphlets,  circulars,  partisan  journals 
and  numberless  advertisements  the  re- 
presentatives of  the  liquor  traffic  manage 
to  influence  public  opinion  at  an  expense 
which  demonstrates  their  dread  of  the 
hostile  sentiment  gaining  force  from  year 
to  year.  In  the  United  States  alone 
the  annual  expenditure  for  direct  and 
indirect  advertisements  of  that  sort  has 
been  estimated  to  exceed  $50,U0lU)00. 

3.  Political  Intrigues. — The  political 
influence  of  the  rumsellers'  party  has 
rarely  failed  to  secure  them  the  con- 
nivance of  a  class  of  politicians  who,  as  a 
Southern  temperance  orator  forcibly  ex- 
presses it,  "  would  at  any  time  sign  a 
private  agreement  with  the  Prince  of 
Darkness  to  import  voters  from  hell  at  so 
much  per  legion,  unless  the  debt  could  be 
cancelled  by  a  reciprocation  of  political 
services." 

4.  Hereditary  Passions. — The  morbid 
appetency  created  by  the  habitual  abuse 
of  alcoholic  beverages  is,  to  a  large  de- 
gree, hereditarv,  and  there  are  families 
who  have  transmitted  a  passion  for 
special  poisons  to  inany  successive  gen- 
erations of  tlieir  descendants.  It  would 
be  exaggeration  to  say  that  any  human 


being  was  ever  born  with  an  unconquer- 
able penchant  for  alcoholic  excesses,  but 
the  inherited  bias  will  always  assert  its 
influence  in  making  its  subject  apt  to 
yield  to  slight  temptations  and  rather  dis- 
inclined to  entirely  renounce  the  use  of 
noxious  stimulants  even  in  deference  to 
the  most  urgent  appeals. 

But  the  steady  increase  of  general 
intelligence,  aided  by  the  revival  of 
health-worship  and  the  progress  of 
social  science  and  rational  hygiene, 
guarantee  the  ultimate  victory  of  the 
temperance  movement.  "  If  anyone," 
says  Goldwin  Smith,  "  doubts  the  general 
preponderance  of  good  over  evil  in 
human  nature,  he  has  only  to  study  the 
history  of  moral  crusades.  The  enthu- 
siastic energy  and  self-devotion  with 
which  a  great  moral  cause  inspires  its 
soldiers  have  always  prevailed,  and 
always  will  prevail,  over  any  amount  of 
self-interest  and  material  power  arrayed 
on  the  other  side." 

Felix  L.  Oswald. 

Rechabites  are  supposed  to  have  been 
originally  not  Israelites  but  Kenites,  who 
became  identified  with  the  Jews.  They 
were  descended  from  Jonadab,  the  son  of 
Eechab,  and  constituted  a  kind  of  hered- 
itary clan  and  religious  order,  noted  for 
its  piety  and  the  abstinence  that  its 
members  practiced.  They  wholly  ab- 
jured wine  and  other  luxuries,  lived  in 
tents,  planted  no  vineyards  and  would 
not  even  cultivate  grain.  Their  tenets 
are  thus  stated  by  the  jirophet  Jeremiah 
( Jer.  35 :  G-7) :  "  But  they  said,  we  will 
drink  no  wine:  for  Jonadab  the  son  of 
Eechab  our  father  commanded  us,  say- 
ing. Ye  shall  drink  no  wine,  neither  ye 
nor  your  sons  for  ever :  neither  sluill  ye 
build  house  nor  sow  seed  nor  plant  vine- 
yard, nor  have  any:  but  all  your  days  ye 
shall  dwell  in  tents;  that  ye  may  live 
many  days  in  the  land  where  ye  are  strang- 
ers." For  their  faithfulness  to  the  com- 
mands of  their  father  Jonadab — who  had 
assisted  Jehu  in  overthrowing  Baal-wor- 
ship (2  Kings  10: 15-17)— they  were  pro- 
mised by  Jeremiah  (Jer.  35  :  19)  : 
"  Therefore  thus  saith  the  Lord  of 
Hosts,  the  God  of  Israel:  Jonadab  the 
son  of  Rechab  shall  not  want  a  man  to 
stand  before  me  for  ever,"  which  promise 
was  fulfilled  by  their  admission  to  the 
tribe  of  Levi. 


Rechabites,  Independent  Order.]  582 


[Rectification. 


Rechabites,  Independent  Order 

of. — The  name  includes  two  distinct  Or- 
ders, having  totally  diiferent  laws,  rituals, 
etc.,  but  recently  united  nnder  a  "  bond 
of  union,"  by  which  members  of  either 
Order  are  allowed  to  visit  the  other. 
The  older  and  larger,  known  as  the  Sal- 
ford  Unity,  was  founded  at  Salford, 
Lancashire,  Eng.,  in  August,  1835,  being 
the  oldest  of  the  modern  secret  temper- 
ance societies.  It  is  an  incorporated 
total  abstinence  beneficial  society,  paying 
weekly  sick  benefits  in  sums  proportion- 
ate to  the  dues  contributed  by  the  different 
members,  and  funeral  benefits  determined 
iu  like  manner.  The  present  membership 
of  this  branch,  comprising  three  divi- 
sions— for  men,  women  and  children — 
is  about  150,000,  and  it  is  rapidly  increas- 
ing. The  governing  powers  are  vested 
in  District  Tents,  meeting  annually  and 
semi-annually,  and  in  a  High  Tent  or 
High  Moveable  Conference,  meeting  bi- 
ennially, composed  of  representatives 
from  the  District  Tents.  Those  inter- 
ested are  referred  to  Henry  Wardropper, 
H.C.R.,  No.  13  Azalea  Terrace,  South 
Sunderland,  Eng.,  for  further  informa- 
tion. 

"  The  Independent  Order  of  Rechabites 
in  North  America  "  has  nothing  iu  com- 
mon with  the  other  Order  except  the  name, 
the  titles  of  some  of  the  officers  and  the 
pledge.  This  Order  was  founded  in 
New  York  City,  Aug.  2,  18-i2,  and  there- 
fore it  is  one  year  older  than  the  Sons 
of  Temperance,  and  the  oldest  secret 
total  abstinence  organization  in  America. 
At  first  it  grew  rapidly,  its  Tents  num- 
bering above  1,000;  but  in  1856  it  began 
to  decline  and  since  the  Civil  War  it  has 
never  recovered  its  former  strength, 
its  place  being  now  largely  taken  by 
the  Independent  Order  of  Good  Templars 
and  the  Sons  of  Temperance. 

The  objects,  as  given  in  the  constitu- 
tion, are  "  Mutual  benefit  in  the  exercise 
of  temperance,  fortitude  and  Justice; 
securing  to  its  membership  sympathy 
and  relief  in  times  of  sickness  and  dis- 
tress, and  in  the  event  of  death  the 
decent  observance  of  necessary  funeral 
obsequies ;  and  it  is  based  upon  and  seeks 
the  extension  of  the  principles  of  total 
abstinence  from  all  intoxicating  drinks." 
The  membership  is  iu  three  classes: 
Primary  Tents,  composed  of  "white 
males  of  good  moral  character,  not  under 


16  years  of  age,  believing  in  the  exist- 
ence and  omnipotence  of  God,  and  will- 
ing to  sign  our  pledge ;  "  Woman's  Tents, 
composed  of  *'  white  Avomen  and  girls  of 
good  moral  character  and  not  less  than 
12  years  of  age,"  with  any  member  in 
good  standing  in  a  male  Primary  Tent 
who  may  be  admitted  by  ballot,  and 
Junior  Tents,  composed  of  "■  white  youths 
of  good  moral  character,  who  believe  in 
a  Supreme  Being  and  are  willing  to  sign 
our  pledge  of  total  abstinence,  who  are 
between  the  ages  of  10  and  18  years." 
The  pledge  is  as  follows: 

' '  I  hereby  declare  that  I  will  abstain  from  all 
intoxicating  liquors,  inchidiug  wine,  beer  and 
cider ;  and  I  will  not  give  or  ott'er  them  to 
others,  except  in  religious  ordinances,  or  when 
prescribed  in  good  faith  by  a  medical  practi- 
tioner ;  I  will  not  engage  in  the  tratfic  of  them, 
and  in  all  suitable  ways  will  discountenance  the 
use,  manufacture  and  sale  of  them  ;  and  to  the 
utmost  of  my  power  I  will  endeavor  to  spread 
the  principles  of  total  abstinence  from  all  in- 
toxicating liquors. " 

All  power  is  vested  in  Grand  Tents, 
having  control  of  the  different  States, 
and  a  High  Tent,  with  supreme  control. 
The  High  Tent  meets  annually,  and  is 
composed  of  one  representative  from  each 
Primary,  Woman's,  Junior  and  Grand 
Tent  in  good  standing,  and  Past  High 
Representatives  who  continue  in  good 
standing. 

Since  the  war  factional  strife  has  pre- 
vented satisfactory  growth,  the  present 
membership  numbering  scarcely  a  hun- 
dred Tents,  with  a  few  thousand  mem- 
bers, scattered  over  Connecticut,  New 
York,  Pennsylvania,  Maryland,  Vir- 
ginia, North  Carolina,  Georgia,  Ohio, 
Kansas,  West  Virginia,  Illinois,  Michigan 
and  the  District  of  Columbia.  In  August, 
1888,  a  large  faction  that  had  broken 
away  from  the  original  Order,  under  an 
organization  and  incorporation  of  its 
own,  was  induced  to  give  up  its  incor- 
poration and  return.  At  present  the 
Rechabites  are  slowly  increasing  in  this 
country,  and  under  good  management 
may  in  time  regain  their  old  footing. 
Frank  D.  Russell. 

Rectification  is  repeated  distillation, 
conducted  for  the  purpose  of  refining 
and  concentrating  alcoholic  s^^irits. 
Strong  and  pure  alcohol  cannot  be  pro- 
duced by  a  single  act  of  distillation,  for 
a  large  percentage  of  water,  with  very 
noxious  impurities  (such  as  fusel  oil  and 


Rectification.] 


5S3 


[Reformed  Drinkers. 


the  higher  alcohols),  are  generated.  To 
eliminate  these  redistillation,  care- 
fully managed,  is  essential.  Beverage 
liquors  (whisliey,  rum,  etc.)  are  not  recti- 
tied,  because  rectification  destroys  the 
characteristic  flavors  and  other  qualities 
of  special  varieties  of  liquor,  yielding 
only  clear  alcohol,  which  has  an  unattrac- 
tive taste.  These  beverages  (if  honestly 
obtained)  are  purified  by  being  retained 
in  the  warehouse  two  or  three  years  ;  for 
with  the  lapse  of  time  chemical  changes 
occur  in  the  liquor,  destroying  the  fusel 
oil,  etc.  But  the  largest  part  of  the 
spirits  used  for  drinking  purposes  is  not 
systematically  aged.  This  is  notorious. 
And  a  very  considerable  quantity  of  it  is 
not  carefully  rectified.  This  is  equally 
uotorious.  In  the  fiscal  year  ending 
June  30,  1889,  there  were  91,133,550 
gallons  of  tax- paid  spirits  produced  in 
the  United  States.  In  the  same  year  only 
<>1,013,9GG  gallons  were  classed  as  "recti- 
fied," while  the  quantity  reserved  by  dis- 
tillers for  conversion  into  genuine  aged 
liquors  was  probably  not  above  15,000,000 
g  dlons.^ 

It  is  of  course  impossible  to  determine 
how  large  a  percentage  of  the  61,013,966 
gallons  classed  as  "rectified"  in  the 
Internal  Revenue  report  was  only  par- 
tially or  nominally  rectified.  But  there 
are  the  best  of  reasons  for  declaring  that 
(aside  from  the  portion  intended  for 
medicinal  uses,  etc.)  very  little  of  it  under- 
went rectification  at  all.  Candid  experts 
admit  the  truth  of  this  statement,  con- 
fessing that  almost  the  entire  amount  of 
beverage  si)irits  is  the  product  of  but  a 
single  distillation,  or  at  the  most  of  two 
distillations — the  second  one  being  con- 
ducted more  for  reducing  the  percentage 
of  water  than  for  getting  rid  of  the 
impurities. 

Besides,  it  is  well  known  that  most  of 
the  "  rectifiers' "  permits  issued  by  the 
United  States  officers  are  procured  by 
wholesale  liquor-dealers  and  others  whose 
especial  business  is  to  mix,  compound, 
blend  and  "  cut "  liquors.  The  Internal 
Revenue  laws  define  a  "  rectifier,"  first, 
as  one  who  "rectifies,  purifies  or  refines 
distilled  spirits  or  wines  by  any  jjrocess 


'  This  estimate  of  the  quantity  so  reserved  is  based  on 
the  statement  of  -lohn  M.  Atlierton,  before  a  Consres- 
sional  Committee  in  1888,  that  the  avera2;e  annual  product 
of  honest  Kentuclcy  whiskey  would  not  exceed  10,000.- 
000  or  12,000,000  ^'a lions,  and  that  the  amount  of  liquor 
a^'ed  in  other  States  than  Kentucky  was  small. 


of'/cr  Ihaii  by  oricjinal  and  continnons 
distillation  from  mash,  wort  or  wash, 
through  continuous  closed  vessels  and 
pipes,"  or  second,  as  a  "wholesale  or 
retail  liquor-dealer  who  has  in  his  posses- 
sion any  still  or  leach-tub,  or  who  keeps 
any  other  apparatus  for  the  purpose  of 
refining  in  any  manner  distilled  spirits," 
or  third,  any  "  person  who,  toithout 
rectifying,  purifying  or  refining  distilled 
spirits,  shall,  by  mixing  snch  spirits, 
wine  or  other  liquor  witli  any  materials, 
manufacture  any  spurious,  imitation  or 
compound  liquors  for  sale,  under  the 
name  of  whiskey,  brandy,  gin,  rum, 
wine,  spirits,  cordials  or  wine-bitters,  or 
any  other  name."  "  The  annual  United 
States  tax  on  rectifiers  is  $200  if  the  prod- 
uct is  as  much  as  500  barrels  (reckoning 
40  gallons  to  the  barrel),  or  6100  if  less 
than  500  barrels.  If  the  distillers  were 
solicitous  for  the  purity  of  their  stuff 
they  would  naturally  combine  rectifying 
with  their  business  ;  but  thev  do  not. 
In  the  fiscal  year  1888-9,  while  ^;^\^^ 
distilleries  were  operated  only  1,368  per- 
sons paid  the  rectifier's  special  tax.  And 
most  of  these  1,368  were  not  rectifiers  at 
all,  but  mere  compounders,  who  took  the 
corrupt  product  of  the  distilleries,  and, 
without  redistilling  it,  mixed  it  with 
other  liquors,  neutralized  the  objection- 
able taste  with  chemicals  and  sold  the 
doctored  article  to  the  dealers. 

[See  also  Distillation  and  Spirituous 
Liquors.] 

Reformed  Drinkers. — Among  tem- 
perance people  in  general  there  is  a  ten- 
dency to  overrate  the  difficulty  of  total  ab- 
stinence, but  it  is  equally  certain  that  the 
difficuly  of  complete  reform  is  apt  to  be 
considerably  underrated.  A  reformed 
toper  Jias  lost  the  advantages  of  the  un- 
seduced  child  whose  disposition  to  heed 
the  warnings  of  its  parents  and  pre- 
ceptors is  supported  by  the  voice  of  in- 
stinct— the  intuitive  aversion  to  the 
first  taste  of  the  intoxicating  poison. 
After  that  instinct  has  been  once  per- 
verted the  morbid  craving  for  strong 
drink  may  be  overcome  by  years  of 
resolute  abstinence,  but  the  abnormal 
diathesis  remains  in  a  latent  form,  and 
is  apt  to  awaken  at  the  slightest  encour- 
agement.    "  What   takes   place    in    the 

2  Internal  Revenue  Laws  (1889),  Section  3244. 


Reformed  Drinkers.] 


584  [Reformed  Presbyterian  Church. 


ptomach  of  a  reformed  drunkard,"  says 
])r.  Sewall,  "  of  the  individual  who  aban- 
dons the  use  of   all  intoxicating  drink  ? 
The    stomach,    by   that     extraordinary 
self-restorative  power  of  nature,  gradu- 
ally resumes  its  natural   api^earance.    Its 
engorged    blood-vessels  become  reduced 
to  their  .original  size,  and  a  few  weeks  or 
months  will  accomplish  this  renovation, 
after  which  the  individual  has  no  longer 
any  suffering  or  desire  for  alcohol.     It 
is  nevertheless  true,  and  should  ever  be 
borne  in  mind,  that  such  is  the  sensibil- 
ity  of    the    stomach    of    the   reformed 
drunkard  that  a  repetition  of  the  use  of 
alcohol  in  the  sliglitest  degree,  ami  in 
any  form,  under  any  circumstance,  re- 
vives   the   appetite.     The   blood-vessels 
again    become    dilated  and  the  morbid 
sensibility  of  the  organ  is  reproduced.'' 
"  People  sometimes  wonder,"  says  Dr. 
Isaac   Jennings,    "  why   such   and   such 
men,  possessing  great  intellectual  power 
and  firmness  of  character  in  other  re- 
spects, cannot  drink  moderately,  and  not 
give  themselves  up  to  drunkenness.  They 
become   drunkards   by    law — fixed,   im- 
mutable law.     Let  a  man  with  a  consti- 
tution as  perfect  as  Adam's  undertake  to 
drink  alcohol,  moderately  and  persever- 
ingly,  with  all  the  caution  and  deliberate 
deterinination  he  can  command,  and  if 
he  could  live  long  enough  he  would  just 
as   certainly   become    a    drunkard — get 
to  a  point  where  he  could  not  refrain 
from  drinking  to  excess — as  he  would  go 
over  Niagara   Falls  when    placed   in   a 
canoe  in  the  river  above  the  falls  and 
left  to  the  natural  ojieration  of  the  cur- 
rent.     And   proportionately   as   he  de- 
scended the  stream  would  his  alcoholic 
attraction    for   it   increase,   so   that    he 
would  find  it  more  and  more  difficult  to 
get   ashore,   until    he   reached   a   point 
where  escape   was   impossible.     And    if 
this  m'an,  after   having   commenced  his 
progress  down  the  river  of  intemperance, 
were  to  go  ashore  at  any  time,  or  from 
any  point  in  the  river,  and  remain  on 
shore  a  longer  or  shorter  period  and  then 
take  to  his  canoe  again,  he  would  start 
afresh  for  the  falls  at  the  very  point  from 
which  he  left.     For  even  when  the  in- 
ebriate  abandons   all   use    of    alcoholic 
drinks  and  the  economy  of  life  immedi- 
ately 2)uts  in  operation  a  train  of  action 
that  generally  results  in  an  apparent  re- 
novation of   the  system,  a  deep,   latent 


and  serious  evil  of  some  kind  neverthe- 
less remains." 

Hence  the  fallacy  of  the  compromisers 
who  recommend  the  milder  alcoholics 
as  antidotes  for  the  brandy  vice.  For  a 
time  the  surrogate  may  bring  a  delusive 
relief,  but  it  cannot  satisfy  the  thirst  for 
the  stronger  tonic  and  only  serves  to 
perpetuate  the  stimulant-diathesis — the 
poison-hunger,  which  will  sooner  or  later 
revert  to  the  wonted  object  of  its  pas- 
sion. Unswerving  loyalty  to  the  pledge 
of  total  abstinence  is  not  at  first  the 
easiest,  but  is  eventually  the  surest  way; 
for  even  after  weeks  of  successful  re- 
sistance to  the  importunities  of  the 
tempter  a  mere  spark  may  rekindle  the 
smothered  flames.  The  road  to  intem- 
perance is  paved  with  mild  stimulants, 
and  the  only  safe,  consistent  and  effective 
plan  of  reform  is  total  abstinence  from 
all  stimulating  jjoisons. 

Felix  L.  Oswald. 

Reformed  Episcopal   Church. — 

The  latest  deliverance  of  its  General 
Council  on  the  liquor  question  was  in 
May,  1887,  in  the  following  words  (unan- 
imously adopted) : 

"  Whereas,  Tlie  enormous  traffic  in  intoxicating 
liquors  is  one  of  the  overshadowing  evils  of  the 
day  and  a  great  obstacle  to  the  advancement  of 
Christ's  kingdom  on  earth;  and 

"  Whereds,  It  is  painfully  true  that  many 
professing  Christians  countenance  or  fail  to  op- 
pose this  great  iniquity;  therefore  be  it 

"Resolved,  (1)  That  all  Christian  men  and 
women  should,  both  by  precept  and  example, 
uphold  the  cause  of  temperance,  and  do  all  in 
their  power  to  suppress  the  liquor  traffic.  (2) 
That  no  Christian  can  consistently  engage  in 
this  traffic,  or  profit  by  it,  either  by  leasing  or 
letting  the  buildings  in  which  to  carry  it  on,  or 
otherwise.  (3)  That  no  Christian  can  consist- 
ently aid  this  traffic  by  signing  petitions  for 
license  to  engage  in  the  same." 

Reformed  Presbyterian  Church. 

— The  General  Synod,  representing  the 
Keformed  Presbyterian  Church  of  North 
America,  during  its  national  session  held 
in  May,  1889,  declared  : 

' '  The  Reformed  Presbyterian  Church  has  in 
the  past  stood  forth  as  the  champion  of  op- 
pressed humanity.  In  the  last  great  conflict 
she  was  among  the  foremost  to  lift  her  voice  to 
condemn  slavery  and  to  demand  the  liberation 
of  the  slave.  A  mightier  conflict  is  \\\\o\\  this 
nation  to-day.  .  .  .  Inaction  is  opposition.  AVe 
arraign  the  liquor  traflic  as  the  '  crime  of 
crimes,'  as  the  overshadowing  curse  of  the  age, 
as  the  prolific  parent  of  vice,  misery  and  pau- 
perism.    We  arraign  the  saloon  as  the  peculiar 


Republican  Party.] 


585 


[Republican  Party. 


institution  of  the  devil,  as  the  inveterate  foe  of 
God  and  man,  as  the  school  of  anarchy,  as  a 
constant  menace  to  the  home,  the  church  and 
the  State  ;  as  an  uncontrolled  and  uncontroll- 
able power  that  has  successfully  defied  all  re- 
strictive laws.  The  logic  of  experience  has 
demonstrated  that  there  is  but  one  elTective 
remedy,  namely,  extermination — Prohibition." 

Republican  Party.^ — Founded  for 
the  great  object  of  opposing  the  aggres- 
sions of  the  slave  power  the  Republican 
party,  if  viewed  in  the  light  of  its  origi- 
nal purpose,  is  Jnstly  characterized  as 
"  the  party  of  moral  ideas "  and  "  the 
grand  old  party."  Even  if  there  is  any 
lingering  disposition  to  doubt  the  wis- 
dom of  its  early  aims  or  the  beneficence 
of  the  resulting  achievements,  none  will 
deny  that  it  sprang  from  noble  impulses. 
With  a  peculiar  hope,  therefore,  a  very 
large  element  of  people  have  looked  to 
this  party  to  promote  the  legislative  and 
other  political  interests  of  the  temper- 
ance reform  as  old  questions  became 
settled  and  the  issue  against  the  liquor 
traffic  became  clearly  defined.  With  a 
determination  amounting  to  passionate 
skepticism  multitudes  have  refused  to  be- 
lieve that  the  accumulating  evidences  of 
the  party's  hostility  have  indicated  its 
real  tendency  or  have  called  for  a  with- 
drawal of  their  co-operation.  Mitch  has 
been  expected,  and  an  extraordinary 
faith  has  been  reposed  in  the  party : 
these  facts  suggest  that  here  is  an  organ- 
ization which  has  uniformly  had  a  large 
constituency  of  progressive  men  and 
upon  which  grave  responsibilities  have 
been  laid;  consequently  that  the  record 
made  by  it  should  be  analyzed  with 
scrupulous  candor.  For  such  an  organiza- 
tion great  allowances  may  be  made;  but 
on  the  other  hand  if  the  net  resiilts  are 
unsatisfactory  and  the  outlook  for  the 
future  is  discouraging  conclusions  must 
be  stated  with  an  emphasis  proportioned 
to  the  disappointment. 

The  name  ''Republican"  was  first 
borne  by  the  Anti-Federalist  party  in 
the  early  days  of  our  national  existence. 
The  Federalists  stood  for  a  strong  cen- 
tralized Government,  the  Anti-Federal- 
ists or  Repitblicans  for  the  sovereignty 
of  the  States.  The  name  was  retained 
until  1805,  when  it  was  dropped  and  the 
new  one,  "  Democratic  party,"  was  taken. 
Afterward  the  supporters  of  John  Quincy 

•  The  editor  is  indebted  to  Rev.  I.  Viliars,  D.D. 


Adams  and  opponents  of  Andrew  Jack- 
son called  themselves  "  National  Repub- 
licans "  until  their  organization  became 
known  as  the  Whig  party.  Thus  botli 
the  Democrats  and  Whigs,  who  divided 
the  control  of  the  Government  for  many 
years,  were  originally  called  Repub- 
licans. 

THE   SLAVERY    ISSUE. 

The  downfall  of  the  Whig  party  came 
at  the  Presidential  election  of  1852.  It 
was  foreshadowed  by  the  utter  rejection 
by  its  leaders  of  the  demand  that  it 
should  resist  the  encroachments  of  slav- 
ery, and  by  their  willingness  to  speak  in 
quite  as  strong  terms  against  the  Anti- 
Slavery  policy  as  even  the  Democrats 
employed.  This  is  strikingly  shown  by 
a  comparison  of  the  Democratic  and 
Whig  National  platforms  of  1852 : 

From  the  Democratic  From  the  Whig  Na- 

National   Platform,  tioiml  Platform,  adopt- 

adopted   at  Baltimore,  ed  at  Baltimore,  Juris 

June  1,  1852:  16,  1853: 

"Kesolved,  .  .  .  "Resolved,  That 
That  all  efforts  of  the  series  of  acts  of 
Abolitionists  or  others,  the  31st  Congress 
made  to  induce  Con-  known  as  the  Com- 
gress  to  interfere  with  promise  measures  of 
the  questions  of  slav-  1850 — the  act  known 
ery,  or  to  take  incip-  as  the  Fugitive  Slave 
icnt  steps  in  relation  law  included, — are  re- 
thereto,  are  calculated  ceived  and  acquiesced 
to  lead  to  the  most  in  by  the  Whig  party 
alarming  and  danger-  of  the  United  States 
ous  consequences,  and  as  a  settlement  in  pri±i- 
that  all  such  efforts  ciple  and  substance  of 
have  an  inevitable  ten-  the  dangerous  and  ex- 
dency  to  diminish  the  citing  questions  which 
happiness  of  the  people  they  embrace  ;  and  so 
and  to  endanger  the  far  as  they  are  con- 
stability  and  perma-  cerned  we  will  main- 
uence  of  the  Union,  tain  them  and  insist 
and  ought  not  to  be  on  their  strict  enforce- 
countenauced  by  any  ment  till  time  and  ex- 
friend  of  our  political  perience  shall  demon- 
institutions,  strate  the  necessity  of 

"Resolved,     That  further    legislation    to 

the  foregoing  proposi-  guard  against  the  eva- 

tion  covers,  and  is  in-  sion  of  the  laws  on  the 

tended  to  embrace,  the  one     hand,     and     the 

whole  subject  of  slav-  abuse  of  their  powers 

ery   agitation   in   Con-  on  the  other — not  im- 

gress;     and    therefore  pairing    their    present 

the   Democratic   party  efficiency;  and  we  dey)- 

of  the  Union,  standing  recate  all  further  agi- 

on   this   national   plat-  tation  of  the  question 

form,    will    abide    by  thus  settled,  as  danger- 

and  adhere  to  a  faithful  ous  to  our  peace,  and 

execution    of    the    act  will  discountenance  all 

known    as    the    Com-  efforts   to   continue  or 

promise     measures    of  renew  such  agitation, 

the  last  Congress — the  whenever,       wherever 

act  for  reclaiming  f ugi-  and   however   the    at- 

tives  from  service    or  tempt    may  be  made; 


Republican  Party,] 


58G 


[Republican  Party. 


lubor  included,   which     and  we  will   maintain 
act,  being  designed  to    this  system  us  essential 
carry   out   an    express    to    the   nationality   of 
provision   of  the   Con-    the   Whig    party   and 
stitution,    cannot  with    the    integrity    of     the 
tidelity  thereto  be  re-     Union." 
])ealed  nor  so  changed 
as  to  destroy  or  impair 
its  efficiency. 

"Resolved,  That 
the  Democratic  party 
will  resist  all  attempts 
at  renewing,  in  Con- 
gress or  out  of  it,  the 
agitation  of  the  slavery 
question,  under  what- 
ever shape  or  color  the 
attempt  may  be  made. " 

The  meu  most  interested  in  maintaining 
the  policy  thus  defined  regarded  the 
Democratic  party  with  greater  confidence 
tlian  the  Whig,  and  consequently  the 
the  latter  was  overwhelmed.  A  period 
of  seeming  calm  followed,  and  for  a  time 
it  was  really  thought  that  the  question 
was  disposed  of.  The  calm  was  broken 
by  the  passage  of  the  Kansas-Nebraska 
bill,  the  repeal  of  the  Missouri  Com2:)ro- 
mise  and  the  virtual  concession  of  full 
freedom  to  the  slaveholders  to  introduce 
their  system  into  all  the  Territories  and 
erect  new  slave  States.  The  passage  of 
the  Kansas-Nebraska  bill  was  secured 
May  27,  1854,  after  four  months  of  dis- 
cussion. "  The  advocates  and  opponents 
of  slavery,"  says  Mr.  Blaine,  "  were  in- 
vited to. a  trial  of  strength  on  the  public 
domain  of  the  United  States.  No  pre- 
vious Anti-Slavery  excitement  bore  any 
comparison  to  that  which  spread  over  the 
North  as  the  discussion  progressed,  and 
especially  after  the  bill  became  a  law.  It 
did  not  merely  call  forth  opposition — it 
produced  amost  a  frenzy  of  wrath  on  the 
part  of  thousands  and  tens  of  thousands 
in  both  the  old  parties  who  had  never 
before  taken  any  part  whatever  in  the 
Anti-Slavery  agitation."  '  And  speaking 
of  the  political  developments  of  the  agi- 
tation Mr.  Blaine  says:  "A  new  party 
sprang  into  existence,  composed  of  Anti- 
Slavery  Whigs  and  Anti-Slavery  Demo- 
crats. The  latter  infused  into  the  ranks 
of  the  new  organization  a  spirit  and  an 
energy  which  AVhig  traditions  could 
never  inspire.  The  same  name  was  not 
at  once  adopted  in  all  the  States  in  1854, 
but  by  the  ensuing  year  there  was  a  gen- 
eral recognition  throughout  the  North 

'  Twenty  Years  of  Congress,  vol.  1,  pp.  115-10. 


that  all  who  intended  to  make  a  serious 
fight  against  the  pro-slavery  Democracy 
would  unite  under  the  flag  of  the  Repub- 
lican party.  In  its  very  first  efi'ort,  with- 
out a  compact  organization,  without  dis- 
cipline, it  rallied  the  Anti-Slavery  senti- 
ment so  etfectually  as  to  carry  nearly  all 
the  free  States  and  to  secure  a  plurality 
of  the  House  of  Representatives.  The 
indignation  of  the  people  knew  no 
bounds.  Old  political  landmarks  disap- 
peared and  party  prejudices  of  three  gen- 
erations were  swept  aside  in  a  day."  ^ 

But  the  Republican  party  did  not  at 
once  propose  the  abolition  of  slavery  or 
even  the  curtailment  of  the  institution 
as  it  then  existed  in  the  Southern  States. 
At  its  first  National  Convention  (Phila- 
delphia, June  17,  185G)  the  attitude  of 
the  party  was  thus  defined : 

"  Resolved,  That  with  our  republican  fathers 
we  hold  it  to  be  a  self-evident  truth  that  all 
men  are  endowed  with  the  inalienable  rights  to 
life,  liberty  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness,  and 
that  the  primary  object  and  ulterior  designs  of 
our  Federal  Government  were  to  secure  the.se 
rights  to  all  persons  within  its  exclusive  juris- 
diction; that  as  our  republican  fathers,  when 
they  had  abolished  slavery  in  all  our  national 
territory,  ordained  that  no  person  should  be 
deprived  of  life,  liberty  or  property  without 
due  process  of  law,  it  becomes  our  duty  to 
maintain  this  provision  of  the  Constitution 
against  all  attempts  to  violate  it  for  the  purpose 
of  establishing  slavery  in  any  Territory  of  the 
United  States,  by  positive  legislation  prohibiting 
its  existence  and  extension  therein.  That  we 
deny  the  authority  of  Congress,  of  a  Territorial 
Legislature,  of  any  individual  or  association  of 
individuals,  to  give  legal  existence  to  slavery  in 
any  Territory  of  the  United  States  while  the 
present  Constitution  shall  be  maintained. 

"  Resolved,  That  the  Con.stitution  confers 
upon  Congress  sovereign  power  over  the  Ter- 
ritories of  the  United  States,  for  their  govern- 
ment; and  that  in  the  exercise  of  this  power  it 
is  both  the  right  and  the  duty  of  Congress  to 
prohibit  in  the  Territories  those  twin  relics  of 
barbarism — polygamy  and  slavery." 

To  prohibit  the  extension  of  slavery 
was  the  fundamental  object  of  the  Repub- 
lican party.  There  was  no  retreat  from 
that  position,  but  the  views  of  tlie  lead- 
ers became  more  and  more  aggressive. 
Thus,  Abraham  Lincoln  in  his  famous 
speech  at  Springfield,  111.,  June  17,  1858, 
accepting  the  nomination  for  United 
States  Senator  from  Illinois,  uttered 
these  memorable  words : 

"'A  house  divided  against  itself  cannot 
stand.'  I  believe  this  Government  cannot  en- 
dure permanently  half  slave  and  half  free.     1 

2  Ibid,  pp.  117-18. 


Republican  Party.] 


08^ 


[Republican  Party. 


do  not  expect  the  Union  to  be  dissolved,  I  do 
not  expect  the  liouse  to  fall,  .  .  .  but  I  do 
expect  it  will  cease  to  be  divided.  It  will  be- 
come all  one  thing,  or  all  the  other.  Either  the 
opponents  of  slavery  will  resLst  the  further 
spread  of  it,  and  place  it  where  the  public 
luind  will  rest  in  the  belief  that  it  is  in  the 
»;ourse  of  ultimate  extinction,  or  its  advocates 
will  push  it  forward  till  it  shall  become  alike 
lawful  in  all  the  States,  old  as  well  as  new.  To 
meet  and  overthrow  the  power  of  that  dynasty- 
is  the  work  now  before  all  those  who  would 
prevent  that  consummation.  This  is  what  we 
have  to  do." 

The  accession  of  tlio  Republicans  to 
power  in  18G0  and  the  secession  of  the 
slave  States  were  followed,  in  dne 
course  of  time,  by  the  abolition  of  slavery 
in  the  District  of  Columbia  and  the 
Territories  (1802),  the  Emancipation 
[-•roclamation  '  (Jan.  1,  18G3),  the  com- 
plete subjugation  of  the  Confederacy 
(18G5),  the  adoption  of  the  13th  (18(36), 
Uth  (18G8)  and  15th  (1870)  Amend- 
ments to  the  Federal  Constitution,  and 
the  reconstruction  of  the  revolted  section. 
During  the  2-1  years  from  1861  to  1885 
the  party  had  unbroken  possession  of  the 
(Tovernment,  although  President  John- 
son's Administration  was  not  in  harmony 
with  its  programme  and  the  Democrats 
became  masters  of  the  House  of  Eepresen- 
tatives  and,  for  a  brief  period,  of  the 
Senate. 

Upon  the  completion  of  the  war  and 
the  legislation  growing  out  of  it  there 
arose  a  belief  that  old  party  ties  were  no 
longer  binding,  that  it  was  proper  to 
enter  into  new  affiliations  and  that  new 
questions  should  be  pushed  to  the  front. 
Horace  Greeley  in  1872  led  a  defection 
from  the  Republican  party.  Many  dis- 
tinguished men,  who  had  ardently  sup- 
ported the  Republicans  throughout  the 
war,  went  over  to  the  Democratic  party. 
As  early  as  1874  (July  27)  the  New  York 
Evening  Post  (then  nnder  the  direction 
of  William  Culleu  Bryant),  rejjresenting 


'  It  is  of  interest  to  remember  tiiat  the  Emancipation 
Proclamation  was  not  issued  until  after  formal  notice  liad 
been  served  upon  the  Confederacy  that,  if  the  authority 
of  the  Government  were  not  recofrnized  within  a  reason- 
al)le  time,  the  slaves  would  be  declared  free.  This  notice 
implied  that  the  Government  was  prepared  to  treat 
with  the  Sout  i  on  some  other  terms  than  abolition.  And 
as  late  as  February,  1865,  only  two  months  before  Lee's 
surrender,  President  Lincoln  submitted  to  tlie  Cabinet  a 
proposition  to  L^rant  $4lX),000,000  of  compensation  for 
liberated  slaves,  one-half  to  be  paid  to  the  Confederate 
.states  in  case  they  should  cease  armed  resistance  by  the 
1st  of  April,  1865,  and  the  other  half  in  case  the"  1.3th 
Amendment  (abolishing;  slavery)  should  Da  ratified  by  the 
requisite  number  of  States  by  the  ensuina;  1st  of  July. 
(See  Nicolay  and  Hay's  "  Abraham  Lincoln,"  vol.  10, 
pp.  133-4.) 


the  best  political  thought  of  the   nation, 
made  this  comment  upon  the  situation  : 

"The  truth  is  that  during  all  these  years 
there  has  been  no  rallying  point  about  which 
the  opposition  could  honestly  and  unanimously 
gather,  and  the  Republican  party  has  now 
carried  all  its  ends  and  has  nothing  further 
to  offer  to  the  people.  The  disintegration  of 
both  the  late  parties  is  complete.  They  have  a 
name  to  live,  but  they  are  dead.  What  is  it  to 
be  a  Republican?  No  living  man  can  answer 
that  question.  We  have  looked  through  the 
long  address  of  the  so-called  Congressional 
Committee  of  the  party  to  find  a  solid  answer  to 
that  question,  but  we  cannot  find  it.  There  is  no 
answer  to  that  question,  because  there  is  no  single 
point  of  vital  public  policy  at  present  on  which 
those  who  call  themselves  Republicans  are 
agreed.  What  is  it  to  be  a  Democrat  to-day? 
That  question  is  easily  put,  but  impossible  to  be 
answered,  for  the  same  reasons  as  before.  The 
parties  are  dead.  Let  the  people  understand 
this  once  for  all,  and  not  let  themselves  be  put 
in  awe  any  longer  by  mere  gibbering  ghosts  of 
what  once  was." 

THE   TEMPERANCE    ISSUE — 1854   TO     1866. 

Just  before  the  organization  of  the 
Republican  party  the  Prohibition  move- 
ment had  swept  a  number  of  States. 
Credit  is  due  the  Democrats  for  most 
of  the  legislation  of  that  period.  (See 
p.  148.)  It  is  proper  to  say,  however,  that 
the  statutes  were  enacted  in  obedience 
to  favorable  votes  of  the  people,  and  that 
if  other  parties  had  been  in  jDower  in 
those  States  they  would  nndoubtedly 
have  passed  similar  measures.  For  ex- 
ample, Vermont's  laAV  was  passed  by  the 
Whigs  in  1852;  and  the  Know-Nothings, 
Free-Soilers  and  Anti-Nebraska  men 
participated  in  Prohibitory  legislation 
in  several  States  (notably  Connecticut, 
Delaware,  Massachusetts  and  Indiana). 
The  election  of  Myron  II.  Clark  as  Gov- 
ernor of  New  York  in  the  fall  of  1854, 
with  a  Legislature  in  harmony  with  him, 
was  substantially  a  victory  for  the  then 
incipient  Republican  party;  therefore 
the  New  York  Maine  law  of  1855  may 
be  regarded  as  a  Re]3ublican  act.  In  one 
other  State — New  Hampshire,  1855 — 
Prohibition  was  adopted  in  part  as  a 
Republican  measure,  though  the  Govern- 
or who  signed  the  bill  was  a  Know- 
Nothing.  But  the  new  division  of  polit- 
ical parties  was  not  completed  tmtil  most 
of  the  legislative  sessions  of  1855  were 
ended,  and  by  that  time  the  feeling  on 
the  slavery  question  was  so  intense  that 
interest  in  Prohibition  ceased.  Thus  the 
Republican  party,  not  having   come  to 


Republican  Party.] 


588 


[Republican  Party. 


the  front  wlien  conditions  were  favor- 
able for  action  against  the  drink  traffic, 
did  not  make  conspicuous  contributions 
to  the  early  Prohibition  successes.  And 
its  failure  to  do  so  in  the  years  betAveen 
1855  and  the  opening  of  the  Civil  War — 
in  which  not  a  single  original  Prohibit- 
ory law  was  enacted' — is  explained  by 
the  increasing  fierceness  of  the  Anti- 
Slavery  contest  and  the  decreasing 
importance  of  all  other  issues.  Un- 
doubtedly it  would  have  been  quick 
to  respond  to  public  sentiment  then  if 
loublic  sentiment  had  been  manifested 
and  if,  as  in  former  years,  there  had 
been  no  special  reasons  to  fear  the  polit- 
ical influence  of  the  liquor-sellers;  for 
many  of  the  most  eminent  temperance 
leaders  of  the  day  were  among  the 
founders  of  the  party,  and  a  majority  of 
the  best  elements  of  citizens  in  the  North 
was  with  it. 

With  1856  began  the  supremacy  of 
the  Rej^ublican  party  in  the  States  of  the 
North.  For  the  next  ten  years  its  ener- 
gies were  absorbed  by  the  gigantic  task 
that  had  been  prepared  for  it  by  its 
founders.  Every  other  design  that  its 
individual  members  may  have  had  was 
subordinated  to  the  aim  of  strengthening 
its  attitiide  on  the  slavery  question  and 
waging  the  conflict.  Not  only  was  Pro- 
hibition neglected  but  its  interests  were 
sacrificed.  Whatever  excuses  may  be 
made,  however,  for  the  repeals  of  Pro- 

>  In  Maine,  however,  the  Democrats,  who  had  enacted 
the  orirjiiial  statute  (1851)  now  became  its  opponents  and 
the  Republicans  became  its  champions.  At  tlie  election 
of  1854  the  repeal  of  the  Maine  law  was  one  of  the  issues, 
and  it  was  understood  that  the  repealers  drew  their 
strength  chiefly  from  the  Democrats.  But  the  Republi- 
cans swept  the  State,  electing  the  Governor  and  a 
majority  in  the  Legislature;  and  at  the  session  of  1855 
this  triumph  was  emphasized  by  a  re-enactment  and 
strenLrthening  of  the  measure,  intended,  probably,  to  con- 
vince tlie  ])eople  tliat  the  new  party  was  thoroughly  com- 
mitted to  it.  But  the  election  of  1855  gave  the  Democrats 
the  Legislature,  and  as  there  was  no  choice  of  Governor 
by  tiie"  people  a  Democrat  was  seated.  Controlling  all 
branches  of  the  State  (Government,  the  Democratic  party 
repealed  Prohibition  early  m  1856  and  re-enacted  license. 
There  was  another  great  Republican  victory  at  the  jxills 
in  the  fall  of  185G,  but  Prohibition  was  not  immediately 
re-established;  to  malvc  sure  of  its  position  the  party 
decided  to  test  the  sentiment  of  the  people.  Tlie  prefer- 
ence of  the  voters  for  the  Republican  party  was  again 
demonstrated  at  tlie  September  election  of  18.57.  Accord- 
ingly in  1858  (March  20)  the  Prohibitory  law  was  restored, 
biit  to  settle  all  controversy  the  question  was  submitted  to 
the  electors  whether  they  would  have  the  Prohiliitory  act 
of  1858  or  the  license  iict  of  18.56.  The  popular  vote 
was  taken  June  7,  18.58,  and  resulted  in  28.804  for  Proliitii- 
tioii  and  5,912  against  it.  The  new  measure  toolv  efl'ect 
July  15,  18.58. 

The  ajipearance  of  the  Republican  party  in  Maine 
revolutionized  the  politics  of  that  State.  It  had  formerly 
been  reliably  Democratic.  The  advocacy  of  rum  by  a 
large  section  of  the  Democratic  party  was  responsible  for 
its  loss  of  power  there.  The  chaiiipionship  of  the  two 
causes  of  Anti-Slavery  and  Prohibition  established  the 
supremacy  of  the  Republican  party  in  Maiue. 


hibitory  laws,  it  is  our  duty  to  record  the 
facts.  The  following  is  a  list  of  the  State 
measures  abrogated  or  materially  weak- 
ened in  this  period  by  the  Republicans : ' 

New  York-. — The  law  of  1855  was  de- 
clared unconstitutional  in  certain  par- 
ticulars by  the  Court  of  Appeals  (see 
p.  90).  The  Republican  Legislature  of 
1856  could  have  retained  and  strength- 
ened those  provisions  which  were  not  un- 
constitutional (pending  a  decision  from 
the  United  States  Supreme  Court).  But 
it  preferred  to  repeal  the  act  and  to  re- 
store the  license  system. 

luwa. — The  Republican  Legislature  of 
1856,  desiring  to  accomplish  indirectly 
the  destruction  of  the  law  of  1855,  en- 
acted a  statute  permitting  County 
Judges  to  grant  licenses  in  all  counties 
voting  for  license,  "i^his  was  declared 
unconstitutional  and  therefore  did  not 
take  elfect.  But  the  next  Republican 
Legislature  (1858)  amended  the  law  so  as 
to  permit  the  manufacture  and  sale  of 
beer,  cider  and  domestic  wines. 

Ifidicma. — The  law  of  1855,  having 
been  pronounced  unconstitutional,  was 
promptly  wiped  out  by  the  Republicans 
in  1858,  and  no  attempt  was  made  to 
enact  new  Prohibitory  legislation.  A 
license  law  (placing  the  fee  at  $50)  was 
substituted  for  it. 

Rhode  Island. — In  1803  the  Republi- 
cans put  an  end  to  the  Prohibitory  law 
of  1852. 

llichigaii. — In  1861  the  manufacture 
and  sale  of  beer,  wine  and  cider  (with 
certain  limitations,  for  which  see  p.  315), 
and  the  manufacture  of  "alcohol,  80  per 
cent,  pure,"  for  sale  out  of  the  State, 
were  excepted  from  the  prohibitions  of  the 
law  of  1855. 

Throughout  these  10  years,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  Prohibition  system  was 
maintained  in  the  Republican  States  of 
Maine,  Vermont,  Massachusetts  and 
Connecticut.  But  in  New  Hampshire 
the  imperfections  of  the  law  of  1855 
(tolerating  the  manufacture  of  liquors) 
were  not  remedied. 

The  blows  dealt  the  Prohibition  cause 
in  this  era  in  individual  States  were 
liglit  compared  with  the  one  adminis- 
tered by  the  enactment  of  the  Internal 
Revenue  law  (1862)  and  the  subsequent 
amendments  to  it.     This  act  gave   the 

2  In  Nebraslia  (then  a  Territory)  the  law  of  1855  was 
killed  i\v  a  Republican  Legislature  in  1858. 


Republican  Party.] 


589 


[Republican  Party. 


liquor  traffic  a  legal  footing  in  the  nation, 
brought  its  representatives  into  close 
political  relations  with  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment and,  by  creating  an  enormous 
liquor  revenue,  caused  the  people  to  look 
to  it  as  a  legitimate  source  of  public  in- 
come. But  the  Internal  Revenue  law  in 
its  inception  was  purely  a  war  measure; 
and  remembering  that  even  at  the  pres- 
ent day  some  temperance  leaders  do  not 
regard  it  as  hurtful  to  their  movement, 
it  would  be  unfair  to  criticise  the  motives 
of  the  men  who  originated  the  law.  Yet 
it  is  a  fact  that  in  adjusting  its  details 
great  consideration  was  shown  for  the 
wishes  and  interests  of  both  the  distillers 
and  the  brewers ;  by  providing  that  the 
act  should  not  go  into  force  until  some 
months  after  its  passage,  and  by  making 
similar  provisions  when  the  liquor  taxes 
were  increased  in  later  years,  the  distillers 
were  enabled  to  make  great  profits  by 
speculations ;  while  the  tax  on  beer  was 
lowered  for  a  time  at  the  demand  of  the 
brewers. 

FROM  18G6  TO  1876. 

The  termination  of  the  war  made  the 
Republican  party  absolute  master  of  the 
country,  h  proceeded  to  establish  the 
results  gained  by  extending  the  suffrage 
to  the  emancipated  race  and  "recon- 
structing "  the  Southern  States.  In 
pursuance  of  this  policy  it  encountered 
some  opposition,  but  its  majority  was 
overwhelming,  and  everywhere  there  was 
a  tendency  among  the  people  to  recog- 
nize that  new  issues  should  now  be  made 
prominent.  A  very  great  (and  perhaps 
not  very  discriminating)  generosity  is 
necessary  if  it  is  sought  to  account  for 
the  repeals  of  Prohibition  in  the  years 
following  the  war  on  the  ground  that  the 
exigencies  of  the  distinctive  work  which 
the  Republicans  had  to  perform  debarred 
them  from  giving  fair  attention  to  the 
claims  of  the  temperance  reform.  The 
Prohibition  agitation  was  renewed,  the 
best  citizens  rallied  to  its  support,  and  it 
could  no  longer  be  said  that  Prohibitory 
laws  were  dropped  from  the  statutes  be- 
cause there  was  no  organized  feeling  in 
behalf  of  their  retention.  The  party 
that  opposed  this  sentiment  did  so, 
therefore,  at  the  risk  of  being  regarded 
as  deliberately  hostile  to  the  cause  and 
to  the  representative  and  well-matured 
arguments  of  its  advocates.     But  in  or- 


der to  show  due  lespect  for  all  possible 
objections  the  action  of  the  party  in  the 
10  years  from  1S6G  to  I87G  will  be  sepa- 
rately presented.  This  division  indicates 
187G  as  the  latest  limit  of  the  period  in 
which  the  party's  treatment  of  the  tem- 
perance question  may  possibly  be  de- 
fended by  charitable  pleas. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  period  there 
were  encourasring  signs  in  Massachiiseits, 
The  Prohibitory  law  was  enforced  there 
with  much  vigor.  The  liquor  element 
at  once  organized  to  repeal  it,  and  the 
Republicans  quickly  surrendered.  One 
of  their  leading  organs,  the  Boston 
Transcript,  smoothed  the  way  by  saying : 
"  What  would  be  the  verdict  of  history 
upon  a  political  party  that  carried  the 
Republic  safely  through  a  civil  war,  and 
then  lost  its  influence  in  the  nation  by 
attempts  to  regulate  the  sale  of  cider  and 
lager  beer  ?"  In  18G8  the  Legislature 
(Republican  by  four  to  one  in  the  Senate 
and  by  100  majority  in  the  House)  re- 
pealed Prohibition  and  enacted  license. 
But  in  the  next  year,  perceiving  the  dire 
effects  of  the  new  measure  and  obeying 
the  almost  unanimous  demand  of  the 
respectable  citizens,  the  Republicans  re- 
enacted  Prohibition.  Again  in  1870  a 
Republican  Legislature  catered  to  the 
wishes  of  the  drink-dealers,  the  manu- 
facture and  sale  of  malt  liquors  being 
excepted.  The  opposition  that  this  pro- 
vision aroused  caused  the  party,  in  1871, 
to  make  the  licensing  of  malt  liquors 
subject  to  Local  Option  votes,  and  (in 
the  same  3'ear)  to  establish  a  State  Con- 
stabulary. Opposition  continued,  until, 
in  1873,  the  beer-exemption  features  were 
stricken  from  the  statute.  Then  came 
earnest  enforcement,  giving  rise  to  an- 
other formidable  license  conspiracy. 
The  Republicans  once  more  acquiesced 
in  the  wishes  of  the  liquor  people,  and 
the  Legislature  of  1875  (Republican  by 
70  majority  in  the  House  and  8  in  the 
Senate)  definitely  destroyed  the  whole 
Prohibitory  law. 

In  Connecticut  the  work  was  done 
more  rudely.  The  Legislature  of  1867 
(Republican  by  46  majority  in  the  House 
and  5  in  the  Senate)  adopted  a  license 
act  but  held  it  in  suspension.  It  was 
not  approved  at  the  next  session.  But 
in  1373  (the  Republicans  controlling  the 
House  by  21  majority  and  the  Senate  by 
5)  the  Prohibitory  system  that  had  been , 


Republican  Party.] 


590 


[Republican  Party. 


in  force  for  18  years  gave  way  to  license. 

In  Michifjan,  after  a  vain  attempt 
(1869)  against  the  anti-license  article  of 
the  Constitution,  the  Republicans  for 
several  years  left  the  Prohibitory  statute 
undisturbed,  though  doing  nothing  to 
improve  it.  In  1875  (with  6  majority 
in  the  House  and  4  in  the  Senate) 
they  rescinded  it  and  substituted  a  tax 
measure.  The  State  Supreme  Court, 
soon  afterward,  declared  that  this  act 
was  not  in  conflict  with  the  Constitution, 
and  then  the  Legislature  submitted  to 
the  people  the  question  of  removing  the 
anti-license  article.  Finding  that  the 
article  was  of  no  practical  value  the  peo- 
ple consented. 

In  1874  Prohibition  was  re-established 
by  the  Republicans  in  Rhode  Island. 
But  the  liquor-sellers  were  so  strong 
in  the  party  that  they  compelled  it  to 
change  to  license  again  in  1875  (the  Re- 
publicans being  in  the  majority  by  five 
to  one  in  the  House  and  nearly  two  to 
one  in  the  Senate). 

In  Iowa  and  Neiv  Hampsliire  the  weak 
Prohibitory  laws  were  not  strengthened. 
In  Maine  and  Vermont  few  or  no  im- 
provements were  instituted,  but  there 
were  no  backward  steps. 

In  the  license  States  some  progress  wr,s 
made,  which  was  offset  by  reactionary 
developments.  The  Republican  State 
Convention  of  18()8  in  New  York  pledged 
Local  Option,  and  the  Legislature  of 
1873  passed  an  act  in  keeping  with  this 
pledge,  but  it  was  vetoed  by  Governor 
Dix  (Rep.).  Provision  for  Local  Option 
by  counties  was  made  in  Pennsylvania 
in  1872;  but  after  many  counties  had 
adopted  Prohibition  the  Legislature  of 
1875  (Repul)licanin  the  Senate)  voted  to 
annul  the  measure  and  the  Republican 
(lovernor  (Hartranft)  signed  the  repeal 
bill.  In  Ohio,  despite  the  Woman's  Cru- 
sade aiul  other  manifestations  of  power- 
ful sentiment,  there  was  no  advance. 
Similarly  in  such  Republican  States  as 
Illinois,  Wisconsin,  Minnesota  and  JVe- 
b)Yiska  nothing  of  consequence  was  done. 
But  in  Kansas  the  unorganized  counties 
were  placed  under  complete  Prohibition 
(18G7).  Town  Local  Option  was  granted 
in  Conneclicnt,  but  as  we  have  seen 
(pp.  526-7)  this  was  but  slight  compen- 
sation for  the  loss  of  State  Prohibition. 

During  this  period  the  Internal  Reve- 
nue legislation   was  preserved    by    the 


Republican  party,  and  more  than  once 
fraterinil  greetings  were  exchano'ed  with 
the  brewers  by  Government  officials. 
(See  United  States  (Jovernment  and 
THE  Liquor  Traffic.)  The  extensive 
"  whiskey  frauds  "  on  the  revenue  belong- 
to  this  time. 

The  National  Republican  party  at  its 
Convention  in  1872  (Philadelphia,  June  6) 
inserted  in  its  platform  the  following, 
known  as  the  Raster  resolution : 

' '  The  Republican  party  propose  to  respect  the 
rights  reserved  by  the  people  to  themselves  as 
carefully  as  the  powers  delegated  by  them  to 
the  State  and  Federal  Government.  It  dis- 
approves of  the  resort  to  unconstitutional  laws 
for  the  purpose  of  removing  evils  by  interfering 
vpith  the  rights  not  surrendered  by  the  people  to 
either  the  State  or  National  Government." 

In  explanation  of  the  meaning  of  this, 
Mr.  Herman  Raster,  its  author,  wrote  the 
following  letter : 

"Chicago,  III.,  .July  10,  1873.  .1.  M.  Miller. 
— Dear  Sir:  In  reply  to  yours  of  July  8,  I 
have  to  say  that  I  have  written  the  si.xteentli 
resolution  of  the  Philadelphia  platform,  and 
that  it  was  adopted  by  the  Platform  Committee 
with  the  full  and  explicit  vniderstanding  that  its 
purpose  was  the  discountenancing  of  all  so- 
called  temperance  (Prohibitory)  and  Sunday 
laws.  This  purpose  was  me.mt  to  be  expressed 
by  reference  to  the  rights  of  the  people  which 
had  not  been  delegated  to  either  National  or 
State  Governments  ;  it  being  assumed  that  the 
right  to  drink  what  one  pleases  (being  responsi- 
ble for  the  acts  committed  under  the  intluence 
of  strong  drink),  and  the  right  to  look  upon  the 
day  on  which  Christians  have  their  prayer- 
meetings  as  any  other  day,  were  among  the 
rights  not  delegated  l)y  the  people,  but  reserved 
to  themselves.  Whether  this  explanation  of 
the  meaning  of  the  resolution  will  satisfy  you,  1 
do  not  know.  But  as  yoii  want  to  serve  tlu; 
cause  of  truth,  so  do  1  ;  and  what  I  have  stated 
here  in  regard  to  the  true  meaning  and  intent  of 
the  sixteenth  resolution  of  the  Philadelphia 
platform  is  the  truth. 

"  Very  respectfully  yours, 

"Herman  Raster." 

It  has  been  denied  that  Mr.  Raster's 
statements  were  warranted  by  the  facts. 
But  15  years  later  he  repeated  them, 
even  more  explicitly,  to  a  correspondent 
of  the  Voice,  and  testimony  supporting 
his  declarations  was  obtained.  ^ 

Tliere  seems  to  be  no  doubt  that  the 
resolution  was  adopted  because  of  Mr. 
Raster's  dogged  insistence  and  his  threat 
that  a  large  element  of  Germans  would  re- 
volt from  the  party  if  it  were  rejected.  It 
may  also  be  true  that  the  leaders  of  the 
party  had  little  or  nothing  to  do  with  the 


'  See  the  "Political  Prohibitionist  for  1888,"'  i)p.  29,  142. 


Republican  Party.] 


591 


[Republican  Party. 


creation  of  it,  and  accepted  it  passively 
and  perhaps  with  distrust.  But  thesuh- 
ject  was  thoroughly  discussed  in  the 
Convention's  Committee  on  Resolutions, 
which,  with  a  fall  understanding  of  the 
significance  of  such  an  utterance,  per- 
mitted the  party  to  be  bound  by  it.  And 
it  is  certain  that  the  liquor  men  showed 
their  appreciation  by  heartil}^  supporting 
the  Republican  ticket  in  1872.  At  the 
Convention  of  the  United  States  Brew- 
ers' Association,  held  in  New  York  on 
the  same  day  that  the  Republican  Nation- 
al Convention  met,  Mr.  Clausen,  the 
President,  said  : 

' '  The  Presidential  election  which  takes  place 
this  fall .  may  change  the  aspects  of  that  [the 
Democratic]  party.  At  the  Cincinnati  Conven- 
tion they  have  placed  at  the  head  of  their  ticket 
a  man  [Horace  Greeley]  whose  antecedents  will 
warrant  him  a  pliant  tool  in  tlie  hands  of  the 
temperance  party,  and  none  of  you,  gentlemen, 
can  support  him.  It  is  necessary  for  you  to 
make  an  issue  at  this  election  throughout  the 
entire  country,  and  although  I  have  belonged 
to  th;-  Democratic  party  ever  since  I  had  a  vote, 
I  would  sooner  vote  for  the  Republican  ticket 
than  cast  my  vote  for  such  a  candidate. 
[Cheers.]" 

And  the  next  year  President  Clausen, 
at  the  Brewers'  Congress  (Cleveland, 
June  4,  1873),  alluding  to  the  defeat  of 
Mr.  Greeley  and  the  Republican  victory, 
said: 

"The  last  Presidential  election  has  shown  us 
what  unity  anicmg  us  can  do.  Let  our  votes 
and  work  in  the  future  be  heard  from  in  every 
direction. ' 

FROM  187G  TO  1891. 

The  steadily  increasing  zeal  of  the 
Prohibitionists  in  this  third  and  last 
period  has  wrung  concessions  from  all 
parties.  The  amount  of  liquor  legis- 
lation enacted  is  unprecedented.  Much 
of  it  is  remarkable  also  for  stringency. 
But  when  the  strength  of  the  movement 
is  considered,  the  high  respectability  of 
its  champions  and  the  low  and  disrep- 
utable average  character  of  its  represen- 
tative opponents,  the  results  seem  inade- 
quate— especially  inadequate  in  the 
States  controlled  by  the  party  of  "  moral 
ideas."  We  briefly  summarize  the  results 
in  these  States: 

Kansas,  Maine,  South  Dakota  and 
North  Dakota  have  secured  Constitu- 
tional Prohibition  by  majority  votes  of 
their  people.  Iowa  also  decided  for  Con- 
stitutional Prohibition,  but  the  State 
Supreme  Court   overthrew  the  Amend- 


ment for  technical  reasons,  whereupon 
the  Republican  party  enacted  a  com2:)lete 
Prohibitory  law,  which  has  been  pre- 
served. Ohio,  too,  showed  a  strong 
]ireference  for  this  most  radical  form  of 
anti-liquor  law,  but  the  Amendment  did 
not  become  a  part  of  the  Constitution, 
and  the  Republicans  though  having  full 
power  to  frame  statutory  Prohibition  in 
subsequent  years  failed  to  do  so,  but  set 
up  the  wretched  Dow  Tax  Liav  (with  inci- 
dental Local  Option)  instead.  Rtiode 
Island  gave  a  three-tifths  vote  for  Con- 
stitutional Prohibition,  but  by  intrigues 
and  non-enforcement  of  the  statute  (for 
which  the  Republican  jiarty  was  largely 
responsible)  a  plot  to  repeal  the  Amend- 
ment was  gradually  developed;  early  in 
1889  the  Legislature  (Republican  by 
large  majorities  in  both  branches)  voted 
to  resubmit  the  question  to  the  peoj^le ; 
the  next  Legislature,  in  June,  1889  (also 
Republican  in  both  branches)  approved 
this  action  ;  the  Republican  managers 
labored  for  repeal  at  the  jiopular  election 
held  to  decide  the  issue,  and,  after  the 
repeal  had  been  consummated,  their 
Legislature  and  Governor  joined  in 
enacting  a  license  law. 

More  significant  are  the  defeats  of  Con- 
stitutional Prohibition  in  the  Republican 
States  of  Michicjan,  Oregon,  Xew  Hamp- 
sli  ire,  JIassachusett.s,  Pennsylvania, 
Washington  and  Nebraska,  and  the 
semi-Republican  State  of  Connecticut. 
Li  all  cases  the  weight  of  Republican 
influence  was  thrown  to  prevent  the 
obtainment  of  po]iular  majorities.  In 
other  States  controlled  in  whole  or  in 
]oart  by  tlie  Republicans,  like  New  York, 
New  Jersey,  Indiana,  Wisconsin,  Illinois, 
Minnesota,  Colorado  and  Ctdifornia,  it 
has  been  the  policy  of  the  party  to 
refuse  the  people  opportunity  to  vote  on 
I'rohibitory  Amendments  at  times  when 
it  has  seemed  pr^ibable  or  possible  that 
such  Amendments  would  be  carried  if 
submitted. 

Much  Local  Option  has  l»een  bestoAved 
by  the  Republicans  in  this  period,  but  as 
an  alternative  for  State  Prohibition.  For 
example,  the  southern  half  of  the  Ter- 
ritory of  Dakota  gave  a  favorable  major- 
ity in  1885  on  the  question  of  incorpo- 
rating a  Prohibitory  Amendment  in  a 
prospective  State  Constitution;  but  the 
Republican  Legislature,  instead  of  pass- 
ing   a    statute    in    harmony   with    the 


Republican  Party.] 


59-2 


[Republican  Party. 


expressed  desire  of  the  electors,  enacted 
County  Local  Option.  Massachicse/fs, 
Michigan,  Ne/v  Jersey/,  Minnesota,  Ohio, 
Nebraska  and  Illinois  are  the  typi(^al 
States  in  which  the  Republicans  have 
made  Local  Option  concessions.  In  other 
States,  like  Ne/u  York  and  Pennsiilvajiia, 
even  the  poor  boon  of  Local  Option  has 
been  persistently  denied. 

The  High  License  acts  of  Nebraska, 
Illinois,  Minnesota,  Pennsylvania  and 
Massacliusetts,  the  High  Tax  law  of 
Michigan,  the  medium  license  laws  of 
Neio  Jersey,  Wisconsin,  Oregon  and 
Rhode  Island,  the  Dow  law  of  Oltio,  and 
measures  of  kindred  character  in  some 
other  States,  originated  with  the  Eepub- 
lican  party.  These,  excepting  possibly 
Nebraska's  and  Illinois's,  were  intended 
to  be  not  progressive  but  obstructive,  and 
they  have  been  obstructive  in  fact,  with- 
out any  exception. 

Legislation  requiring  scientific  temper- 
ance instruction  in  public  schools  has 
been  widely  introduced,  and  the  Repub- 
licans, always  glad  to  find  some  means, 
short  of  Prohibition,  for  pleasing  the 
temperance  poople,  have  permitted  edu- 
cational acts  to  pass  in  many  States. 
Yet  even  these  strictly  non-political 
measures  have  been  fought  by  Repub- 
licans at  times,  as  in  Ohio.  Besides, 
while  they  have  been  more  generally 
favored  at  the  North  by  the  Republicans 
than  by  the  Democrats,  the  latter  have 
supported  them  in  noteworthy  instances : 
the  New  York  law  was  signed  by  a 
Democratic  Governor  and  the  United 
States  law  was  passed  by  a  Democratic 
House  and  received  the  ajiproval  of  a 
Democratic  President. 

There  is  no  more  important  result  of 
the  last  decade's  work  than  the  incor- 
poration of  injunction  and  nuisance 
provisions  in  Prohibitory  acts.  Such 
provisions  have  been  formulated  by  the 
Republicans  in  Kansas,  Iowa,  the  Da- 
kotas  and  (though  less  satisfactorily) 
Neiv  Hampshire  and  Vermont.  The 
people,  thoroughly  believing  in  the  prin- 
ciple of  Prohibition,  have  demanded  the 
most  perfect  instrument  for  its  enforce- 
ment that  could  be  devised,  and  the  Re- 
publicans have  given  them  the  injunc- 
tion and  nuisance  plan.  In  doing  so, 
however,  they  have  merely  elaborated 
and  made  available  a  well-recognized 
common   law   remedy.     And  they  have 


not  uniformly  taken  the  desired  action: 
in  Rhode  hland,  though  they  solemnly 
promised  to  strengthen  the  law  by  add- 
ing injunction  features,  they  rejected  an 
Injunction  bill  at  two  successive  legis- 
lative sessions  when  put  to  the  test. 

Broadly  surveying  now  the  deeds  of 
the  party  in  the  separate  States  we  fail 
to  discern  grounds  for  much  encourage- 
ment. Where  the  people  have  over- 
whelmed all  political  opposition  by  the 
ardor  of  their  Prohibition  enthusiasm 
the  Republican  party  has  executed  their 
will,  sometimes  with  seeming  alacrity, 
sometimes  reluctantly.  Yet  there  are  not 
wanting  instances  of  absolute  defiance  of 
popular  desire,  and  the  examples  of 
Rliode  Island  and  Ohio  are  to  be  classed 
with  the  worst  cases  of  Democratic  hos- 
tility. The  party  leaders  have  endeavor- 
ed to  postpone  and  finally  to  defeat  Pro- 
hibition oftener  than  they  have  con- 
sented to  it.  Their  boasted  High  License 
has  proved  itself  the  most  dangerous  of 
compromises,  practically  worthless  for 
all  purposes  save  the  purpose  of  retard- 
ing Prohibition  and  intrenching  the 
traffic.  Their  Local  Option  cannot  com- 
2"»are  with  the  Local  Option  of  the  Demo- 
cratic South.  Tlieir  enforcement,  while 
highly  successful  where  the  people  will 
not  brook  violations,  has  been  so  imper- 
fect in  representative  cities  as  to  seriously 
embarrass  the  cause  in  the  country  at 
large. 

Below  are  analyses  of  State  Republi- 
can platforms  for  two  important  years : 

1886. — Favoring  the  adoption  of  Prohibition, 
none  ;  favoring  the  submission  of  the  Prohibi- 
tion question  to  popular  vote,  '  Arl^ansas,  Massa- 
chusetts, Michigan,  Missouri,  Nebraslia,  New 
Hampsliire,  Oregon,  Pennsylvania,  Tennessee 
and  Texas — 10 ;  favoring  High  License  and 
Local  Option,  Minnesota — 1  ;  impliedly  favor- 
ing Local  Option,  New  Jersey — 1  ;  favoring 
(with  more  or  less  definiteness)  the  continued 
maintenance  of  Prohibitory  laws  in  Prohibition 
States,  Iowa,  Kansas,  Maine,  New  Hampshire 
and  Vermont — 5  ;  favoring  the  strengthening  or 
enforcement  of  license  laws,  Massachusetts  and 
Michigan — 2  ;  iadetiuite  expressions,"  Alabama, 

1  Tliese  pled,?es  were  of  no  practical  value.  In  Arkan- 
sas and  Missouri  the  Republicans  made  no  attempt  to 
redeem  their  promise,  and  in  all  the  other  eight  States 
liere  mentioned  the  Hepublican  party  managers  (or  the 
most  influential  of  them)  helped  to  defeat  l^rohibitory 
Amendments  at  tlie  polls. 

2  The.following,  adopted  by  the  Alabama  Republican 
State  Committee,  is  a  specimen  of  these  indefinite  utter- 
ances: 

"  The  organization  of  temperance  men  in  Alabama 
meets  our  hearty  approval,  and  we  recognize  in  it  the 
spirit  of  him  who  came  among  us  and  taught,  '  A  new 
command  1  give.    1  would  that  ye  love  oue  another.'  " 


Republican  Party.] 


593 


[Republican  Party. 


Colorado,  Connecticut,  Indiana,  Ohio  and  Wis- 
consin— 6;  favoring  tlie  liquor  traffic,  Califor- 
nia— 1  ;  silent,  Illinois,  Nevada,  New  York, 
North  Carolina  and  Rhode  Island — 5  ;  no  repre- 
sentative State  meetings  of  the  party  held, 
Delaware,  Florida,  Georgia,  Kentucky,  Louisi- 
ana, Maryland,  Mississippi,  South  Carolina, 
Virginia  and  West  Virginia — 10. 

1888. — Favoring  the  adoption  of  Prohibition, 
none ;  silent,  Alabama,  Arkansas,  California, 
Colorado,  Florida,  Georgia,  Illinois,  Kentucky, 
Louisiana,  Maryland,  Mississippi,  Missouri,  Ne- 
vada, North  Carolina,  Ohio,  Oregon,  South 
Carolina,  Tennessee,  Texas,  Vermont,  Vir- 
ginia, West  Virginia  and  Wisconsin — 23  ;  de- 
claring for  the  continued  support  of  Prohibitory 
laws  in  Prohibition  States,  Iowa,  Kansas,  Maine 
and  Rhode  Island — 4  ;  recognizing  or  allud- 
ing to  the  national  aspects  of  the  question.  ' 
Delaware,  Massachusetts,  Maine  and  Minne- 
sota— 4  ;  favoring  High  License  or  Local  Op- 
tion, or  both,  Connecticut,  Indiana,  Michigan, 
Minnesota  aad  New  York — 5 ;  favoring  the 
submission  of  Constitutional  Prohibition,  Ne- 
braska and  Pennsylvania — 2  ;  indefinite,  New 
Hampshire  and  New  Jersey — 2. 

The  representative  opinion  of  lead- 
ers and  press  shows  a  strong  bahmce 
of  sentiment  against  recognizing  Prohi- 
bition as  a  policy  to  be  embodied  in  the 
general  tenets  of  the  Republican  party. 
Of  course  it  would  bo  unfair  to  cite  indi- 
vidual expressions  as  conclusive  if  a 
reasonable  doubt  as  to  the  prevailing 
view  could  be  entertained.  It  may  also 
be  admitted  that  this  dominant  anti- 
Prohibition  opinion,  however  emphatic, 
is  merely  the  opinion  of  the  past  and 
the  present,  and  does  not  necessarily  in- 
dicate the  opinion  of  the  future;  and 
that,  concerning  the  tendency  of  future 
opinion,  each  individual  may  form  his 
own  views,  governed  by  a  recognition  of 
past  and  existing  circumstances.  But 
this  article  would  be  defective  if  the 
truth  were  not  frankly  shown ;  and  we 
believe  no  intelligent  observer  will  doubt 


1  The  most  important  of  these  utterances  was  the  fol- 
lowing, adopted  by  the  Massachusetts  Republican  Con- 
vention (Boston,  April  26),  which  was  held  for  the  pur- 
pose of  electing  delegates  to  the  National  Convention : 

"  The  Republican  party  of  Massachusetts  has  com- 
mitted itself  in  favor  of  pronounced  and  progressive 
temperance  legislation.  It  has  demanded  the  restriction 
of  the  liquor  trafiie  by  every  practicable  measure,  and  now 
It  calls  upon  the  National  Republican  Convention  to 
recognize  the  saloon  as  the  enemy  of  humanity;  to 
demand  for  the  people  the  privilege  of  deciding  its  fate  at 
the  ballot-box;  to  insist  that  it  shall  be  crippled  by  every 
restraint  and  disability  which  local  public  sentiment  will 
sanction;  in  short,  to  take  that  attitude  upon  the  tem- 
perance question  which  will  win  to  the  party  all  foes  of 
the  liquor  traflic  and  all  friends  of  good  order." 

Notwithstanding  this  apparently  uncompromising 
"  plank,"  the  Republican  party  of  Massachusetts,  as  an 
organization,  ignored  the  merits  of  the  Prohibitory 
Amendment  question  when  it  came  up  for  decision  the 
next  year,  and  its  representative  newspapers  and 
shrewdest  politicians  did  all  that  was  possible  to  defeat 
the  Amendment. 


that  the  following  citations  display  the 
average  views  of  the  authoritative  lead- 
ers and  organs  upon  the  question  of 
party  advocacy  of  Prohibition: 

James  G.  Blaine,  candidate  for  President 
in  1884  (in  a  letter  to  the  Philadelphia  Press, 
Nov.  29,  1883):  "  Instead,  therefore,  of  repealing 
the  tax  on  spirits,  the  National  Government  can 
assign  it  to  the  States  in  proportion  to  their 
population.  The  machinery  of  collection  is  to- 
day in  complete  operation.  A  bill  of  10  lines 
could  direct  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  to 
pay  the  whole  of  it,  less  the  small  expense  of 
collection,  to  the  States  and  Territories  in  the 
proportion  of  their  population,  and  to  continue 
it  permanently  as  a  part  of  their  regular  annual 
revenues.  ...  It  [this  plan]  makes  the  taxes  on 
spirituous  and  malt  liquors  a  permanent  resource 
to  all  the  States,  enabling  them  thereby  defin- 
itely to  readjust  and  reduce  their  own  taxa- 
tion." (For  Mr.  Blaine's  definition  of  Prohibi- 
tion as  a  State  and  not  a  national  issue,  see 
p.  109.) 

Benjamin  Harrison,  President  (in  a  speech  at 
Danville,  Ind.,  Nov.  26,  1887):  "  Heretofore  the 
Republican  party  [of  Indiana]  has  had  some 
dalliance  with  the  liquor  traffic.  .  .  .  We  said 
in  our  State  platform  that  we  were  in  favor  of 
clothing  local  communities  with  power  to  act 
upon  this  question.  There  I  stand,  for  one,  to- 
day. I  do  not  believe  in  State  Prohibition  as 
the  best  method  of  dealing  with  this  question." 
(This  speech,  however,  was  a  plea  for  Local 
Option,  and  Gen.  Harrison  took  occasion  in  it  to 
condemn  the  influence  of  the  liquor  element  in 
politics.  The  vital  point  is,  his  practical  recom- 
mendations went  no  farther  than  Local  Ojition, 
but  distinctly  repudiated  State  Prohibition. ) 

John  Sherman,  United  States  Senator  from 
Ohio  (in  a  speech  at  Alliance,  O.,  in  1873): 
"All  parties,  to  be  useful,  must  be  founded 
upon  political  ideas  which  affect  the  frame- 
work of  our  Government,  or  the  rights  and  im- 
munities secured  by  law.  Questions  based 
upon  temperance,  religion,  morality,  in  all  their 
multiplied  forms,  ought  not  to  be  the  basis  of 
parties. " 

New  York  Tribune,  Oct.  9,  1890:  "The  Re- 
publican party  as  a  party  is  squarely  committed 
to  High  License. "  The  same  paper  said,  June  20, 
1889:  "The  outcome  in  Pennsylvania  [defeat 
of  the  Prohibitory  Amendment]  is  cause  for 
general  congratulation.  It  is  a  splendid  triumph 
tor  High  License. " 

Chicago  Tribune,  July  13,  1886:  "  In  the 
great  Western  States  the  large  majority  of  the 
beer-saloon-keepers  are  Republicans,  and  their 
patrons  are  largely  Republicans.  If  they  are 
to  be  stigmatized  [by  the  Anti-Saloon  Conven- 
tion] as  'public  enemies,' and  dealt  with  as 
such,  the  inevitable  result  will  be  that  they 
will  find  welcome  shelter  with  the  whiskey- 
Democratic  party,  and  that  the  Republican 
party  will  lose  thousands  upon  thousands  of 
honorable  votes,  the  loss  of  which  cannot  be 
made  good."  (It  was  this  paper  that  gave 
utterance  to  the  memorable  opinion  that  "  Pro- 
hibition must  be  prohibited  in  the  Republican 
party.") 

Ciuciunati  Commercial  Gazette,  Feb.  7,  1887: 


Republican  Party.] 


594 


[Republican  Party. 


"It  is  vain  to  say  that  the  Republican  party 
must  aud  shall  become  u  Prohibitiou  party.  It 
must  and  shall  do  no  such  thing.  Those  who 
are  in  it  simply  to  make  it  so  might  as  well  go 
at  once,  for  they  will  not  succeed."  In  its 
issue  for  Aug.  27,  1888,  the  C'oinmercud  Gazette 
said:  "  Hundreds  of  saloons  in  Ohio  are  sub- 
stantially Republican  club-houses." 

St.  Paul  Pioneer  Press,  Feb.  28,  1888:  "The 
Republican  party,  nationally,  is  not  a  Prohibi- 
tion party,  and "  it  is  not  likely  to  be  so  trans- 
formed at  any  future  date.  It  does  not  recog- 
nize the  liquor  question  as  an  issue  properly 
national  at  all." 

Brooklyn  Times,  Aug.  5,  1886:  "The  temper- 
ance question  is  only  one  and  not  the  most 
important  of  the  great  issues  that  make  up  the 
Republican  party,  and  it  is  the  qm^stion  on 
which  there  is  least  agreement  of  sentiment 
within  the  party." 

Indianapolis  Journal,  June  21,  1888:  "The 
Republican  party  is  not  in  favor  of  Prohibition 
and  cannot  be  placed  in  that  position  without 
palpable  insincerity  or  duplicity  on  the  part  of 
the  [National]  Convention."  This  is  of  especial 
interest  because  the  Journal,  at  that  time,  wjis 
warmly  advocating  the  claims  of  Gen.  Benjamin 
Harrison  for  the  Republican  nomination  for  the 
Presidency,  and  felt  that  it  was  iiolitic  to  reflect 
his  anti-Prohibition  ideas.  After  Harrison's 
election  and  inauguration  the  Indianapolis 
Jourrtal  was  known  as  his  personal  organ,  and 
on  Nov.  8,  1889,  it  printed  a  very  significant 
editorial  in  which  it  said:  "The  Republican 
party,  as  a  political  party,  has  no  identification 
nor  sympathy  with  Prohibitiou  as  a  political 
movement,  and  Republicans  in  all  the  State 
should  so  declare.  That  done,  let  it  adopt 
High  License,  Local  Option  and  restrictive 
police  laws  as  a  finality,  and  call  a  halt  to  agita- 
tion on  the  liquor  question." 
I  New  York  Mail  and  Express,  Nov.  18,  1889  : 
"So  the  Republicans  of  Iowa  are  coming  into 
line  with  Republicans  elsewhere — in  New  York, 
in  New  Jersey,  in  Pennsylvania,  in  Illinois — in 
believing  that  the  best  temperance  law  is  a 
judicious  combination  of  Local  Option  and  High 
License.  It  is  the  ground  we  have  always 
occupied,  and  it  is  ground  on  which  Repub- 
licans, if  they  stand  together,  can  always  win." 

As  a  national  organization  the  party 
has  not  materially  changed  the  position 
that  it  took  in  1872.  Its  platforms  in 
1876,  1880  and  1884  contained  no  words 
that  conld  be  construed  as  repudiating 
the  Raster  resolution  or  suggesting  a  dis- 
position to  look  with  kindness  upon  the 
anti-saloon  creed.  At  the  National  Con- 
vention of  1884  a  formal  plea  was  made 
before  the  Committee  on  Kesolutions  by 
Miss  Frances  E.  Willard,  President  of 
the  National  Woman's  Christian  Tem- 
perance Union.  Miss  Willard  did  not 
ask  for  a  radical  declaration  but  for  a 
sympathetic  one.  She  warned  the  party 
that  many  thousands  of  the  best  citizens 
were  awaiting  its  action  with  the  deepest 


solicitude  and  would  sever  their  connec- 
tion with  it  if  practical  words  of  en- 
couragement were  not  spoken.  The  only 
response  that  the  platform  gave  was  a 
declaration  that  '*  the  Republicans  of  the 
United  States,  in  National  Convention 
assembled,  renew  their  allegiance  to  the 
princijjles  upon  which  they  have  tri- 
umphed in  six  successive  Presidential 
elections."' 

Again  in  1888  the  Convention  was  be- 
sought to  place  the  party  in  harmony 
with  its  temperance  element.  The  Anti- 
Saloon  Republicans,  who  had  been  striv- 
ing for  more  than  two  years  to  induce 
the  leaders  to  take  up  the  question,  sent 
a  deputation,  headed  by  11.  K.  Carroll, 
LL.I).,  of  the  New  York  Independent. 
Dr.  Carroll  made  an  impressive  speech 
before  the  Platform  Committee,  reciting 
the  moral,  religious  and  political  reasons 
why  the  Republicans  should  declare 
themselves  foes  to  the  drink  traffic.  He 
especially  dwelt  upon  the  importance  of 
relieving  the  party  of  the  incubus  of  the 
Raster  resolution.  Mrs.  J.  Ellen  Foster 
also  sulnnitted  recommendations.  But 
the  platform  as  adopted  (June  21)  gave 
no  hint  of  a  friendly  purpose.  On  the 
other  hand  it  embraced  these  words: 
'•■  We  reaffirm  our  unswerving  devotion 
to  .  .  .  the  autonomy  reserved  to  the 
States  under  the  Constitution;  to  the 
personal  rights  and  liberties  of  the  citi- 
zens in  all  the  States  and  Territories  in 
the  Union."  This  was  interpreted  by 
Herman  Raster,  author  of  the  Raster  re- 
solution, as  an  implied  repetition  of  that 
celebrated  utterance.  '  Just  before  ad- 
journment (June  25),  the  following,  pre- 
sented by  C.  A.  Botttelle,  and  known  as 
the  Boutelle  resolution,  was  passed : 

"  The  first  concern  of  all  good  government  is 
the  virtue  and  sobriety  of  the  people  and  the 
purity  of  the  home.  The  Republican  party 
cordially  sympathizes  with  all  wise  and  well- 
directed  efforts  for  the  promotion  of  temperance 
and  morality." 

This  Boutelle  resolution,  so  indefinite 
in  its  terms,  was  not  acceptable  to  any  of 
the  temperance  leaders  who  had  been  in- 
clined to  independence.  There  Avas  an 
understanding  that  it  had  been  sub- 
mitted to  a  prominent  brewer  before  it 
was  offered  in  the  Convention,  and  had 
been    apj^roved    by    him.  •'     The    news- 

•  See  the  Voice,  June  28,  1888. 

2  Political  Prohibitionist  for  1&S9,  p.  13. 


Republican  Party.] 


595 


[Restriction. 


papers  of  the  liquor  traffic  warmly 
commended  it,  particularly  Bonfort's 
Wine  and  Spirit  Cirmilar,  which  said 
(July  10,  1888) : 

' '  And  pray,  who  withholds  indorsement  from 
such  propositions  as  these  V  In  behalf  of  the 
wine  and  spirit  trade,  we  hereby  accord  this 
declaration  our  unreserved  approval.  The  man 
who  would  do  otherwise  would  be  very  apt  to 
contend  that  two  and  two  do  not  make  four." 

The  frank-spoken  Eepublican  organs 
did  not  hesitate  to  inform  the  temper- 
ance people  that  the  party  was  no  farther 
committed  than  it  had  been  before. 
"The  Boutelle  resolution,"  said  the 
Cincinnati  Commercial  Gazette,  July  17, 
1888,  "  was  a  simple  piece  of  sentimental- 
ism,  equally  harmless  and  unnecessary. 
If  it  had  meant  anything  it  wouldn't 
have  passed." 

It  is  needless  to  give  additional  illus- 
trations. Those  seeking  more  detailed 
information  are  referred  to  the  "  Politi- 
cal Prohibitionist"  for  1888  and  1889. 
The  relations  of  the  Eepublican  party  to 
the  drink  trade  as  shown  by  its  adminis- 
tration of  Governmeitt  affairs  are  iiidi- 
cated  in  brief  in  our  article  on  United 
States  Government  and  the  Liquor 
Traffic. 

Attached  to  this  great  organization 
are  numberless  individuals  of  intense 
temperance  convictions.  Among  its 
recognized  leaders  are  able  men  whose 
anti-saloon  ideas  are  positive  and  undis- 
guised. It  is  impossible  to  broach  the 
Prohibition  question  in  any  hamlet,  city 
or  State  where  the  Republican  party  is 
represented  by  its  better  elements  with- 
out securing  very  cordial  Republican 
support.  This  support  is  neutralized 
too  often  by  political  machinations,  by 
local  circumstances  and  by  misleading 
issues ;  but  there  is  no  doubt  that  a  host 
of  Republicans  is  prepared  at  all  times 
to  sustain  advanced  measures,  and  that  a 
scarcely  less  favorable  tendency  is  latent 
in  other  hosts.  The  ultimate  decision 
in  the  case  of  every  reform  rests  with  the 
people  and  not  with  their  jiarty  organi- 
zations. Obstructive  tactics,  violent  disa- 
vowals and  artful  expedients  are  tempo- 
rarily successful,  and  may  be  successful 
for  a  long  period  of  years.  But  with 
sufficient  perseverance  may  come  finally 
revolution.  Knowing  the  strength  and 
high  respectability  of  the  following 
already  secured,  and  thoroughly  believ- 


ing in  the  soundness  of  their  economic 
policy,  the  advocates  of  Prohibition  feel 
assured  that  their  cause  will  outlive  and 
eventually  subdue  all  party  antagonism. 

Restriction,  broadly  defined,  is  any 
legislative   policy   short   of   Prohibition 
that  narrows  the   liquor   traffic    or  the 
privileges    and  freedom  of  the  persons 
engaged  in  it.    By  requiring  the  traffick- 
ers to  pay  license  fees,  even  if  no  other 
conditions  are   prescribed,  a  certain  re- 
striction is  effected,  for  the  legal  right 
to  conduct  the  business  is  thereby  lim- 
ited to  individuals  who  comply  with  the 
requirement.      Similar    restrictions    are 
those   which   prescribe   certain  formali- 
ties of  procedure  to  be  observed  by  the 
would-be  liquor-trader  before  he  can  be 
qualified  to  receive  a  license — such  form- 
alities as  the  filing  of  an  application  for 
License,  certifying  that  the  applicant  is 
"  of   good   moral   character,"    etc.,   and 
signed  by  a  specified  number  of  neigh- 
])oring   property-holders    or  citizens,  in 
some  cases  a   small   luimber  being  ade- 
quate and  in  others  a  large  number,  even 
a  majority,  being  necessary  ;  the  filing 
of   a   bond   obligating    the  licensee    to 
observe  all  the  provisions  of  the  liquor 
laws,  this  bond  to  be  guaranteed  by  one 
or  more  responsible  persons,  who  become 
pecuniarily  liable    for   any   misconduct 
on  the  part  of  the  licensee ;  and  the  pro- 
curement of  consent  from  a  Board  of  Ex- 
cise, Board  of  Commissioners,  Board  of 
Aldermen  or  Council,  Court,  magistrate 
or  other    authority  having   jurisdiction 
over  license   applications.     Other   occa- 
sional   restrictions    antecedent    to    the 
granting   of    license    provide    that   the 
applicant  shall  be  a  citizen  of  the  United 
States  and  one  who  has  never  been  con- 
victed of  offending  against  the  law ;  that 
his  bondsman  or  bondsmen  shall  reside 
in  the  ward,  town,  etc.,  where  the  liquor 
establishment   is   to  be   conducted,  and 
shall  not  be  pecuniarily  interested  in  the 
sale  of  liquors ;  that  the  aggregate  num- 
ber of  licenses  issued  shall  be  reducible 
to  the  ratio  of  one  for  a  minimum  num- 
ber of  inhabitants  (as  300,  500  or  1,000) ; 
that  the  license  shall  not  in  any  manner 
be   transferred   or   disposed    of    (unless 
absolutely   surrendered)   by  the  holder, 
and  shall  not  be  continued  in  case  of  his 
death,  etc. 

Restrictions  like  these  operate  essen- 


Restriction.] 


596 


[Restriction. 


tially  to  raise  revenue  for  the  Govern- 
ment, to  determine  the  proportions  of 
the  traffic  and  to  make  license  an 
exceptional  privilege,  more  or  less  diffi- 
cult of  obtainment.  Their  peculiar 
effect  is  to  circumscribe  the  bounds  of 
legalization,  yet  to  legalize  to  some 
extent  and  with  certainty.  It  is  true 
they  imply  that  the  Government  recog- 
nizes in  the  liquor  traffic  a  perilous  insti- 
tution which  should  be  singled  out  for 
special  discriminations  ;  and  the  sound- 
ness of  the  Government's  instinct  is 
amply  justified  by  practical  results,  for 
the  men  who  apply  for  liquor  licenses 
are,  as  a  class,  the  very  worst  men  in  the 
community.  But  restrictions  that  deal 
merely  with  the  method  or  extent  of 
licensing  have  little  to  do  with  principle. 
They  involve  a  limited  sanction,  but  a 
sanction  nevertheless.  Therefore  these 
are  seldom  regarded  as  restrictions 
proper  by  individuals  who  look  upon  the 
whole  traffic  as  wrong  and  harmful.  And 
in  practice  they  are  not  frequently  found 
to  be  genuine  temperance  restrictions: 
this  is  sufficiently  demonstrated  by  the 
failure  of  the  High  License  system.  In- 
deed, the  revenue  features  of  license  laws 
are  believed  to  be  the  reverse  of  restrictive, 
for  they  create  in  licensees  a  strong  in- 
centive to  increase  their  sales  and  so 
extend  the  consumption  of  liquor.  But 
apart  from  the  revenue  features  the 
regulations  governing  the  manner  and 
volume  of  licensing  are  not  singly  com- 
bated with  any  particular  formality. 
The  whole  policy  is  condemned,  yet  if 
the  license  programme  as  a  whole  cannot 
be  defeated  the  radicals  are  not  dis]3osed 
to  manifest  much  interest  concerning  its 
details  unless  these  details  are  clearly 
formulated  with  a  view  to  giving  the 
liquor-sellers  special  favors  or  intrench- 
ing their  business. 

Another  class  of  restrictions  embraces 
prohibitions  that  the  dealers  are  ex- 
pected to  live  up  to  in  the  conduct  of 
their  vocation.  These  are  of  very  wide 
range,  and,  as  expressed  in  the  laws  of 
the  States,  cover  all  conceivable  devices 
for  minimizing  the  evils  of  the  traffic  and 
the  "  abuse  "  of  drink.  Thus  the  sale  to 
minors,  common  drunkards  and  intox- 
icated persons,  insane  and  idiotic  indi- 
viduals, Indians,  etc.,  is  prohibited;  the 
sale  on  Sundays  and  (in  some  States)  on 
all  holidays  is  unqualifiedly  forbidden  ; 


saloon-keepers  are  not  permitted  to  em- 
ploy barmaids  and  are  often  required  to 
exclude  all  women  from  their  places  ; 
sales  during  certain  hours  of  the  night  are 
unlawful  ;  gambling  must  not  be  tole- 
rated on  licensed  premises,  and  all  games, 
as  well  as  music,  dancing,  etc.,  are  pro- 
hibited in  a  number  of  States  ;  liquor- 
dealers  are  frequently  required  to  have 
no  screens  on  their  premises  and  no 
obstructions  to  a  clear  view  of  the  in- 
terior from  the  street  ;  sometimes  it  is 
prescribed  that  no  liquor  shall  be  con- 
sumed in  the  place  where  sold  ;  in  other 
instances  liquor  cannot  be  sold  for  con- 
sumption on  the  premises  unless  meals 
are  ordered  by  the  purchasers  ;  the  prac- 
tice of  *'  treating "  has  been  prohibited 
by  certain  statutes  ;  wholesalers  nnist 
not  vend  at  retail  ;  manufacturers  in 
Prohibition  localities  must  not  sell  to 
residents  of  those  localities,  etc.  To  sus- 
tain these  various  provisions  penalties  for 
violations  are  imposed,  ranging  in  sever- 
ity from  a  nominal  fine  to  fine  and  im- 
jDrisonment  and  revocation  of  license  ; 
while  individuals  injured  in  property, 
person  or  means  of  support  in  conse- 
quence of  the  sale  of  liquor  are  entitled 
to  briug  civil  action  for  damages  against 
the  sellers  and  against  the  owners  of  the 
premises. 

Such  restrictions  as  those  just  noticed 
are  uncompromising  and  are  backed  by 
j^rinciple.  The  Prohibitionists  do  not 
oppose  but  welcome  them.  Yet,  being 
incidental  to  the  license  system,  their 
practical  value  is  comparatively  slight. 
Knowing  the  unscrupulous  character  of 
the  men  who  "sell  rum  for  a  livelihood," 
as  well  as  the  strong  temptations  that 
continually  beset  them,  it  is  childish  to 
hope  that  observance  will  be  shown  un- 
less the  consequences  of  disobedience  are 
likely  to  prove  very  serious ;  and  the  influ- 
ence of  the  traffic  is  nearly  always  power- 
ful enough  to  keep  the  police  inactive,  or 
to  avert  prosecutions,  or  to  perjure  wit- 
nesses, or  to  prevent  convictions  by  juries. 
In  exceptional  cases  (notably  where 
vigorous  work  has  been  done  by  Law  and 
Order  Leagues)  the  liquor-sellers  have 
been  compelled  to  respect  the  restrictive 
laws,  but  ordinary  experience  is  highly 
discouraging. 

Genuine  restriction,  then,  as  under- 
stood by  the  advanced  temperance  advo- 
cates, though  unsatisfactory  in  results  is 


Revenue.] 


597 


[Roman  Catholic  Church. 


not  objectionable  in  principle  or  tenden- 
cy. The  word  "  restriction "  does  not 
excite  antipathy,  like  "  license/'  and  is  not 
misleading,  like  "  regulation,"  But  the 
coupling  of  license  with  restriction  is 
distasteful  to  those  who  are  consci- 
entiously opposed  to  license.  Accord- 
ingly it  has  often  been  suggested  that  a 
basis  of  agreement  between  the  moderate 
and  the  radical  temperance  people  might 
be  reached  through  a  policy  of  "  restric- 
tion without  license  " — that  is,  a  policy 
retaining  and  strengthening  all  the  sepa- 
rate restraints  of  present  license  laws, 
but  eliminating  the  feature  of  express 
sanction.  This  is  proposed  on  the 
ground  that  so  far  as  the  law  speaks 
concerning  the  status  of  the  drink  traffic 
or  any  other  vicious  business  it  should 
speak  in  words  of  prohibition — that  if 
not  prepared  at  once  to  prohibit  the 
whole  traffic,  the  State  should  prohibit 
certain  features  of  it,  as  is  now  done, 
but  without  sanctioning  those  features 
not  now  forbidden,  and  without  taking 
revenue  from  the  business.  (For  a 
full  discussion  of  this  subject  see 
the  address  delivered  by  I.  K.  Funk, 
D.D.,  in  "Proceedings  of  the  National 
Temperance  Congress,  Held  in  the 
Broadway  Tabernacle,  New  York,  June 
11  and  12,  1890.") 

[For  the  restrictions  embraced  in  various 
liquor  laws  the  reader  is  referred  to  Legis- 
lation.] 

Revenue. — See  Cost  of  the  Driis'k 
Traffic  and  Internal  Kevenub. 

Rhode  Island. — See  Index. 

Riley,  Ashbel  Wells.  —  Born  in 
Glastonbury,  Hartford  County,  Conn., 
March  19, 1795;  died  in  Rochester,  N.Y., 
April  3,  1888.  He  took  up  his  resid- 
ence in  Rochester  in  1816  and  was  one 
of  the  first  five  village  Trustees.  When 
the  village  became  a  city  he  was  made 
one  of  its  Aldermen.  In  1828  he  was 
appointed  Brigadier-General  in  the  New 
York  State  Militia.  While  an  Alderman 
of  Rochester  he  began  visiting  the  jail 
and  distributing  tracts  among  the  pris- 
oners. In  1836  with  two  other  Alder- 
men he  refused  to  grant  licenses  for  the 
sale  of  liquor.  He  first  became  an  advo- 
cate of  Prohibition,  as  he  stated  in  a 
speech  before  the  International  Temper- 
ance Conference  at  Philadelphia  in  1876, 
while  watching  a  tavern  burn  in  a  little 


town  in  Montgomery  County,  N.  Y.,  and 
hearing  the  wife  of  a  man  who  had  been 
made  a  drunkard  in  that  tavern  exclaim, 
"  Glory  to  God !  I  prayed  for  that."  He 
was  a  strong  Abolitionist,  and  the  first 
Abolition  meeting  held  in  Rochester  met 
in  his  house.  He  was  also  an  ardent 
Sabbatarian  and  lost  several  thousand 
dollars  in  an  attempt  to  sustain  a  Sab- 
bath-observing line  of  boats  on  the  Erie 
Canal.  He  began  lecturing  for  temper- 
ance about  1838.  Though  not  an  edu- 
cated man  he  was  a  very  effective  agita- 
tor. Some  of  his  methods  were  novel. 
Sometimes  he  paid  liquor-sellers  to  come 
and  hear  him.  Prof.  A.  A.  Hopkins 
says :  "  Gen,  Riley  was  the  first  total  ab- 
stinence Avorker  to  use  the  pledge  in  a 
systematic  fashion."  A  medal  which  he 
presented  to  pledge-signers  bore  a  pic- 
ture of  the  "old  oaken  bucket;"  more 
than  6,000  of  these  medals  were  distribu- 
ted. He  paid  his  own  expenses  and 
worked  for  the  love  of  the  cause,  travel- 
ling extensively  and  making  several 
thousand  speeches  in  the  United  States, 
and  lecturing  also  in  various  parts  of  the 
United  Kingdom,  France  and  Italy. 
The  mother  of  Miss  Frances  E.  Willard 
took  the  pledge  after  listening  to  one  of 
his  addresses.  A  thorough-going  radi- 
cal, he  believed  in  the  principles  of  the 
Prohibition  party  and  cast  his  sixty- 
eighth  annual  ballot  for  its  ticket. 

Roman  Catholic  Church. — From 
very  early  times  it  has  been  the  universal 
practice  of  priests  in  the  confessional  to 
administer  the  total  abstinence  pledge  as 
a  penance  to  persons  addicted  to  the  ex- 
cessive use  of  intoxicants,  and  to  make 
abstinence  on  the  part  of  such  persons  a 
condition  of  partaking  of  the  sacra- 
ments. The  attitude  of  the  church  in 
this  country  in  relation  to  the  use  and 
sale  of  alcoholic  beverages  is  stated  in  the 
decrees  issued  by  the  3d  Plenary  Council 
of  Roman  Catholic  Prelates  in  the  United 
States,  held  at  Baltimore  in  1884-5.  Of 
these  decrees  the  following  are  the  most 
important  ones  touching  temperance : 

"  113.  A  Christian  should  carefully  avoid  not 
only  what  is  positively  evil,  but  what  has  even 
the  appearance  of  evil,  and  more  especially 
whatever  commonly  leads  to  it.  Therefore 
Catholics  should  generously  renounce  all  recre- 
ations and  all  kinds  of  business  which  may 
interfere  with  keeping  holy  the  Lord's  day,  or 
which  are  calculated  to  lead  to  the  violation  of 
the  laws  of  God  or  of  the  State.     The  worst. 


Roman  Catholic  Church.] 


598 


[Roman  Catholic  Church. 


without  doubt,  is  the  carrying  on  of  business  in 
barrooms  and  saloons  on  Sunday,  a  traffic  by 
means  of  which  so  many  and  such  grievous  in- 
juries are  done  to  religion  and  society.  Let  pas- 
tors earnestly  labor  to  root  out  this  evil  ;  let 
them  admonish  and  entreat  ;  let  them  even  re- 
sort to  threatenings  and  penalties,  when  it  be- 
comes necessary.  They  should  do  all  that  be- 
longs to  their  office  to  efface  this  stain,  now 
nearly  the  only  blot  remaining  among  us,  obscur- 
ing the  splendor  of  the  day  of  the  Lord. 

"260.  There  is  no  doubt  but  that  among  the 
evils  we  especially  deplore  in  this  country  the 
abuse  of  intoxicating  drinks  is  to  be  mmibered, 
for  this  excess  is  the  constant  source  of  sin  and 
the  fruitful  origin  of  misery.  Utter  ruin  has 
thereby  come  to  innumerable  individuals  and 
whole  families,  and  it  has  dragged  many  souls 
headlong  to  eternal  destruction.  And,  since 
this  vice  has  spread  not  a  little  even  among  the 
Catholics,  scandal  is  thus  given  to  non-Catholics 
and  a  great  obstacle  is  set  up  against  the  spread 
of  religion.  Both  love  of  religion  and  of  coun- 
try therefore  urge  all  Christians  to  use  every 
effort  to  stamp  out  this  pestiferous  evil. 

"26L  It  is  from  the  priests  of  the  Church 
that  we  especially  hope  for  assistance  in  this 
work  ;  for  upon  them  has  God  imposed  the 
duty  of  imparting  the  "Word  of  Life,  and  of 
propagating  sound  morality  among  the  people. 
Let  them  never  cease  to  cry  out  boldly  against 
drunkenness,  and  whatsoever  leads  to  it  ;  and 
let  this  be  done  more  especially  during  such 
seasons  of  devotion  as  retreats  and  missions. 
Let  them  bear  in  mind  the  teaching  of  the 
Apostle  and  earnestly  admonish  their  people 
that  '  drunkards  shall  not  inherit  the  kingdom 
of  God.'  (I  Cor.  6:10.)  Those  of  their  hocks 
M'ho  presumptuously  deem  themselves  above  the 
danger  of  temptation  should  be  warned  that  '  he 
that  loveth  the  danger  shall  perish  in  it.' 
(Ecclesiasticus  3:27.)  And  since  the  moving 
force  of  instruction  should  be  strengthened  by 
the  attractive  power  of  good  example,  the  clergy 
themselves  should  in  this  matter  be  patterns  to 
their  flocks,  exhibiting  in  their  own  conduct 
living  models  of  the  virtue  of  temperance. 

"262.  Following  in  the  footsteps  of  the 
Fathers,  the  other  councils  of  Baltimore,  and 
supported  by  the  teachings  of  the  Angelic  Doc- 
tor, we  heartily  approve  and  commend  the 
praiseworthy  custom  of  many  who  in  our  day 
abstain  entirely  from  the  use  of  intoxicating 
liquors,  thus  to  overcome  more  certainly  the 
vice  of  intemperance,  either  by  removing  from 
themselves  the  occasions  thereof  or  by  present- 
ing to  others  a  splendid  example  of  the  virtue  of 
temperance,  whose  zeal  we  willingly  admit  is 
according  to  knowledge  and  has  already  brought 
forth  abundant  fruit  and  promises  still  greater 
iu  the  future. 

"263.  Lastly,  we  warn  our  faithful  people 
who  sell  intoxicating  liquors  to  consider  se- 
riously by  how  many  and  how  serious  dangers 
and  occasions  of  sin  their  business — although 
licit  unlawful  in  itself — is  surromided.  If  they 
can,  let  them  choose  a  more  honorable  way  of 
making  a  living;  but  if  they  cannot,  let  them 
study  by  all  means  to  remove  from  themselves 
and  others  the  occasions  of  sin.  Let  ^hem  not 
gel  1  drink  to  the  young — that  is,  to  those  who 


are  not  of  age, — nor  to  those  who  they  foresee 
will  abuse  drink.  Let  them  keep  their  .saloons 
closed  on  Sundays,  and  at  no  time  let  them  al- 
low blasphemy,  cursing  or  obscene  language 
within  the  walls  of  their  taverns.  If  through 
their  culpable  neglect  of  co-operation  religion  is 
brought  into  contempt  and  souls  ruined,  they 
must  know  that  in  Heaven  there  is  an  Avenger 
who  will  exact  the  severest  punishment  from 
them." 

These  declarations  of  the  Plenary 
Council,  and  the  principles  and  work  of 
the  Catholic  Total  Abstinence  Union 
(see  Catholic  Temperance  Societies), 
were  recognized  and  warmly  commended 
by  the  present  Pope.  Leo  XIII.,  in  a 
letter  to  Bishop  Ireland  of  Minnesota,  as 
follows : 

"To  Our  Venerable  Brother,  John  Ire- 
land, Bishop  OF  St.  Paul,  Minn.,  Leo  XIII., 
Pope. —  Venerable  Brother:  Health  and  apos- 
tolic benediction.  The  admirable  works  or 
piety  and  charity  by  which  our  faithful  children 
in  tiie  United  States  labor  to  promote  not  only 
their  own  temporal  and  eternal  welfare  but  also 
that  of  their  fellow-citizens,  and  which  you 
have  recently  related  to  us,  give  t(j  us  exceeding 
great  consolation.  And  above  all  we  have  re- 
joiced to  learn  with  what  energy  and  zeal,  by 
means  of  various  excellent  associations,  and  es- 
pecially through  the  Catholic  Total  Abstinence 
L'niou,  you  combat  the  destructive  vice  of  in- 
temperance. For  it  is  well  known  to  us  how 
ruinous,  how  deplorable  is  the  injury  both  to 
faith  and  to  morals  that  is  to  be  feared  from  in- 
temperance in  drink.  Nor  can  we  sufficiently 
praise  the  prelates  of  the  United  States  who  re- 
cently in  the  Plenary  Council  of  Baltimore  with 
weightiest  words  condemned  this  abuse,  declar- 
ing it  to  be  a  perpetual  incentive  to  sin  and  a 
fruitful  root  of  all  evils,  plunging  the  families 
of  the  intemperate  into  the  direst  ruin,  and 
drawing  numberless  souls  down  to  everlasting 
perdition;  declaring  moreover  that  the  faithful 
who  yield  to  this  vice  of  intemperance  become 
thereby  a  scandal  to  non-Catholics,  and  a  great 
hinderance  to  the  propagation  of  the  true  re- 
ligion. 

"  Hence  we  esteem  worthy  of  all  commenda- 
tion the  noble  resolve  of  your  pious  associations, 
by  which  they  pledge  themselves  to  abstain  to- 
tally from  every  kind  of  intoxicating  drink. 
Nor  can  it  at  all  be  doubted  that  this  determi- 
nation is  the  proper  and  the  truly  efficacious 
remedy  for  this  very  great  evil;  and  that  so 
much  the  more  stroiigly  will  all  be  induced  to 
put  this  bridle  upon  appetite  l)y  how  much  the 
greater  are  the  dignity  and  intluence  of  those 
who  give  the  example.  But  greatest  of  all  in 
this  matter  should  be  the  zeal  of  priests,  who, 
as  they  are  called  to  instruct  the  people  in  the 
word  of  life  and  to  moidd  them  to  Christian 
morality,  .should  also  and  above  all  walk  be- 
fore them  in  the  practice  of  virtue.  Let  pas- 
tors, therefore,  do  their  best  to  drive  the  plague 
of  intemperance  from  the  fold  of  Christ  by 
assiduous  preaching  and  exhortation,  and  to 
shine  before  all  as  models  of  abstinence,  that  so 
the    many    calamities    with    which    this    vice 


Roman  Catholic  Church.] 


599 


[Roman  Catholic  Church. 


threatens  both  churcli  and  State  may  by  their 
strenuous  endeavors  be  averted. 

"And  we  most  earnestly  beseech  Almighty 
God  that,  in  this  important  matter,  he  may 
graciously  favor  your  desires,  direct  your  coun- 
sels and  assist  your  endeavors;  and  as  a  pledge 
of  the  Divine  i^rotection,  and  a  testimony  of  our 
paternal  affection,  we  most  lovingly  bestow 
upon  you,  Venerable  Brother,  and  upon  all 
your  associates  in  this  holy  league,  the  apos- 
tolic benediction. 

"Given  at  Kome,  from  St.  Peter's,  this  27th 
day  of  March,  in  the  year  1887,  the  tenth  year 
of  our  Pontificate. 

"Leo  XIII.,  Pope." 

As  the  attitude  of  the  Eonian  Catholic 
clergy  of  the  United  States  was  deliued 
by  the  decrees  already  qttoted,  so  the 
views  of  the  laity  were  declared  by  the 
1st  Congress  of  Catholic  Laymen,  held  in 
Baltimore  in  November,  1889.  The  de- 
liverances of  that  Congress  embraced 
the  following: 

"We  should  seek  alliance  with  non-Catho- 
lics for  proper  Sunday  observance.  Without 
going  over  to  the  Judaic  Sabbath  Ave  can  bring 
the  masses  over  to  the  moderation  of  the  Chris- 
tian Sunday.  To  effect  this  we  must  set  our 
faces  sternly  again.st  the  sale  of  intoxicating 
beverages  on  Sunday,  The  corrupting  influ- 
ence of  saloons  in  politics,  the  crime  and  pau- 
perism resulting  from  excessive  drinking,  re- 
quire legislative  restriction,  which  we  can  aid 
in  procuring  by  joining  our  influence  with  that 
of  the  other  enemies  of  intemperance.  Let  us 
resolve  that  drunkenness  shall  be  made  odious 
and  give  practical  encouragement  and  support 
to  Catholic  temperance  societies.  We  favor  the 
passage  and  enforcement  of  laws  rigidlj^  closing 
saloons  on  Sunday  and  forbidding  the  sale  of 
liquors  to  minors  and  intoxicated  persons. " 

In  the  controversy  between  the  sup- 
porters of  High  License  and  restriction 
and  the  radicals  who  insist  on  absolute 
Prohibition,  the  church  does  not  for- 
mally take  sides.  The  Catholic  Pro- 
hibitionists naturally  derive  much  com- 
fort, as  well  as  weighty  arguments,  from 
the  strong  utterances  of  the  Plenary 
Council  and  the  words  of  the  Pope.  But 
it  seems  to  be  understood  at  present  that 
most  of  the  Catholic  leaders  hold  con- 
servative opinions  so  far  as  legislative 
policy  is  concerned — that  is,  while  pre- 
pared to  approve  High  License  and 
similar  measures  they  seem  to  be  slow  to 
urge  complete  Prohibition  as  the  sole 
remedy.  On  the  other  hand  Prohibition 
sentiment  is  steadily  gaining  groitnd, 
and  there  is  no  doubt  that  many  of  its 
important  champions  are  influential 
Catholics. 

Some   of   the   most   pronounced    and 


memorable  of  all  utterances  on  drinkinof 
and  drink  have  come  from  fathers  of  the 
church  and  very  eminent  contemporary 
prelates.  Li  the  8th  Century  St.  Boni- 
face, in  a  letter  to  the  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  administered  this  rebuke : 

"  It  is  reported  that  in  your  diocese  the  vice 
of  drunkenness  is  too  frequent,  so  that  not  only 
certain  Bishops  do  not  hinder  it  but  they  them- 
selves indulge  in  excess  of  drink  and  force 
others  to  drink  till  they  are  intoxicated.  This 
is  certainly  a  great  crime  for  a  servant  of  God 
to  do  or  to  have  done,  since  the  ancient  canons 
decree  that  a  Bishop  or  a  priest  given  to  drink 
should  either  resign  or  be  deposed."  ' 

St.  Thomas  Aquinas,  the  "Angelic 
Doctor"  referred  to  in  the  Plenary 
Council  decrees,  who  lived  in  the  13th 
Centitry,  taught  that  "There  are  things 
contrary  to  soundness  or  a  good  condi- 
tion of  life,  and  the  temperate  man  does 
not  use  these  in  any  measure,  for  this 
would  be  a  sin  against  temperance." ' 

Among  the  highly  distinguished  Cath- 
olic divines  of  this  day  Cardinal  Man- 
ning (England)  and  Archbishop  Ireland 
(United  States)  are  especially  emphatic 
in  speaking  for  the  abolition  of  the 
saloon.  (It  shoiild  be  said  by  way  of 
qualification,  however,  that  both  Cardi- 
nal Mannitig  and  Archbishop  L-eland 
have  shown  a  tendency  to  accept  com- 
j)romise  legislation  while  waiting  for 
complete  Prohibition.)  In  a  celebrated 
speech  at  Bolton,  Eng.,  Cardinal  Man- 
ning said: 

"I  impeach  the  liquor  traffic  of  high  crime* 
and  misdemeanors  against  the  commonwealth, 
and  I  ask  you,  in  the  name  of  common  sensfr 
and  common  justice,  can  you  withhold  from 
those  intrusted  with  the  high  responsibility  of 
the  l)allot  the  power  of  applying  their  votes  in 
the  form  of  a  veto  when  it  is  pro]iosed,  without 
consulting  them,  to  put  in  the  midst  of  them 
these  places  for  the  sale  of  intoxicating 
drinks  ?  ...  It  is  mere  mockery  to  ask  us  to 
put  down  driuikenness  by  moral  and  religious 
means,  when  the  Legislature  facilitates  the 
multiplication  of  incitements  to  intemperance  on 
every  side.  You  might  as  well  call  iq)on  me 
as  the  captain  of  a  sinking  ship,  and  say : 
'Whj'  don't  you  pump  the  water  outV  when 
you  are  scuttling  the  ship  in  every  direction. 
If  you  will  cut  off  the  supply  of  temptation  I 
will  be  bound  by  the  help  of  God  to  convert 
drunkards  ;  but  until  you  have  taken  off  this 
l)erpetual  supply  of  intoxicating  drink  we 
never  can  cultivate  the  fields.     You  have  sub- 


'  Discipline  of  Drink,  by  Rev  T.  E.  Brid^ett  (London, 
1S7(J),  p.  77. 

=  Summaj    Theolugxu-'    (Parma,   18"J4),    (iuiestio  cxM, 
art.  fa. 


Roman  Catholic  Church.] 


600 


[Ross,  William. 


merged  them,  and  if  ever  we  reclaim  one  por- 
tion you  immediately  begin  to  build  upon  it 
a  gin  palace  or  some  temptation  to  drink.  The 
other  day,  when  a  benevolent  man  had  estab- 
lished a  sailors'  home,  I  was  told  there  were  two 
hundred  places  of  drink  round  about  it.  How, 
then,  can  we  contend  against  these  legalized 
and  multiplied  facilities  and  temptations  to  in- 
toxication ?  This  is  my  answer  to  the  bland 
objurgation  of  those  who  tell  us  the  ministers 
of  reltgion  are  not  doing  their  part:  let  the  Leg- 
islature do  its  part  and  we  will  answer  for  the 
rest." 

Archbishop  Ireland,  in  an  address  be- 
fore the  Minnesota  Catholic  Total  Absti- 
nence Union,  June  5,  1889,  at  Minne- 
apolis, said,  in  part : 

' '  We  thought  we  meant  business  years  ago 
in  this  warfare,  but  I  hope  God  will  forgive  us 
for  our  weakness,  for  we  went  into  the  battle- 
field without  sufficient  resolution.  We  labored 
under  the  fatal  mistake  that  we  could  argue 
out  the  question  with  the  rumsellers.  We 
imagined  that  there  was  some  power  in  moral 
suasion,  that  when  we  would  show  them  the 
evil  of  their  ways  they  would  abandon  the 
traffic.  We  have  seen  that  there  is  no  hope  of 
improving  in  any  shape  or  form  the  liquor 
trattic.  There  is  nothing  now  to  be  done  but 
to  wipe  it  out  completely. "  ' 

The  relations  of  individual  Catholics 
to  the  drink  traffic  were  graphically 
stated  by  Archbishop  Ireland  in  an  arti- 
cle in  the  Catholic  World  for  October, 
1890,  the  occasion  being  the  centennial 
anniversary  of  the  birthday  of  Father 
Mathew : 

' '  In  the  centennial  of  Father  Mathew  there  is 
a  deep  significance.  It  speaks  to  us,  in  accents 
that  will  not  be  stilled,  of  our  own  duty.  In- 
temperance is  among  us,  doing  fearful  harm  to 
bodies  and  to  souls.  It  has  not  the  unlimited 
sway  which  former  years  accorded  to  it :  there 
are  serried  battalions  in  the  field  opposing  it. 
Public  opinion  no  longer  fawns  to  it  ;  both  its 
victims  and  its  agents  are  held  in  ill-repute. 
Yet,  withal,  the  slimy  serpent  lives,  and  through 
all  ranks  of  society  it  trails  its  poison-laden 
lengths,  distilling  in  all  directions  its  x^estilen- 
tial  breathings.  Who  is  there  who  has  not  sor- 
rowed over  its  ravages  ?  Let  me  speak  as  a 
Catholic.  .  .  .  Intemperance  to-day  is  doing 
Holy  Church  harm  beyond  the  power  of  pen  to 
describe,  and  unless  we  crush  it  out  Catholicity 
can  make  but  slow  advance  in  America.  I 
would  say,  intemperance  is  our  one  misfortune. 
With  all  other  difficulties  we  can  easily  cope, 
and  cope  successfully.  Intemperance,  as  noth- 
ing else,  paralyzes  our  forces,  awakens  in  the 
minds  of  our  non-Catholic  fellow-citizens  vio- 
lent prejudices  against  us  and  casts  over  all  the 
priceless  treasures  of  truth  and  grace  which  the 
church  carries  in  her  bosom  an  impenetrable  veil 
of  darkness.  Need  I  particularize  ?  Catholics 
nearly  monopohze  the  liquor  traffic  ;  Catholics 

»  The  Voice,  June  13.  1889. 


loom  up  before  the  Criminal  Courts  of  the  land, 
under  the  charge  of  drunkenness  and  other  vio- 
lations of  law  resulting  from  drunkenness,  in 
undue  majorities  ;  poorhouses  and  asylums  are 
thronged  with  Catholics,  the  immediate  or  me- 
diate victims  of  drink  ;  the  poverty,  the  sin, 
the  shame  that  fall  upon  our  people  result 
almost  entirely  from  drink,  and,  God  knows, 
tho.se  afflictions  come  upon  them  thick  and 
heavy  !  No  one  would  dare  assert,  so  strong 
the  evidence,  that  the  disgrace  from  liquor- 
selling  and  liquor-drinking  taken  from  us,  the 
most  hateful  enemy  could  throw  a  stone  at  us, 
or  that  our  people  would  not  come  out  in  broad 
daylight  before  the  country  as  the  purest,  the 
most  law-abiding,  the  most  honored  element  in 
its  population." 

Ross,  William. — Born  in  London, 
Eng.,  Dec.  25,  1812;  died  in  Dover,  111., 
Dec.  18,  1875.  As  a  boy  he  learned  to 
drink  at  the  table  of  his  father,  who  was 
a  Colonel  in  the  British  army,  stationed 
atMontreal,  Canada.  He  had  many  wild 
youthful  escapades,  became  dissipated 
and  at  20  was  turned  into  the  street 
one  cold  night  by  a  tavern-keeper,  with 
whom  he  was  boarding.  A  gentleman 
found  him  lying  in  the  snow,  his  hand 
having  been  crushed  by  the  door  as  it 
was  shut  after  him.  A  few  days  later, 
with  his  arm  in  a  sling,  he  made  his  first 
temperance  speech  at  Eochester,  IN".  Y. 
Soon  after  this  he  was  led  to  devote  his 
life  to  fighting  the  drink  curse  by  a 
tragic  circumstance.  His  twin  sister, 
wife  of  a  British  army  officer,  was  killed 
by  a  blow  from  a  glass  thrown  by  her 
husband  in  a  fit  of  drunken  passion  at  a 
servant.  Mr.  Ross  studied  medicine  at 
AVoodstock,  Vt.,  that  he  might  be  better 
prepared  to  treat  the  subject  of  alcohol 
from  a  pathological  point  of  view.  In 
his  earlier  lectures  he  carried  a  small 
still  by  means  of  which  he  illustrated 
the  adulteration  of  liquors.  He  lectured 
extensively  in  nearly  every  State  of  the 
East,  South  and  North,  and  in  central 
New  York.  At  the  outbreak  of  the  Civil 
War  he  was  living  in  Missouri,  but  was 
compelled,  because  of  Union  principles, 
to  move  to  Illinois.  He  entered  actively 
into  the  campaign  of  186-4  for  the  Re- 
publican party.  In  his  temperance  work 
he  early  became  convinced  that  "  moral 
suasion  for  the  victim,  legal  suasion  for 
the  victimizer  "  was  the  true  basis  upon 
which  the  reform  should  be  wrought 
out,  and  for  him  is  claimed  the  honor  of 
introducing  and  having  adopted  by  the 
State  Temperance  Convention  at  Bloom- 
ington,  111.,  Dec.  9,  1868,  the  first  uu- 


Royal  Templars  of  Temperance.]  601 


[Rush,  Benjamin. 


qualified  Prohibition  party  resolution 
enunciated  by  a  State  temperance  organ- 
ization. The  platform,  as  originally  pre- 
sented in  this  Convention,  made  the  fol- 
lowing declaration :  "  We  accept  the 
issue  made  by  the  liquor-dealers  and 
Beer  Congresses  and  will  meet  them  at 
the  polls."  At  the  instance  of  Dr.  Ross 
this  amendment  was  added:  "and  m 
support  of  these  sentiments  we  will  pro- 
ceed to  form  a  Prohibition  party." 

Royal  Templars  of  Temper- 
ance.—This  Order  was  originally  or- 
ganized in  Buffalo,  N.  Y.,  in  18G9,  as  a 
league  of  temperance  workers  who  were 
members  of  the  Good  Templars.  Sons  of 
Temperance  and  Temple  of  Honor,  the 
object  being  to  labor  "  unceasingly  for 
the  promotion  of  the  cause  of  temper- 
ance, morally,  socially,  religiously  and 
politically."  It  was  intended  to  be  wholly 
educational  in  its  methods,  and  no 
special  efforts  were  made  to  establish  the 
Order  outside  the  city  of  Buffalo.  In 
February,  1877,  it  was  reorganized  on 
the  present  basis  as  a  beneficiary  insu- 
rance Order.  The  membership  consists 
of  beneficiary  members  and  honorary 
members.  At  the  end  of  1889  there  were 
15,349  beneficiary  members  and  4,679 
honorary  members — total,  20,028.  The 
expenditures  for  the  year  1889  were 
$272,672.49,  divided  as  follows:  general 
fund,  $13,874.18 ;  beneficiary  fund,  1258,- 
069.91 ;  additional  benefit,  1120.92 ;  prop- 
agation fund,  $607.48.  The  newspapers 
of  the  Order  are  the  Royal  Temflar, 
published  at  Buffalo,  N.  Y.,  and  the  In- 
ternational Royal  Templar,  published 
at  Hamilton,  Ont. 

Rum. — See  Spirituous  Liquors. 

Rum  Power.— A  name  for  the  or- 
ganized liquor  traffic,  having  much 
the  same  significance  that  the  term 
"slave  power"  formerly  had.  The 
"rum  power"  is  that  great  political 
factor,  embracing  all  who  are  pecuniar- 
ily interested  in  the  traffic  and  their  im- 
mediate followers,  which  stands  ready  to 
resist,  by  open  or  secret  warfare,  all 
Prohibitory  or  restrictive  legislation,  to 
prevent  the  enforcement  of  statutes,  to 
intimidate  parties  and  to  fill  the  public 
offices  with  pro-liquor  partisans.  (See 
pp.  384-5.) 


Rush,  Benjamin. — Born  at  Bristol, 
Pa.  (near  Philadelphia),  Dec.  24,  1745; 
died  in  Philadelphia,  April  19,  1813.  He 
was  of  Quaker  extraction,  his  grand- 
father having  joined  ^yilliam  Penn's  set- 
tlers in  1683.  He  was  educated  at 
Princeton  College,  graduating  in  1760; 
studied  medicine  in  Philadelphia  and 
Edinburgh,  and  had  hospital  experience 
in  London  and  Paris;  was  appointed 
Professor  of  Chemistry  in  the  Philadel- 
phia Medical  College  in  1769,  and  be- 
came a  very  successful  practitioner  and  a 
voluminous  writer  on  medical  subjects. 
He  is  sometimes  called  "  The  Sydenham 
of  America."  For  years  he  was  recog- 
nized as  the  most  eminent  medical  man 
of  Philadelphia,  if  not  of  America.  A 
very  close  friend  of  Benjamin  Franklin's, 
he  was,  like  that  philosopher,  abstemious 
and  regular  in  his  personal  habits. 
Though  his  scientific  tastes  were  keen 
he  was  above  all  a  man  of  public  spirit. 
He  retained  his  connection  with  the 
Philadelphia  Medical  College  until  that 
institution  was  consolidated  with  the 
University  of  Pennsylvania  (1791),  and 
then  he  became  a  professor  in  the  L^ni- 
versity.  He  took  especial  interest  in  all 
studies  and  work  designed  to  alleviate 
the  worst  plagues  of  the  race.  During 
the  yellow  fever  epidemic  in  Philadel- 
phia in  1793  he  was  untiring;  he  is 
credited  with  having  saved  several  thou- 
sand lives  at  that  time,  personally  min- 
istering to  more  than  a  hundred  patients 
each  day.  Chosen  a  member  of  the  Con- 
tinental Congress  of  1776  he  was  one  of 
the  signers  of  the  Declaration  of  Inde- 
pendence. He  was  also  a  member  of  the 
Constitutional  Convention  of  1787.  He 
withdrew  from  politics  in  1787,  but 
was  recalled  to  the  public  service  in  1799, 
when  he  was  appointed  Treasurer  of  the 
United  States  Mint,  a  position  that  he 
held  until  his  death.  He  took  a  promi- 
nent part  in  organizing  the  first  Anti- 
Slavery  society  in  this  country  (1774) 
and  was  its  Secretary  for  many  years. 
All  movements  for  the  advancement  of 
philanthropy,  religion  and  humanity's 
cause  generally  fovind  a  cordial  friend  in 
him.  When  his  professional  success  was 
assured  he  devoted  one-seventh  of  his 
income  to  charitable  purposes. 

The  publication  in  1785  of  Dr.  Rush's 
famous  essay  on  "  The  Effects  of  Ardent 
Spirits  on  the  Human  Body  and  Mind," 


Rush,  Benjamin.] 


CO- 


[Rush,  Beniamin. 


marks  the  beginning,  in  English-speak- 
ing countries,  of  formal  discussion  of 
the  drink  evil.  Despite  the  utterances 
and  efforts  that  had  preceded  it,  no 
deep  or  lasting  impression  had  been 
made  by  them.  It  can  truly  be  said 
that  before  this  essay  was  printed  there 
was  no  such  thing  in  existence  as  an 
extended,  weighty  and  well-sustained 
argument  of  practical  character  against 
the  use  of  strong  drink.  The  injunc- 
tions and  warnings  of  Scripture,  the 
declarations  of  prominent  men  of  all  pe- 
riods of  the  world's  history,  the  pro- 
hibitions and  restrictions  of  early  Eng- 
lish and  American  liquor  legislation, 
were  merely  detached  pleas  and  sugges- 
tions that  commended  themselves  to  the 
judgment  of  reflecting  and  virtuous  peo- 
ple, but  had  never  impelled  a  writer  of 
respectable  parts  to  make  a  studied  attack 
upon  the  customs  and  prejudices  of  the 
day  or  to  lay  foundations  for  a  distinct 
propaganda.  True,  Dr.  Rush  did  not 
create  an  organized  following,  and  the 
results  of  his  work,  if  judged  by  re- 
sponsive public  manifestations,  seem 
to  have  been  meagre  in  his  day.  Yet 
his  pamphlet,  read  by  most  of  the 
thoughtful  Americans  of  the  time,  had  a 
convincing  effect  upon  many  minds,  and 
did  much  to  raise  up  special  advocates 
of  reform  and  to  establish  the  general 
sentiment  that  began  to  take  shape  soon 
after  the  opening  of  the  lOtli  Century. 
In  England  the  Genthman's  Magazine 
reprinted  it  in  1786,  and  Dr.  Rush  made 
special  efforts  to  extend  its  circulation, 
presenting  copies  to  religious  and  other 
organizations.  The  value  and  influence 
of  this  essay  are  considered  so  important 
by  the  temperance  people  of  the  present 
day  that  a  Centennial  Temperance  Con- 
ference was  held  in  Philadelphia  in  1885 
to  commemorate  the  one  hundredth  year 
since  its  publication. 

The  essay  assails  distilled  spirits  only, 
and  even  commends  beer  and  wine.  It 
was  natural  for  early  writers  to  view  the 
weaker  intoxicants  with  some  favor,  for 
scientific  testimony  against  them  was 
then  scant  and  the  evils  of  spirit-drink- 
ing were  overshadowing.  In  an  age  when 
it  was  thought  proper  and  indeed  essen- 
tial to  take  the  most  fiery  liquors,  and 
scarcely  discreditable  to  indulge  in  them 
beyond  ordinary  bounds,  an  unusual 
courage  and  clearness  of  percej^tion  was 


necessary  to  speak  uncompromisingly 
against  them.  Dr.  Rush  not  only  spoke 
uncompromisingly  but  laid  out  nearly  all 
the  fundamental  lines  of  argument  along 
which  the  present  temperance  move- 
ment is  pressed.  He  showed  that  dis- 
tilled spirits  should  never  be  used  except 
in  extreme  cases.  He  described  their 
effects  upon  the  victim  in  striking 
words : 

"  In  folly  it  causes  him  to  resemble  a  calf;  in 
stupidity,  an  ass  ;  in  roaring,  a  mad  bull  ;  in 
qviaiToling  and  fighting,  a  dog  ;  in  cruelty,  a 
tiger  ;  in  fetor,  a  skunk  ;  iu  tilthiness,  a  hog, 
and  in  obscenity,  a  he-goat." 

He  alluded  to  the  hereditary  and  de- 
ranging influences  of  spirituous  drink, 
and  urged  physicians  to  exercise  great 
caution  in  prescribing  it.  He  declared 
with  the  utmost  positiveness  that  such 
drink  was  of  no  value  for  sustaining  the 
body  either  in  very  cold  or  in  very  hot 
weather,  or  in  times  of  manual  or  mental 
labor.  He  warned  his  readers  against 
tobacco.  He  laid  stress  on  the  reminder 
that  "no  man  ever  became  suddenly  a 
drunkard."  He  besought  ministers  of 
the  gospel  and  church  organizations  to 
help  in  the  reform,  and  pointed  out  the 
political  danger  of  being  "governed  by 
men  chosen  by  intemperate  and  cor- 
rupted voters."  He  mentioned  the  de- 
sirability of  legislation.  Finally  he  pro- 
nounced against  the  "  tapering-off' "  plan, 
saying  that  drinkers  should  abstain 
"suddenly  and  entirely." 

It  is  most  interesting  to  note  that 
among  the  substitutes  for  spirits  recom- 
mended by  Dr.  Rush  (and  recommended 
not  once  but  several  times),  prominence 
is  given  to  opium.  In  the  very  last 
words  he  speaks  of  laudanum  as  one  of 
the  temporary  substitutes  whose  employ- 
ment for  effecting  a  transition  to  sober 
habits  he  has  "  never  known  to  be  attend- 
ed with  any  bad  effects."  In  another 
place  he  says  that  "wine  and  opium 
should  always  be  preferred  to  ardent 
spirits ;"  that  "  they  are  far  less  injurious 
to  the  body  and  mind  than  spirits,  and 
the  habits  of  attachment  to  them  are 
easily  broken  after  time  and  repentance 
have  removed  the  evils  they  were  taken 
to  relieve."  When  Dr.  Rush  published 
his  essay,  the  opium  habit  was  not  wide- 
spread in  America  or  England  ;  its  ter- 
rors were  not  generally  known  ;  De 
Quincy   had   not    penned    his   "Confes- 


Russell,  John.] 


603 


[Russia. 


sions"  and  Coleridge  had  not  written 
his  despairing  words :  "  Carmen  reliquum 
in  futurnm  tempus  relegatuni — To-mor- 
row !  and  To-morrow !  and  To-morrow  I "' 
Neither  had  England  fairly  entered  upon 
the  work  of  enslaving  China.  Bnt  the 
formal  endorsement  of  so  fearful  a  drug 
by  a  scientific  writer  in  a  work  especially 
designed  to  combat  ignorance  and  temp- 
tation and  to  serve  a  philanthropic  pur- 
pose, is  exceedingly  instructive.  The 
fact  that  a  man  like  Dr.  Rush,  in  the 
light  of  the  meagre  scientific  testimony 
and  the  restricted  observation  of  his 
time,  did  not  hesitate  to  approve  opium, 
is  a  sufficient  answer  to  all  who  may 
be  disposed  to  cite  his  authority  in  be- 
half of  malt  and  vinous  liquors. 

Russell,  John,  first  candidate  of  the 
Prohibition  party  for  Vice-President  of 
the  United  States;  born  in  Livingston 
County,  N.  Y.,  Sept.  20,  1822.  His  par- 
ents came  from  New  Jersey  and  were 
of  Puritan  descent.  In  18o8  they  re- 
moved to  Michigan.  John  acquired  his 
education  in  the  district  school,  but  im- 
proved it  by  reading  and  study.  At  the 
age  of  21  he  became  a  Methodist  minister 
in  the  Detroit  Conference.  He  had 
pastoral  charges  in  Port  Huron,  Romeo, 
Ypsilanti,  Plint,  Pontiac,  Marquette  and 
Detroit.  For  eiglit  years  he  was  a  Presid- 
ing Elder.  He  was  a  delegate  to  the 
General  Conference  in  1860  and  1880. 
In  the  last-mentioned  year  he  was  C'hair- 
man  of  the  Special  Committee  on  Tem- 
perance and  wrote  the  important  report 
submitted  by  it.  The  following  words, 
still  included  in  the  doctrine  of  his 
church,  are  from  his  pen :  "  Voluntary 
total  abstinence  from  all  intoxicants  as 
the  true  ground  of  personal  temperance, 
and  complete  legal  Prohibition  of  the 
traffic  in  intoxicating  drinks  as  the  duty 
of  civil  government."  He  has  been 
chosen  as  one  of  the  four  delegates  from 
the  Detroit  Conference  to  the  second 
Ecumenical  Conference  of  the  Methodist 
C'hurch,  to  be  held  in  New  York  in  1891. 
As  a  temperance  advocate  and  Prohibi- 
tionist he  has  become  very  prominent. 
For  eight  years  he  was  the  Temperance 
Agent  of  his  Conference,  for  12  years  at 
the  head  of  the  Good  Templars  in  Michi- 
gan, for  two  years  the  head  of  the  world- 
wide Order  and  for  two  years  Right 
Worthy  Grand  Lodge  Lecturer.     In  per- 


forming the  duties  of  these  positions  he 
labored  in  24  States  and  the  Dominion 
of  Canada;  he  also  spent  some  time  in 
Great  Britain  and  France.  He  is  known 
as  the  "  Father  of  the  Prohibition  party," 
having  published  the  first  newspaper 
that  advocated  the  formation  of  a  separ- 
ate political  party  (see  p.  573),  and  hav- 
ing taken  steps  that  led  to  a  meeting  of 
Prohibitionists  in  Detroit  in  1867,  at 
which  the  new  party's  organization  in 
Michigan  had  its  birth.  The  reports  on 
"  political  action "  for  four  successive 
years  beginning  with  1867,  adopted  by 
the  Right  Wortliy  Grand  Lodge  of  Good 
Templars,  were  written  by  him.  He  was 
Temporary  Chairman  of  the  Convention 
that  founded  the  National  Prohibition 
party,  and  for  years  he  filled  the  most  im- 
portant places.  At  the  Nominating  Con- 
vention of  1872  he  was  made  the  can- 
didate for  Vice-President.  Many  of  the 
most  logical  and  striking  articles  apj^ear- 
ing  in  Prohibition  newspapers  have  been 
contributed  by  him. 

Russia.^ — In  the  10th  Century,  Avhen 
Vladimir  of  Russia,  then  a  pagan,  re- 
solved to  adopt  a  new  religion,  he  curtly 
rejected  the  claims  of  Mohammedanism 
because  of  its  founder's  prohibition  of 
liquor,  giving  as  his  reason  that  drinking 
was  "  a  joy  to  the  Russian  heart."  Thus 
from  that  distant  time  the  jieople  of  this 
nation  have  been  free  to  gi-atify  their 
taste  for  drink  uninfluenced  by  religious 
scruples.  The  original  Russian  bever- 
ages were  mead  and  beer,  fermented 
from  honey  and  barley,  respectively  ; 
and  to  this  day  no  other  ones  are  men- 
tioned in  the  old  songs.  The  distilled 
vodka,  which  is  now  the  national  intoxi- 
cant, came  into  use  gradually,  i;ntil  un- 
der Nicholas  its  supremacy  was  no  longer 
to  be  questioned  and  all  the  vodka-shops 
Avere  graced  with  the  imperial  shield  of 
the  double-headed  eagle  and  were  com- 
monly styled  the  Czar's,  the  liquor  busi- 
ness being  then  practically  a  Government 
monopoly.  In  January,  1863,  the  pres- 
ent system  of  indirect  or  Excise  taxes  on 
the  manufacture  and  sale  was  intro- 
duced. The  regulations  for  distilleries 
are  very  strict.  Resides  levying  Excise 
duty  on  the  manufacture  of  all  liquors 


'  For  the  Governinont  i<tatistip!S  in  Ibis  article  the  editor 
is  indebted  to  Peter  I'opoff  of  the  lUissian  Consulate- 
(Jeneral,  Xew  York  ;  for  otlicr  particulars  to  Axel  Gus- 
tat'sou  and  Joseph  Malins. 


Russia.] 


604 


[Russia. 


(excepting  wines)  the  Government  re- 
quires every  vendor  to  take  out  an 
annual  license.  The  official  report 
for  1888  shows  the  following  items  of 
revenue : 

Excise  duty  on  alcohols,  237,138,344  roubles; 
on  vodka  made  out  of  grapes  and  fruits,  831,- 
659  roubles  ;  on  vodka  made  out  of  alco- 
hol, 1,239,430  roubles;  on  beer  and  mead, 
5,134,823  roubles;  on  malt,  1,469,434  roubles; 
licenses  to  distillers,  wholesale  and  retail  deal- 
ers, 18,293,719  roubles;  duty  on  lands  under 
distilleries,  361,361  roubles;  fines  for  violations 
of  the  Excise  rules,  443,439  roubles;  different 
items,  70,585  roubles — total  liquor  revenue, 
264,982,794  roubles,  or  about  $132,500,000, 
reckoning  a  rouble  at  50  cents. 

This  liquor  revenue  was  more  than  32 
per  cent,  of  the  entire  Government  in- 
come in  1888,  and  was  more  than  twice 
as  large  as  any  other  item,  the  next  high- 
est items  being  the  land  tax  (115,000,000 
roubles)  and  the  customs  duties  (110,- 
000,000  roubles). 

In  1886  there  were  2,331  distilleries 
operating,  and  their  product  aggregated 
31,420,408  vedro  of  pure  alcohol,  equiva- 
lent to  about  78,550,000  vedro  of  vodka 
(vodka  being  40  per  cent,  strong),  or 
250,000,000  United  States  gallons  of 
distilled  beverages.  To  produce  this 
the  distillers  destroyed  80,793,407  pood 
about  (1,300,000  tons)  of  potatoes,  30,- 
523,340  pood  (about  500,000  tons)  of 
rye,  and  smaller  quantities  of  green 
malt,  dry  malt,  beets,  corn,  wheat, 
millet,  barley,  oats,  etc.  The  pota- 
toes used  in  distillation  came  chiefly 
from  the  Polish,  Baltic  and  middle 
provinces,  the  grain  from  Siberia, 
Turkestan  and  the  middle  provinces, 
and  the  beets  from  Little  Eussia. 

There  were  1,407  beer  and  556  mead 
breweries  in  1886,  and  reckoning  on  the 
basis  of  the  Excise  duty  (16.7  kopecks,  or 
about  8.4  cents  per  vedro  of  beer)  it  ap- 
pears that  about  30,000,000  vedro  (96,- 
000,000  United  States  gallons)  of  beer 
was  manufactured  in  that  year.  The 
production  of  mead  was  probably  less 
than  10,000,000  gallons. 

The  wine  yield,  according  to  official 
data  collected  by  the  Minister  of  State 
Domains  in  1889,  was  about  20,000,000 
vedro  (64.000,000  United  States  gal- 
lons). There  were  170,000  desiatine 
(459,000  acres)  devoted  to  viticulture. 
No  Excise  duty  is  levied  on  wines,  and 
this  fact  accounts  for  conflicting  esti- 
mates of  the  quantity  of  wine  produced. 


The  imports  and  exports  of  liquors 
nearly  balance  each  other.  In  1888  the 
value  of  liquors  exported  was  8,234,874 
roubles  (the  chief  item  being  alcohol  and 
corn  spirits,  7,841,349  roubles),  and  the 
value  of  imported  intoxicants  was  7,697,- 
931  roubles  (the  chief  item  being  wines, 
6,180,289  roubles). 

The  immense  importance  of  the  drink 
traffic  as  a  source  of  Government  reve- 
nue undoubtedly  bars  temperance  prog- 
ress. Mr.  Thomas  Stevens,  one  of  the 
most  observant  of  recent  American  trav- 
ellers in  Eussia,  states  the  truth  with 
much  force : 

"I  have  said  more  about  vodka-drinking," 
he  writes,  ' '  than  I  intended  to  in  this  paper.  The 
evil  of  it  is  so  prominently  to  the  fore,  how- 
ever, and  the  subject  so  prolific  that  when  once 
entered  upon  it  is  hard  to  get  away  from.  That 
vodka-drinking  is  at  the  root  of  three-fourths  of 
the  misery  one  sees  in  Russia  I  am  already  fully 
persuaded.  The  evil  is  enormous,  but  the 
remedy  is  not  so  easily  found.  The  revenues 
are  correspondingly  enormous,  and  the  univer- 
sal adoption  of  temperance  by  the  peasantry 
would  bankrupt  the  Government  at  once.  The 
revenues  from  vodka  pay  the  expenses  of  both 
army  and  navy." 

He  reports  an  interview  with  a  repre- 
sentative citizen  of  the  mir  (or  com- 
munity) of  Volosova,  which,  according 
to  Mr.  Stevens,  comes  "near  being  an 
ideal  mir." 

"  The  secret  of  the  prosperity  of  Volosova," 
said  this  citizen,  ' '  is  that  we  voted  to  have  no 
vodka-shop  in  the  mir — that,  and  nothing  else. 
Every  mir  has  the  privilege  of  Local  Option.  It 
remains  with  the  people  themselves  whether 
they  shall  admit  a  vodka-seller  to  their  midst  or 
not.  Vodka-sellers  get  into  the  mirs  by  bribery 
and  by  paying  a  good  share  of  the  taxes.  A 
vodka-seller  will,  perhaps,  engage  to  pay  500 
roubles  of  the  mir's  taxes,  which,  let  us  say, 
amounts  to  one-tenth  of  the  whole.  This  being 
agreed  to,  the  liquor-shop  is  opened,  the 
moujiks  [peasants]  spend  everything  in  drink, 
and  the  entire  mir  is  demoralized.  The  vodka- 
seller  takes  20  roubles  out  of  every  moujik's 
pocket,  in  return  for  which  he  pays  20  kopecks 
back  in  the  guise  of  taxes.  Now  in  Volosova 
we  decided  to  keep  our  20  roubles  and  pay 
our  20  kopecks  taxes  ourselves,  and  so  at  the 
end  of  the  year  we  find  ourselves  19  roubles 
and  80  kopecks  in  pocket."  ' 

In  Eussia  there  are  nearly  a  hun- 
dred holidays  in  the  year  (including 
Sundays),  and  it  is  the  practice  of 
the  peasants  to  celebrate  these  days 
by  visiting  the  vodka-shops  and  get- 
ting  drunk.     At  times    nearly  all    the 

1  New  York  World,  July  27, 1890. 


St.  Jolin,  John  P.] 


605 


[Saloon. 


inhabitants  of  a  village,  including  the 
priests,  will  be  found  intoxicated.  An 
interesting  instance  (the  occasion  being 
the  dedication  of  a  new  church)  is  given 
by  George  Kennan  in  his  graphic  ac- 
counts of  his  Siberian  experiences.^ 

The  Jews  have  long  been  specially 
identified  with  the  retail  liquor  business, 
in  many  places  practically  monopolizing 
it. 

Some  years  ago  the  Good  Templar 
Order  was  planted  in  Finland  by  Oscar 
Eklund  of  Sweden,  but  the  authorities 
compelled  its  members  to  take  the  form 
of  a  public  organization.  In  Russia 
proper  some  temperance  sentiment  has 
recently  been  developed  by  the  example 
and  counsels  of  Count  Leo  Tolstoi.  Va- 
rious total  abstaining  sects  are  found  in 
different  parts  of  the  Empire. 

Russian  law  prescribes  severe  punish- 
ment for  drunkenness — imprisonment 
for  not  less  than  seven  days  or  a  fine  of 
not  less  than  25  roubles.  Intoxication 
cannot  be  pleaded  in  extenuation  of 
crime.  In  St.  Petersburg  there  are  an- 
nually about  47,000  arrests  for  drunken- 
ness.^ 

St.  John,  John  P.,  fourth  Presiden- 
tial candidate  of  the  Prohibition  i»arty; 
born  at  Brookville,  Ind.,  Feb.  25,  1833. 
He  was  educated  in  a  log  schoolhouse, 
and  after  leaving  school  worked  for 
several  years  as  clerk  in  a  store  at  |>6  a 
month.  When  19  he  went  to  California, 
and  in  the  next  few  years  he  led  an 
adventurous  life,  making  voyages  to 
Mexico,  South  America  and  the  Sand- 
wich Islands  and  taking  part  in  Indian 
wars  in  California  and  Oregon.  Return- 
ing from  the  Pacific  Coast  in  1859  he 
lived  for  a  while  in  Charleston,  111.  It 
was  here  that  he  was  prosecuted,  under 
the  old  Black  laws,  for  assisting  a  fugi- 
tive colored  boy.  Mr.  St.  John  had  fed 
the  lad.  He  pleaded  guilty  but  was 
acquitted.  He  was  admitted  to  tlie  bar 
in  1862,  and  about  the  same  time  entered 
the  Union  army,  in  which  he  served  as 
Captain,  Major  and  Lieutenant-Colonel. 
Upon  leaving  the  army  in  1864  he  went 
to  Independence,  Mo.,  where  he  prac- 
ticed law  for  the  next  four  years.  In 
1869  he  changed  his  residence  to  Olathe, 
Kan.,    and    he    still    lives    there.     His 

'  See  the  Century  Magazine  for  November,  1889. 
*  On  the  authority  of  Joseph  Malins. 


political  career  began  in  1872,  when  he 
was  chosen  a  member  of  the  Kansas  State 
Senate.  He  declined  a  re-election.  The  Re- 
publican party  made  him  Governor  of  the 
State  in  1878  and  again  (by  an  increased 
majority)  in  1880.  His  second  election 
is  memorable  because  he  was  thoroughly 
committed  to  Prohibition,  and  because 
the  Constitutional  Amendment  against 
the  manufacture  and  sale  of  liquors  was 
adopted  at  the  same  time.  From  his 
youth  he  had  been  an  ardent  opponent 
of  the  saloon ;  the  home  of  his  boyhood 
had  been  darkened  by  intemperance. 

In  1882  he  was  once  more  a  candidate 
for  the  Governorship^  but  the  feeling 
against  third  terms  and  the  antagonism 
of  the  liquor  element  caused  his  defeat. 
His  administration  of  the  office  was 
especially  distinguished  by  the  comple- 
tion of  important  public  works  and  suc- 
cessful undertakings  for  advancing  moral 
and  material  interests.  A  noteworthy 
incident  was  the  cordial  reception  given 
and  pecuniary  help  extended  to  about 
75,000  destitute  colored  people  who 
came  into  the  State  during  that  period. 
Governor  St.  John  did  not,  however, 
apply  any  part  of  the  State  funds  for 
their  relief,  but  he  organized  a  committee 
of  citizens  and  made  earnest  and  effective 
appeals.  When  the  National  Republican 
Convention  of  1884  refused  to  express 
sympathy  for  the  Prohibition  cause  he 
joined  the  Prohibition  party.  By  it  he  was 
nominated  for  the  Presidency,  July  23, 
1884.  (See  pp.  570-4.)  The  abuse  and 
persecution  to  which  he  was  subjected 
during  and  after  the  campaign  of  1884 
strengthened  his  attachment  to  the 
cause  and  increased  the  devotion  of  his 
followers.  The  charges  made  against 
him  were  shown  to  have  had  no  founda- 
tion save  in  malignity.  He  continued 
his  work,  speaking  in  all  parts  of  the 
country.  He  presided  over  the  National 
Prohibition  Convention  of  1888. 

Mr.  St.  John  was  for  seven  years 
President  of  the  State  Temperance  Union 
of  Kansas.  He  is  regarded  as  one  of  the 
ablest  and  most  popular  of  Prohibition 
advocates,  particularly  successful  in  plat- 
form oratory.  He  is  a  warm  sympathizer 
with  the  Woman  Suffrage,  anti-monopoly 
and  other  radical  movements. 

Saloon. — The  common  name  for  the 
retail  drink-shop,  the  equivalent  of  the 


Saloon.] 


GOG     [Sandwich  (Hawaiian)  Islands. 


English  "  public  house."  The  characteris- 
tics of  the  saloon  as  a  place  of  resort  and 
as  a  public  institution  are  so  well  known 
and  have  been  so  frequently  alluded  to 
in  this  work  (see  especially  Liquor 
Traffic)  that  it  will  be  sufficient  to 
notice  here  a  few  of  the  facts  most 
prominently  suggested  by  this  sub- 
ject. 

The  fundamental  purposes  of  the  typi- 
cal saloon,  indicated  alike  by  its  location, 
its  equipment,  its  management  and  its 
associations,  are  to  entice  and  ensnare,  to 
absorb  the  money  and  time  of  the  people 
without  giving  any  useful,  necessary  or 
even  harmless  article  in  exchange.  It 
thrives  best  where  population  is  densest, 
but,  unlike  other  business  establishments, 
its  prosperity  does  not  depend  upon  the 
existence  or  cultivation  of  a  self-respect- 
ing, thrifty  and  provident  class  of 
patrons:  the  disproportionate  number 
of  saloons,  as  compared  with  other  places 
of  trade,  in  the  poor  quarters  of  every 
city,  illustrates  this.  Comparatively  few 
individuals  who  have  a  decent  reputa- 
tion to  maintain  or  a  sensitiveness  to 
protect  are  disposed  or  can  afford  to 
openly  frequent  the  saloon  at  this  day. 
Upon  these  general  truths,  and  number- 
less allied  truths  of  equal  significance, 
rests  the  whole  indictment  against  the 
drink  traffic. 

No  typical  saloon  is  complete  unless  it 
is  peculiarly  constructed  and  arranged 
with  a  view  to  facilitating  violation  of  law 
and  encouraging  clandestine  custom. 
Back  doors  and  side  doors,  apertures  and 
"  family  entrances,"  are  designed  solely 
for  admitting  and  serving  patrons  on 
Sunday  and  during  prohibited  hours,  or 
for  accommodating  individuals  (like 
women  and  minors)  who  must  be  screen- 
ed from  the  public  gaze.  It  is  a  com- 
mon thing  also  for  the  saloon  to  make 
merchandise  of  prostitution,  gambling 
and  all  forms  of  vice,  crime  and  wrong. 

The  saloon  is  singled  out  as  a  pecu- 
liarly dangerous  and  objectionable  insti- 
tution by  all  men  of  affairs.  The  fire 
insurance  companies  pronounce  it  a  most 
unsafe  "risk."  Intense  opposition  is 
displayed  by  every  person  interested 
when  it  is  proposed  to  place  a  saloon  in 
the  neighborhood  of  a  church  or  school. 
The  staunchest  anti-Prohibitionists  are 
quick  to  resent  attempts  to  locate  salooiis 
near  their  residences  or  places  of  busi- 


ness. ^  Property-owners  and  real  estate 
agents  refuse  to  lease  premises  to  retail 
liquor-sellers  unless  enormous  rents  are 
paid.  A  New  York  newspaper,  reporting 
the  efforts  made  by  "  persons  represent- 
ing some  million  dollars'  worth  of  pro})- 
erty  "  to  prevent  the  opening  of  a  dram- 
shop by  one  Gorger  in  their  district  of  tlie 
city,  says :  "  Gorger  obtained  a  lease  for 
the  store  at  81st  street,  agreeing  to  pay 
$G,000  per  annum,  though  the  present 
tenant,  a  real  estate  agent,  is  paying  only 
$1,500.  A  store  across  the  street,  occu- 
pied by  a  druggist,  rents  for  $3,800.  An 
offer  of  |1G,000  per  year  from  a  saloon- 
keeper for  the  premises  was  recentlv  re- 
fused."' 

Sandwich  (Hawaiian)  Islands. — 

Before   the   introduction    of    European 
civilization  the  Hawaiians  prepared  in- 
toxicants from  the  narcotic  root  awa  and 
the  ti  plant.     After  Capt.  Cook's  visit  in 
1778  these  beverages  gradually  gave  way 
to  the  white  man's  whiskey   and   rum. 
The  consequences  were  terrible.     Wben 
the  missionaries  arrived  at  the  islands  in 
1820  the   natives  were  addicted  to  the 
grossest   intemperance,   and   their  king, 
Kamehameha  II.,  was  a  confirmed  drunk- 
ard, spending  whole  days  in  debauchery. 
The  example  and  influence  of  the  mis- 
sionaries were  so  potent  that  in  October, 
1829,  the  new  king  and  his  chiefs  pro- 
hibited the  manufacture  and  retailing  of 
ardent  spirits.     This  was  resented  by  the 
few  foreigners  in  Honolulu,  and  the  dis- 
solute  companions   of   the   young   king 
encouraged  him  to  grant  licenses  and  so 
increase  his  revenues.     The  Eegent  and 
chiefs  refused  to  issue  any,  but  the  law 
was  relaxed.     In  1831  a  native  temper- 
ance  society   was   formed   at  Honolulu, 
pledging  its  members  against  drinking 
for  pleasure,  against  dealing  in  liquors 
for  gain  and  against  treating  friends  or 
employes.     In  1833  (in  consequence  of  a 
petition  signed  by  nearly  3,000  people) 
another  Prohibitory  law  was  passed  and 


>  When  the  liquor  men  of  Rhode  Island  were  making 
preparations  to  repeal  the  Prohibitory  Amendment  several 
bankers  of  Providence  signed  their  petitions.  But  after 
repeal  had  been  acconiplisihed  these  same  bankers  strenu- 
ously urged  the  Commissioners  not  to  grant  licenses  for 
liquor  faloons  in  the  vicinity  of  their  banks.  (See  the 
Voice,  Sept.  12,  1889.) 

For  a  great  variety  of  opinions  from  private  citizens 
concerning  the  undesirability  of  having  the  saloon  as  a 
neighbor,  see  the  Voice  for  Sept.  :i."i,  1890,  and  Jan.  39, 
1891. 

a  New  York  Evening  Post,  Jan.  21, 1891. 


Scientific  Temperance  Laws.] 


60^ 


[Scotland. 


the  traffic  was  suppressed  evei'ywhere 
except  in  ]Ionolulii.  In  1835  drunken- 
ness was  prohibited  under  penalty  of  a 
fine  of  $6,  or  one  month  at  hard  labor, 
or  24  lashes.  Both  these  measures  were 
poorly  enforced.  In  1838  the  introduc- 
tion of  spirits  into  the  kingdom  was 
prohibited  and  a  heavy  duty  was  laid  on 
wines.  For  a  while  drunkenness  de- 
creased and  churches  flourished.  The 
larger  towns,  however,  were  under  a  sort 
of  license  system  (allowing  sales  of  wine, 
beer  and  native  drinks),  but  a  fine  of 
150  was  imposed  for  every  offense  of 
selling  without  license.  Capt.  Laplace, 
commanding  a  French  frigate,  now 
appeared  on  the  scene  and  at  the  point 
of  the  bayonet  compelled  the  king  to 
sign  a  treaty  admitting,  among  other 
articles,  French  wines  and  brandy  Ex- 
cessive drinking  was  again  the  rule,  and 
the  king  himself  became  a  victim  of  the 
habit.  About  1850  the  selling  and  giv- 
ing of  intoxicants  to  natives  were  pro- 
hibited under  penalty  of  $200  fine  or  two 
years'  imprisonment  at  hard  labor  ;  and 
in  185 1  the  sale  of  spirits  was  forbidden 
in  all  places  except  Honolulu.  These 
measures,  when  enforced,  were  of  great 
benefit  to  all,  especially  the  natives.  But 
in  August,  1882,  the  two  acts  last  men- 
tioned were  repealed,  a  license  fee  of 
11,000  was  established  and  saloons  were 
introduced  generally.  Since  then  the 
consumption  of  liquor  has  been  steadily 
on  the  increase.  Custom  House  reports 
show  that  about  110,000  gallons  are  con- 
sumed annually,  valued  at  about  $850,000, 
representing  an  annual  per  capita  expen- 
diture of  more  than  $10.50.  Some  tem- 
perance work  has  recently  been  done, 
under  the  direction  of  the  missionaries 
and  others,  with  occasional  assistance 
from  foreign  visitors,  like  Mrs.  Mary 
Clement  Leavitt  and  Richard  T.  Booth. 
There  is  now  (1890)  an  influential  and 
active  Woman's  Christian  Temperance 
Union  in  Honolulu. 

Thomas  S.  Southwick. 
(Honolulu.) 

Scientific  Temperance  Educa- 
tional Laws. — These  measures,  pro- 
viding for  instruction  in  the  public 
schools  concerning  the  natiire  and  effects 
of  alcoholic  liquors  and  narcotics,  are  of 
recent  origin.  The  demand  for  such 
acts   was   first  created  by  the  Woman's 


Christian  Temperance  Union,  which  es- 
tablished a  special  department  in  the  in- 
terest of  the  movement,  placing  at  its 
head  Mrs.  Mary  H.  Hunt  of  Massachu- 
setts. Her  intelligent  and  indefatigable 
labors  have  produced  important  results. 
The  following  is  a  list  of  States  having 
such  statutes : 

Alabama  (1885),  California  (1887),  Colorado 
(1S87),  Connecticut  (1886),  Delaware  (1887), 
Florida  (1889),  Illinois  (1889),  Iowa  (1886),  Kan- 
sas (1885),  Louisiana  (1888),  Maine  (1885),  Mary- 
land (1886),  Massachusetts  (1885),  Michigan 
(1883  and  1886),  Minnesota  (1887),  Missouri 
(1885),  Montana  (1890),  Nebraska  (1885),  Ne- 
vada (1885),  New  Hampshire  (1883),  New  York 
(1884),  North  Dakota  (1890),  Ohio  (1888),  Ore- 
gon (1885),  Pennsylvania  (1885),  Rhode  Island 
(1884),  South  Dakota  (1890),  Vermont  (1882  and 
1886),  Virginia  (by  the  State  Board  of  Educa- 
tion, 1890),  Washino-ton  (1890),  West  Vii-ginia 
(1887),  Wisconsin  (1885). 

In  1886  Congress,  with  the  approval  of 
the  President,  passed  an  act  applying  to 
the  schools  in  the  District  of  Columbia 
and  Territories  and  all  other  schools 
controlled  by  the  general  Government. 
This  was  the  first  purely  temperance 
measure  enacted  by  Federal  authority. 
For  some  years  difficulty  was  expe- 
rienced in  obtaining  satisfactory  text- 
books. Certain  publishers  of  popular 
school  Avorks  on  physiology  and  hygiene 
failed  to  include  in  these  works  adequate 
information  on  the  alcohol  question,  and 
in  some  cases  beer  and  wine  were  ap- 
proved or  not  condemned.  But  the 
efforts  of  Mrs.  Hunt  have  been  highly 
successful  with  publishers  as  well  as 
with  Legislatures.  Her  work  has  been 
wholly  disinterested  and  philanthropic. 

Scotland. — The  organized  temper- 
ance movement  in  Scotland  dates  from 
1829.  John  Dunlop,  J.  P.,  of  Greenock, 
Oct.  5,  1829,  founded  a  temperance 
society  at  that  place,  four  persons  sign- 
ing the  following  pledge : 

"We,  the  undersigned,  hereby  agree  to  ab- 
stain fi"om  all  spirituous  and  fermented  liquors 
for  two  years  from  this  date,  5th  October, 
1829." 

This  Greenock  society  changed  to  an 
anti-spirits  basis.  Other  societies  were 
formed  in  this  year  at  Maryhill,  near 
Glasgow  (Oct.  1),  and  at  Glasgow  (Nov. 
12),  through  the  efforts  of  Dunlop.  The 
most  important  of  the  early  organizations 
was  the  one  begun  at  Dumfermline,  Sept* 
21,  1830,  more  than  150  persons  sub- 
scribing to  a  thoroughly  radical  jjledge 


Scotland.] 


608 


[Sewall,  Thomas. 


within  a  few  days.  On  Sept.  4,  1838,  a 
general  Convention  was  held  in  Glasgow, 
41  delegates  being  present  from  30  socie- 
ties, and  the  Scottish  Temperance  Union 
was  begnn,  with  Dunlop  as  President. 
The  Scottish  Temperance  Leagne  was 
started  at  Falkirk,  Nov.  5,  1844.  In  1845 
there  were  74  societies  in  Scotland  with 
a  total  membership  of  40,000  in  a  popula- 
tion of  000,000;  in  1850  250  societies 
with  a  membership  of  90,000.  The  Scottish 
Permissive  Bill  and  Temperance  Associa- 
tion, with  legislative  and  other  objects 
similar  to  those  of  the  United  Kingdom 
Alliance,  was  founded  Oct.  1,  1858. 

Though  the  Scots  have  been  regarded 
as  hard  drinkers  from  early  times  the 
cause  has,  on  the  whole,  made  more  sub- 
stantial and  gratifying  progress  among 
them  than  among  the  English  or  Irish. 
The  facts  that  follow  are  given  on  the 
authority  of  Mr.  Robert  Mackay,  Secre- 
tary of  the  Scottish  Permissive  Bill  and 
Temperance  Association. 

At  the  end  of  1889  the  Good  Templar 
Order  had  a  membership  of  60,000,  and 
there  were  numerous  other  temperance 
organizations,  strong  in  numbers  and  in- 
fluence.     The  religious    denominations, 
Avith  the  Free  Church  in  the  van,  were 
generally  aggressive.  All  the  temperance 
workers  were  united  for  the  great  object 
of  securing  the  enactment  by  the  Impe- 
rial Parliament   of  the  Scotland  Direct 
Veto  (Local  Option)  bill  which  has  been 
pressed  for  several  years  by  Peter  M'La- 
gan,  M.P.     Plebiscites  on  the  question  of 
the  Direct  Veto,  which  have  been  taken 
in  the   leading   towns,   leave  no  doubt 
that  the  country  is  overwhelmingly  for 
this   policy   and,  presumably,   for  local 
Prohibition ;  by  these  plebiscites  the  peo- 
ple have,  by  a  vote  of  twelve  to  one,  ex- 
pressed a  desire  to  be  clothed  with  Pro- 
hibitory  powers.      Of    the   72  Scottish 
Members  of  Parliament  in  1889,  47  were 
for  Mr.  M'Lagan's  bill,  14  were  for  some 
form  of  popular  regulation,  and  only  11 
were  distinctly  against  suppressing  the 
drink    traffic.      The    bill    had    reached 
second  reading  in  the  House  of  Commons, 
a  stage  farther  than  any  general  Local 
Option  measure  had  been  advanced.    In- 
troduction of  the  system  has  been  pre- 
vented only  by  the  obstructive  tactics  of 
English   members   and  the  interference 
of  the  Irish  question.     Scotland  has  had 
full  Sunday-closing   (sales  to  bona  fide 


travellers  being  permitted,  however)  since 
1853 — longer  than  any  other  country 
within  the  United  Kingdom.  In  1889 
there  were  127  distilleries,  producing 
18,721,374  gallons  of  spirits  (of  which 
5,709,101  gallons  were  retained  in  Scot- 
land for  beverage  purposes),  and  the 
quantity  of  malt  liquors  retained  for 
home  consumption  was  1,275,068  barrels 
(each  barrel  containing  36  gallons).  The 
per  capita  consumption  of  foreign  spirits 
and  wines  was  1,286  gallon;  of  beer, 
26.892  gallons;  per  capita  consumption 
of  all  liquors  on  the  basis  of  proof  spirits, 
3.70  gallons.  There  were  16,592  ordinary 
retail  liquor  licenses  in  force.  The  con- 
sequences of  the  licensed  liquor  business 
are  no  less  appalling  in  Scotland  than 
elsewhere. 

Seventh-Day  Adventists.  —  Res- 
olutions of  the  General  Conference,  held 
in  Minneapolis,  Minn.,  Oct.  23,  1888 : 

"  Wliereds,  We  recognize  temperance  as  one 
of  the  Christian  graces;  therefore 

"Resolved,  That  we  heartily  indorse  the 
principles  of  the  American  Health  and  Temper- 
ance Association,  in  protesting  against  the  manu- 
facture and  sale  of  all  spirituous  and  malt 
liquors,  and  in  discarding  the  use  of  tea,  coffee, 
opium  and  tobacco,  and  that  we  urge  upon  all 
people  the  importance  of  these  principles. 

"  Resolved,  That  while  we  pledge  ourselves 
to  labor  earnestly  and  zealously  for  the  Prohibi- 
tion of  the  liquor  traffic,  we  hereby  utter  an 
earnest  protest  against  connecting  with  the 
temperance  movement  any  legislation  which 
discriminates  in  favor  of  any  religious  class  or 
institution,  or  which  tends  to  the  infringement 
of  anybody's  religious  liberty;  and  that  we 
cannot  sustain  or  encourage  any  temperance 
party  or  any  other  organization  which  indorses 
or  favors  such  legislation." 

Sewall,  Thomas.  —  Born  in  Au- 
gusta, Me.,  April  16, 1786;  died  in  Wash- 
ington, D.C.,  April  10,  1845.  He  took 
his  medical  degree  at  Harvard  in  1812. 
In  1827  he  was  made  professor  in  the 
Medical  Department  of  Columbian  Uni- 
versity, Washington,  D.  C.  He  wrote 
and  lectured  exteiisively  on  the  scientific 
phases  of  temperance,  and  prepared  a 
series  of  charts,  which  have  since  been 
widely  used  by  lecturers  and  others,  il- 
lustrating the  condition  of  the  human 
stomach  under  the  influence  of  alcohol. 
Dr.  Sewall  reached  the  conclusion  that 
"  Alcohol  is  a  poison,  forever  at  war  with 
man's  nature  ;  and  in  all  its  forms  and 
degrees  of  strength  produces  irritation 
of  the  stomach  which  is  liable  to  result 


Sherry.] 


609 


[Sin  Per  Se. 


in  inflammation,  ulceration  and  mortifi- 
cation ;  a  tliickening  and  induration  of 
its  coats,  and  finally  schirrhus,  cancer 
and  other  organic  affections.  It  may  be 
asserted  with  confidence  that  no  one  who 
indulges  habitually  in  the  use  of  alco- 
liolic  drinks,  whether  in  the  form  of 
wine  or  more  ardent  spirits,  possesses  a 
healthy  stomach." 

Sherry. — See  Vixous  Liquoks. 

Sin  Per  Se. — The  phrase  "sin  per 
.se  "  (from  the  Latin  per,  in  or  by,  and  se, 
itself)  is  one  originating  from  the  theo- 
logical controversies  of  the  early  Chris- 
tian church.  It  is  used  to  designate 
those  actions  which  are,  from  their 
inherent  nature,  regarded  as  sinful.  It 
is  evident  that  there  are  many  acts  which 
are  not  in  themselves  sinful,  but  which, 
because  of  the  consequences  they  in- 
volve, under  certain  circumstances  be- 
come sinful.  To  defraud  another,  for 
instance,  is  a  sin  not  because  of  its  harm- 
fulness  but  because  of  the  inherent 
character  of  the  act.  Stealing  a  dime 
from  a  rich  employer  might  involve  lit- 
tle or  nothing  of  injury  to  him,  yet  it 
would  be  as  certainly  a  sin  as  the  theft 
of  a  thousand  dollars.  The  moral  char- 
acter of  the  action  would  be  the  same  in 
each  case,  irrespective  of  its  harmf  ulness. 
On  the  other  hand,  driving  a  horse  rap- 
idly is  not  a  sin  because  of  the  moral 
nature  of  the  act  itself,  but  driving  a 
horse  rapidly  under  such  circumstances 
as  to  endanger  life  or  limb  is  a  sin  be- 
cause of  the  injury  it  causes  or  may 
cause.  To  ask  whether  the  drinking  a 
glass  of  liquor  is  a  sin  per  se  is  simply 
to  ask  whether  the  act  is  inherently  im- 
moral, or  immoral  because  of  the  injury 
it  involves  either  to  the  one  drinking  or 
to  others.  If  the  act  were  harmless,  not 
only  in  its  direct  effects  but  in  its  indi- 
rect influence,  would  it  be  a  sin  ?  Un- 
questionably not.  Moreover,  it  might 
be  harmful  and  yet,  if  the  one  drinking 
were  ignorant  of  that  fact,  the  act  still 
would  not  be  a  sin  unless  the  ignorance 
were  due  to  wilful  blindness.  A  sin 
per  se  presupposes  an  act  of  conscious 
disloyalty  to  one's  sense  of  right.  Drink- 
ing liquor  may  involve  just  that,  but  it 
may  not. 

A  similar  distinction   is   made  in  law 
between   offenses  malum   in  se  (evil  in 


themselves)  and  offenses  malum  prohib- 
itum (evil  because  prohibited).  The 
first  class  embraces  acts  "  naturally  evil  " 
(Bouvier),  such  as  theft,  arson,  murder, 
and  the  second  class  embraces  acts  not 
inherently  evil,  but  which  are  likely  to 
involve  injury,  such  as  fast  driving, 
building  frame  houses  within  the  fire 
limits,  establishing  a  slaughter-house  in 
a  residence  district.  The  evil  in  the 
former  case  inheres  in  the  act  itself, 
apart  from  the  consequences ;  in  the  lat- 
ter case  the  evil  lies  in  the  possible  or 
probable  consequences. 

The  question  whether  Prohibition  is 
based  upon  the  doctrine  that  it  is  a  sin 
per  se  to  drink  liquor,  is  one  of  more 
than  mere  metaphysical  importance. 
There  are  several  denominations,  notaljly 
the  Eoman  Catholic  Church,  whose  the- 
ology is  repugnant  to  such  a  doctrine, 
which,  it  is  felt,  would  involve  the  an- 
cient Manicha^an  heresy,  in  which  all 
matter  was  considered  as  originating 
with  the  powers  of  darkness,  and  all 
attempt  to  derive  pleasure  from  mate- 
rial things  Avas  forbidden  as  sinful.  That 
Prohibition  is  not  based  upon  any  such 
doctrine  should  appear  from  the  fact 
that  no  Prohibitory  law  ever  framed  or 
seriously  proposed  provided  for  the  pro- 
hibition of  liquor  as  a  medicine,  or  in- 
deed prohibited  the  use  of  liquor  in  any 
form.  The  prohibition  applies  to  the 
barter  and  sale,  as  something  involving 
disastrous  public  consequences.  If  Pro- 
hibition were  based  upon  the  Manichaean 
heresy,  it  would  apply  to  the  use  of 
liquor  in  all  forms  and  under  all  circum- 
stances. The  fact  that  the  distinction 
between  the  ordinary  beverage  use  and 
the  use  as  a  medicine  is  carefully  made,, 
indicates  that  it  is  the  harmf  ulness  of 
drinking  that  is  guarded  against.  The 
law  that  forbids  the  traffic  in  spoiled 
meat  or  "  bob-veal "  does  not  imply  that 
it  is  a  sin  per  se  to  eat  tainted  meat  or 
'•  bob-veal."  So  the  law  of  Prohibition 
does  not  imply  the  doctrine  of  sin  per  se. 
While  this  distinction  has  not,  perhaps, 
always  been  kept  clear  in  the  minds  of 
some  of  the  advocates  of  Prohibition, 
yet  on  the  whole  the  argument  in  its  be- 
half is  that  the  sale  of  liquor  is  an  injury 
to  the  common  weal,  and  therefore,  be- 
cause of  its  consequences,  it  ought  to  be 
forbidden. 

E.  J.  Wheelek.     1 


Smith,  Gerrit.] 


610 


[Social  Purity. 


Smith,  Gerrit.— Born  in  Utica,  N. 
Y.,  March  6,  1797;  died  in  New  York 
City,  Dec.  28,  1874.  He  was  a  pioneer 
Abolitionist,  a  philantliropist  and  a  man 
of  wealth,  owner  of  vast  tracts  of  land 
in  northern  and  central  New  York,  and 
once  a  partner  with  John  Jacob  Astor  in 
the  fur  trade.  In  1848  he  refused  to 
support  the  Free  Soil  ticket  and  was 
himself  nominated  by  the  extreme  Abo- 
litionists for  President.  He  was  elected 
to  Con2;ress  in  1853,  but  resigned  at  the 
close  of  the  first  session.  He  Avas  a  most 
radical  opponent  of  the  liquor  traffic  as 
well  as  of  slavery,  and  insisted  that 
neither  of  these  evils  could  rightfully  be 
legalized,  because  both  were  inherently 
and  necessarily  outlaws.  He  was  also 
greatly  interested  in  the  question  of 
Woman  Suffrage,  and  in  promoting  the 
property  rights  of  married  women.  In 
1869  he  went  to  Chicago  to  help  form  the 
Prohibition  party,  but  not  agreeing  with 
its  plans  and  methods  he  did  not  give  the 
national  organization  a  very  hearty  sup- 
port, although  in  New  York  he  took 
considerable  interest  in  the  Anti-Dram- 
shop party. 

Smith,  Green    Clay,  second   Pro- 
hibition Presidential  candidate;  born  in 
Eichmond,  Ky.,  July  2, 1832.  His  father, 
John  Speed  Smith,  was  an  aide-de-camp 
to  Gen.  William  Henry  Harrison  in  the 
War  of  1812,  and  was  a  Member  of  Con- 
gress from  Kentucky.     His  mother  was 
the  daughter  of  Gen.  Green  Clay  and  the 
sister  of  Cassius  M.  Clay.     As  a  boy  he 
served  with  credit  in  the  Mexican  War. 
After  he  was  mustered  out  of  the  army 
he  graduated  at  Transylvania  University, 
studied  law  and  commenced  the  practice 
of   his   profession   with  his  father.     In 
1856  he  married  and  settled  in  Coving- 
ton, Ky.     Before  the  Civil  War  he  was 
a   Democrat.      He    predicted    that    the 
election  of  Lincoln  would  result  in  war. 
Secession  sentiment  ran  high  in  Coving- 
ton when  Fort  Sumter  was  fired  on.  Mr. 
Smith  with  six  other  Unionists  called  a 
meeting   which   to   their    surprise    was 
largelv  attended.     Without  knowing  the 
sentiment  of  the  audience  he  boldly  de- 
nounced  secession.     A  few  ran  out  in 
disgust,  but  the  speaker  carried  most  of 
the  audience  with  him.     He  enlisted  in 
the  Union  Army  as  a  private,  and  was 
rapidly  promoted  to  the  ranks  of  Major, 


Colonel  and  Brigadier-General.  In  18  63 
he  was  elected  to  Congress.  He  was  a 
warm  friend  of  Lincoln's  and  heartily 
supported  the  Administration.  He  was 
a2:)pointed  by  President  Johnson  Gover- 
nor of  Montana.  Returning  to  Ken- 
tucky, he  entered  the  Baptist  ministry. 
He  has  been  presiding  officer  of  the 
General  Association  of  his  church  in 
Kentucky  for  nine  consecutive  years. 
He  has  represented  the  Sons  of  Temper- 
ance as  Grand  Worthy  Patriarch,  and 
the  Good  Templars  as  Worthy  Chief 
Templar.  In  1876'  he  was  nominated 
for  President  of  the  United  States  by 
the  Prohibition  party,  and  received 
9,737  votes. 

Social  Purity. — The  National  Wom- 
an's Christian  Temperance  Union  was 
not  many  years  in  perceiving  that  in- 
temperance and  impurity  are  iniquity's 
Siamese  Twins,  that  malt  liquors  and 
wine  have  special  power  to  tarnish  the 
sacred  springs  of  being,  that  every  house 
of  ill-repute  is  a  secret  saloon  and  nearly 
every  inmate  an  inebriate.  White-Eib- 
boners  became  painfully  conscious  that 
unnatural  and  unspeakable  crimes  against 
the  physically  weaker  sex  make  our  daily 
papers  read  like  a  modern  edition  of 
Fox's  "  Martyrs,"  and  that  a  madness  not 
excelled  if  indeed  equalled  in  the  worst 
days  of  Eome  seems  to  possess  the  in- 
flamed natures  of  men  let  loose  from  the 
two  hundred  thousand  saloons  of  the 
nation  upon  the  weak  and  unarmed 
(■'women  whose  bewildering  danger  it  is 
to  have  attracted  the  savage  glances  of 
these  men,  or  to  be  bound  to  them  by 
the  sacred  tie  of  wife  or  mother  in  bond- 
age worse  than  that  which  lashes  the  liv- 
ing to  the  dead.  White-Eibboners  also 
began  to  study  the  laws  and  discovered 
that  to  steal  a  cow  was  a  crime  punished 
more  severely  than  the  stealing  of  a  wom- 
an's honor.  In  many  of  the  States  the 
responsibility  for  a  dual  moral  defalca- 
tion was  to  be  equally  shared  by  a  girl  of 
ten  years  old,  no  matter  how  much 
greater  might  be  the  age  of  her  assail- 
ant, while  penalties  were  found  to  be 
light  and  conviction  hard  to  secure. 

Considerations  like  these  had  long 
been  stirring  the  conscience  of  the  W. 
C,  T.  U,  and  sporadic  efforts  had  been 
made  to  enter  practically  upon  the  work 
of  promoting  social  purity,  but  not  until 


Social  Purity.]                                  611  [Sons  of  Temperance. 

the  Philadelphia  TV.  C.  T.  TJ.  Convention  tion  and  power,  and  ontlawing  the  liquor 
in  1885  was  the  reform  begun  nationally,  traffic  are  all  a  part  of  this  great  work. 
Three  months  before,  William  T.  Stead's  for  there  is  not  one  among  the  forty  de- 
mighty  disclosures  had  aroused  the  Eng-  partments  provided  for  in  the  plan  of 
iish-speaking  race  to  the  unprotected  the  National  W.  C.  T.  U.  that  does  not 
condition  of  women  and  girls;  and  as  av  close  like  the  fingers  of  the  hand  upon 
consequence  the  British  Parliament  had  that  core  and  center  of  the  world's  mani- 
raised  the  age  of  protection  to  16  years,  fold  curse — the  social  evil, 
and  had  otherwise  greatly  increased  the  Frances  E.  Willard. 
safeguards  of  the  physically  weaker  sex.  '.  ^ 
Under  the  impetus  of  this  new  move-  Sons  of  Temperance. — The  rise 
ment  the  White  Cross  pledge  for  men  and  progress  of  the  Washingtonian  move- 
had  been  successfully  introduced  into  ment  were  phenomenal.  Its  enthusiasm 
this  country,  and  the  writer,  in  her  an-  was  inspiring,  and  the  principles  and 
nual  address  at  Philadelphia,  made  a  plea  ^blessings  of  total  abstinence  were  spread 
for  the  organization  of  a  national  move-  /throughout  the  land.  In  connection 
ment  for  the  protection  of  women.  The  with  it  came  the  organization  of  the 
Department  was  organized,  and  the  Sons  of  Temperance  in  New  York  City, 
writer  was  placed  at  its  head.  She  at  Sept.  29,  1842.  This  associatioTi  at  once 
once  prepared  a  petition  for  the  protec-  assumed  a  prominent  place  among  the 
tion  of  women  and  went  to  Mr.  Terence  fraternal  and  benevolent  organizations, 
V.  Powderly,  chief  of  the  Knights  of  incorporating  among  its  principles  a  life 
Labor,  and  secured  his  agreement  to  of  abstinence.  Its  founders  had  three 
send  out  92,000  copies  to  his  Local  As-  distinct  objects  in  view  :  "  To  shield 
semblies ;  and  during  that  year,  by  every  themselves  from  the  evils  of  intemper- 
practicable  means,  the  same  petition  was  ance,  to  afford  mutual  assistance  in  case 
circulated  throughout  the  United  States,  of  sickness  and  to  elevate  their  character 
In  1888  it  was  presented  to  Congress  by  as  men."  Their  plan  of  organization 
Senator  Blair  and  the  desired  bill,  rais-  embraced  three  distinct  branches — the 
ing  the  age  of  consent  to  16  years,  was  Subordinate  (or  local)  Division,  the  Grand 
passed.  Division  (confining  its  work  to  the  Prov- 

There  is  hardly  a  State  or  Territory  in  ince  or  State)  and  the  National  Division 

which  there  has  not  been  a  notable  im-  (whose  jurisdiction  is  North  America), 

provement  in  the  laws  within  five  years.  The  Subordinate  Division  meets  weekly 

and  humanly  speaking,  the  W.  C.  T.  U.  and  is  the  life  and  strength  of  the  Order, 

was  the  instrument  employed.    A  litera-  Tlie  Grand   Division  holds  quarterly  or 

ture  has  been  wrought  out,  for  parents,  semi-annual  sessions,  and  supervises  the 

preachers,     teachers,     young      people ;  work  in  State  or  Province.    The  National 

pledges  have  been  prepared,  and  every-  Division  meets   annually,   and   in  it   is 

thing  needed  to  spread  the  propaganda  vested  the  supreme  power.     The  grand 

is  furnished  by  the  Woman's  Temperance  purpose  is  to  reclaim  the  inebriate,  rescue 

Publication  Association.  (Chicago).  the  moderate  drinker  and  save  the  youth 

Industrial  homes  for  women  are  being  from  the  power  of  the  drink  habit.     The 

founded  by  State   appropriations ;   jaro-  Order  has  no  privileged  classes  ;  it  en- 

tective  agencies  iti  the  large  cities  to  co-  rolls  all  ranks  in  society.     Women  have 

operate  with  friendless  women  in  their  every  right  and  privilege  accorded  to  any 

efforts  to  secure  such  rights  as  they  have  _  member,  and  are  eligible  to  every  office 

under  the  law;  missions  of  hope  and  help  in   the   gift   of  the   Order.     The    body 

for  degraded  women ;  lodging  houses  and  recognizes  no  distinction  on  account  of 

reading  rooms ;  police  matrons  in  all  po-  sex,  color,  wealth  or  former  condition, 

lice  stations — all  these,  and  many  meth-  The  Order  is  made  attractive  by  im- 

ods  more,  attest  the  intelligent  zeal  of  pressive  ceremonies,  and  a  solemn  obli- 

White-Eibboners  for  the  betterment  of  gation  is  taken  to  live  a  life  of  sobriety, 

their    own    sex.     Laws    giving    to    the  purity  and  benevolence.     Wliile  classed 

mother  the  equal  custody  of  her  children,  among  the  "  secret "  temperance   socie- 

making    property    and    marriage    laws  ties  it  is  destitute,  in  its  mystic  features, 

more   just  between   husband   and  wife,  of  sign,   grip   and   degree.     The    ritual 

clothing  women  with  the  ballot's  protec-  service  is  brief,  including  admonitions 


Sons  of  Temperance.] 


613 


[South  America. 


from  the  word  of  God,  elevating  moral 
precepts  and  the  melody  of  music.  Its 
membership  is  sincere  and  devoted  to  the 
work  of  the  Order,  in  pursuance  of  its 
fundamental  principles  of  "  Love,  Purity 
and  Fidelity."  It  is  a  voluntary  associa- 
tion, with  just  and  explicit  laws,  and  yet 
without  the  power  of  enforcing  an  un- 
willing obedience.  It  not  only  enjoins 
total  abstinence  as  a  cardinal  idea  but 
takes  all  legitimate  and  honorable  means 
to  suppress  and  proliibit  the  manufacture 
of  and  the  traffic  in  intoxicating  drinks, 
and  it  will  never  rest  satisfied  until  the 
annihilation  of  the  drink  traffic  is  se- 
cured. The  Mutual  Eelief  Society,  in 
connection  with  the  Order,  is  a  public 
charity  conducted  as  a  fraternal  business 
enterprise.  It  is  a  valuable  auxiliary  in 
propagation  work,  and  gives  strength 
and  permanency  to  Subordinate  Divi- 
sions. It  is  well  officered,  prompt  and 
economical,  meriting  and  receiving  a 
very  generous  supj^ort  from  the  Order  in 
all  its  branches.  In  North  America  the 
Sons  of  Temperance  have  1,G00  Subordi- 
nate Divisions,with  a  membership  exceed- 
ing 85,000.  The  National  Division  is  the 
fountain-head  and  has  granted  charters 
for  the  N.  D.  of  Great  Britain  and  Ireland, 
the  N.  D.  of  Australasia  aiid  the  N.  D. 
of  Victoria  and  South  Australia,  in  each 
of  which  countries  there  is  a  large  and 
iTifluential  membership.  The  Sons  of 
Temperance  cordially  extend  the  hand 
of  fellowship  to  all  temperance  organi- 
zations, and  to  all  champions  of  the  cause 
in  their  mission  to  destroy  the  power  of 
the  drink  habit  and  traffic. 

B.  R.  Jeavell. 
(Most  Worthy  Secretary.) 

The  following  is  a  list  of  the  men  who. 
have  held  the  position  of  Most  Worthy 
Patriarch  since  the  beginning  of  the 
Order:  1844-6,  Daniel  UrSands"^;  184G-8, 
Philip  S.  White;  1848-50,  Samuel  F. 
Gary;  1850-2,  John  W.  Oliver;  1852-4, 
John  B.  O'Neal;  1854^6,  Samuel  L.  Til- 
ley;  1856-8,  M.  D.  McHenry;  1858-60, 
B.  D.  Townsend ;  1860-2,  S.  L.  Condict ; 
1862-4,  S.  L.  Carleton;  1864-6,  J,  J. 
Bradford;  1866-8,  John  N.  Stearns; 
1868-70,  Robert  M.  Foust;  1870-2,  S.  B. 
Ransom;  1872-4, 0.  D.  Wetmore;  1874-6, 
F.  M.  Bradley;  1876-8,  Louis  Wagner; 
1878-80,  George  W.  Ross;  1880-2,  Evan 
J.  Morris;  1882-4,  Benjamin  R.  Jewell; 


1884-6,  B.  F.  Dennisson;  1886-8,  R. 
Alder  Temple;  1888-90,  Edward  Crum- 
mey. 

South  America. — The  intelligent 
people  of  those  South  American  Repub- 
lics that  lie  in  the  torrid  regions  are  com- 
pelled by  natural  condioions  to  recognize 
the  virtue  of  temperance.  In  their  warm 
climate  excessive  drinking  is  swiftly  fa- 
tal. But  in  the  temperate  parts  of  the 
continent,  especially  tlie  Argentine  Re- 
public and  Chili,  much  greater  careless- 
ness is  shown.  On  the  other  hand  some 
of  the  tropical  countries  are  by  no  means 
exempt  from  the  drink  curse,  and  the 
detestable  domestic  intoxicants  work 
great  havoc  among  the  natives  and  in 
the  seaport  towns.  Throughout  South 
America  radical  anti-liquor  legislation 
seems  to  be  practically  unknown 

The  particulars  for  various  nations 
that  follow  are  partly  from  such  statisti- 
cal authorities  as  the  "  Statesman's  Year- 
Book"  and  the  United  States  Consular 
reports,  and  partly  from  information 
specially  obtained  for  this  work  from 
American  Ministers  in  South  ximerica 
and  South  American  Ministers  in  the 
United  States. 

The  Argentine  Republic  (population  in  1887, 
about  3,900,000)  lias  no  special  legislative  pol- 
icy against  the  liquor  traffic,  but  the  propri- 
etors of  liquor  establishments,  like  all  other 
persons  engaged  in  trade,  must  pay  license  fees. 
These  fees  range  from  $125  to  .$1,250  a  year. 
The  city  of  Buenos  Ayres  has  a  police  ordi- 
nance punishing  the  inebriate  with  a  heavy  fine, 
which  is  doubled  on  second  offense.  In  1885 
the  Provinces  of  Mendoza,  Cordoba  and  San 
Juan  yielded  3,890,000  gallons  of  wine,  and  the 
production  of  rum  reached  1,540,000  gallons. 
In  1887  the  total  value  of  imported  goods  was 
$117,352,125;  value  of  imported  liquors,  $15,- 
488,437.  About  30,000,000  gallons  of  wine 
were  imported,  valued  at  about  $12,000,000.  The 
Argentines  have  a  speeial  fondness  for  the  Bor- 
deaux wines  of  France.  The  beer  and  other 
light  drinks  imported  in  1887  had  a  value  of 
about  $1,100,000;  distilled  spirits  of  various 
kinds,  about  $2,400,000. 

i^/Y/s^:^  (population  in  1888,  14,000,000)  levies 
comparatively  high  duties  on  liqiiors,  and  the 
license  fees  for  vendors  are  also  relatively  high. 
The  wine-producing  industry  is  in  its  infancy, 
but  is  advancing;  and  artificial  wines  are  fabri- 
cated on  a  considerable  scale.  The  brewing 
business  is  rapidly  developing;  in  Rio  Janeiro 
there  were  in  1889  42  breweries  and  agencies 
for  provincial  breweries.  In  1885-6  (5,540,960 
gallons  of  wine  were  imported  through  the  Rio 
Janeiro  custom-house,  most  of  it  coming  from 
Portugal. 

British  Guiana  (population  in  1887,    277,038) 


South  America.] 


613 


[Spain. 


supplies  other  countries  with  large  quantities 
of  rum.  Much  of  the  so-called  Jamaica  rum 
comes  from  British  Guiana.  Total  exports  of 
rum  in  1885,  38,353  puncheons,  valued  at 
$1,004,562. 

In  Chili  (population  in  1885,  2,527,320)  the 
liquor  traffic  is  perfectly  free  and  the  taxes  on 
sellers  are  low.  The  annual  production  of 
wine  is  about  24,000,000  gallons,  most  of  which 
is  consumed  at  home.  Hundreds  of  thousands 
of  dollars  are  invested  in  breweries  (owned  by 
Germans),  and  the  beer  output  is  rapidly  in- 
creasing. Value  of  imports  of  wines,  liquors 
and  beer  in  1887,  1,079,905  pesos.  (The  Chi- 
lian peso  is  nominally  equal  to  a  dollar,  but  its 
commercial  value  is  a  little  less. ) 

The  United  States  of  Colombia  (estimated 
population  in  1881,  3,878,600)  permits  the  retail 
liquor  business  to  stand  on  the  same  footing  with 
other  trades,  no  attempt  being  made  to  regulate 
it.  The  manufacture  is  a  Government  monop- 
oly, the  right  to  produce  liquors  being  sold  to 
the  highest  bidders.  In  1890  there  were  two 
bi'eweries,  one  at^Bogota  and  one  at  Medellin, 
but  their  product  was  small  and  of  poor  quality. 
Large  quantities  of  vile  liquors  of  the  varieties 
known  as  chica  and  aguardiente  are  made  and 
consumed,  but  the  United  States  Minister  in- 
forms us  that  there  are  no  official  figures.  The 
tariff  on  imported  liquors  is  high. 

Paraguay  (estimated  population  in  1888, 
270,000)  distills  caiia,  or  rum,  from  the  sugar- 
cane. The  mode  of  manufacture  is  rude  and 
the  spirit  is  horribly  impure,  but  is  in  consider 
able  request  among  the  common  people.  Value 
of  imported  wines,  liquors,  etc.,  in  1886,  $235,- 
855.53. 

In  Peru  (population  in  1876,  2,621,844)  the 
Government  regards  the  manufacture  of  liquor 
as  an  important  industry  and  does  not  tax  it. 
But  the  consumption  is  taxed  and  imported 
liquors  pay  duty.  The  native  distilled  intoxi- 
cants are  chica  (from  the  mixed  juices  of  Indian 
corn,  apples  and  grapes)  and  rum  (from  the 
sugar-cane).  These  articles  are  both  nasty  and 
cheap:  an  ordinary  wine-bottle  of  rum  costs 
only  about  13  cents.  Brandy  is  made  from  the 
grape.  Wine  is  abundant,  the  annual  yield 
averaging  about  400,000  barrels,  valued  at 
$2,640,000  United  States  money.  The  Peruvian 
wines  are  strong  in  alcohol.  The  consumption 
tax  is  1  to  10  cents  per  liter  (quart),  and  it  is  col- 
lected from  the  publicans  by  private  individuals, 
to  whom  the  privilege  is  auctioned.  In  the 
district  of  Lima  the  general  Government's  rev- 
enue in  1889  from  this  source  was  about 
$75,000,  and  the  municipal  Government  had 
an  additional  revenue  of  about  $94,000.  Liquor 
sellers  also  have  to  pay  license  fees.  There  are 
no  temperance  societies. 

Uruguay  (population  in  1886,  596,463)  does 
not  in  any  way  impose  severer  restrictions  upon 
the  drink  trailic  than  upon  other  branches  of 
trade.  In  the  last  few  years  extensive  vine- 
yards have  been  planted.  The  imports  of 
liquors  of  all  kinds  in  1886  were  valued  in  the 
neighborhood  of  $4,000,000. 

Venezuela  in  1884  had  a  population  (esti- 
mated) of  2,121,988.  Most  of  the  liquors 
consumed  in  this  country  are  French  wines  and 
brandies  of  execrable  quality.     Concerning  the 


Venezuelans  Mr.  W.  S.  Bird,  United  States 
Consul  at  La  Guayra,  wrote  in  1885:  "They 
are  remarkably  free  from  drunkenness  and 
singularly  exempt  from  crime." 

South  Carolina. — See  Index. 

South  Dakota. — The  steps  leading 
to  the  enactment  of  Prohibition  in  Sonth 
Dakota  are  described  on  p.  126.  The 
statute  (approved  March  1,  1890)  is  very 
thorough  in  its  provisions.  The  penalty 
for  manufacturing,  selling  or  keeping  for 
sale  any  liquor  for  beverage  purposes  in  vi- 
olation of  law  is  a  fine  of  $100  to  $500  and 
imprisonment  in  the  County  Jail  60  days 
to  six  months  for  the  first  offense,  and  one 
year's  confinement  in  the  State  Prison 
for  any  subsequent  ofl'ense.  But  any 
registered  pharmacist  may  sell  for  medi- 
cal, mechanical,  sacramental  and  scien- 
tific purposes,  upon  procuring  a  permit 
(good  for  one  year)  from  the  County 
Judge,  the  granting  or  refusing  of  such 
a  permit  ^ing  subject  to  popular  petition 
and  judicial  discretion,  and  various  con- 
ditions similar  to  those  laid  down  in  the 
Kansas  law  (pp.  299-300) ;  and  druggists' 
sales  are  regulated  by  the  strictest  pro- 
visions, violators  to  suffer  the  penalties 
above  stated.  If  any  person  signing  a 
druggist's  petition  for  a  permit  knows 
that  the  applicant  is  in  the  habit  of  be- 
coming intoxicated,  or  is  not  in  good, 
faith  engaged  in  the  pharmacy  business, 
he  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  $50  to 
$100.  A  County  Judge  knowingly  grant- 
ing a  permit  to  such  an  applicant  must 
pay  a  fine  of  $500  to  $1,000;  any  Sheriff, 
Deputy  Sheriff,  State's  Attorney,  Mayor, 
Constable,  Marshal,  police  officer  or 
other  officer  wilfully  failing  to  perform 
duties  imposed  by  the  act  shall  be  fined 
$100  to  $500,  and  be  imprisoned  in 
the  County  Jail  60  days  to  six  months, 
and  forfeit  his  office.  The  provisions  of 
the  Kansas  and  North  Dakota  legislation 
relating  to  injunction  and  nuisance, 
search  and  seizure,  civil  damage  and 
otlier  radical  proceedings  are  carefully 
followed.  The  statute  is  published  in 
pamphlet  form  (25  pp.). 

[For  other  South  Dakota  particulars,  see  the 
Index.] 

Spain. — The  exceptional  temperance 
of  the  Spanish  nation  has  been  variously 
attributed  to  the  instinctive  abstemious- 
ness of  the  Latin  races  and  the  tendency 
of  a  semi-tropical  climate,  but  is  to  a 
large  degree  undoubtedly  due  to  the  in- 


Spain.] 


614   [Spirits  and  Spirituous  Liquors. 


fluence  of  the  seven  centuries  of  Arabian 
supremacy,  when  the  manufacture  and 
sale  of  intoxicating  beverages  were  re- 
stricted by  severe  legal  penalties  and  the 
at  least  external  observance  of  temperate 
habits  became  a  characteristic  of  a  liberal 
education.  The  manifold  vices  of  the 
Castilian  nobles  in  the  time  of  Philip  II. 
did  not  include  the  vice  of  drunkenness, 
and  in  the  national  character-sketches  of 
Cervantes  and  Lope  de  Vega  the  toper 
is  almost  invariably  depicted  as  a  low-bred 
ruffian.  Boracho  (drunkard)  became  a 
synonyme  of  everything  vulgar  and  brut- 
ish, while  temperance,  if  not  abstinence, 
was  too  generally  practiced  by  every 
person  of  common  sense  to  be  regarded 
as  a  special  virtue.  The  expulsion  of 
the  Moors  marked  the  beginning  of  a 
gradual  change  in  the  habits  of  the 
nation,  but  Spain  still  ranks  as  one 
of  the  most  temperate  countries  of  modern 
Europe,  and  the  product  of  the  enor- 
mous vineyard  area  is  largely  absorbed 
by  the  export  trade  and  the  manufacture 
of  raisins. 

Felix  L.  Oswald. 

The  annual  production  of  wine  in 
Spain  (or  what  passes  for  wine)  is  in  the 
neighborhood  of  500,000,000  United 
States  gallons.  A  very  large  quantity 
of  this  so-called  wine  is  made  from  cheap 
German  spirits,  with  the  infusion  of  some 
grape-must  and  certain  flavoring  and 
other  chemical  substances.  The  returns 
of  spirits  imported  into  Spain  for  the 
years  1873-85  are  impressive.  In  1873 
the  total  value  of  imported  spirits  was 
11,945,247  ;  in  1885,  110,066,531.  The 
exports  of  "  wines  "  increased  immensely 
in  the  same  period: — exports  in  1873, 
69,733,126  United  States  gallons,  valued 
at  $34,856,349  ;  in  1885,  189,767,837 
United  States  gallons,  valued  at  $60,084,- 
714.^  The  most  famous  Spanish  wine  is 
sherry,  from  the  town  of  Jerez.  J.  A. 
Hall,  United  States  Consular  Agent  at 
Jerez,  made  a  report  in  1887  on  the  un- 
scrupulous adulterations  of  the  sherry- 
makers.  He  said  that  they  not  only 
fortify  extensively,  but  instead  of  fortify- 
ing with  a  superior  alcohol  use  "  Berlin 
spirits,  produced  principally  from  pota- 
toes and  laden  with  deadly  amylic  alco- 
hol." ^     But  even  the  official  figures  show 


a  great  decline  in  the  amount  of  Spanish 
sherry  produced.  In  1873  there  were  13,- 
210,710  United  States  gallons  exported; 
in  1889,  2,631,899  United  States  gallons. 
The  phylloxera  is  responsible  for  this 
decrease.  The  common  and  Catalonian 
wines  constitute  about  95  per  cent,  of 
the  entire  product,  and  there  is  a  great 
demand  for  them  in  France,  where  they 
are  converted  into  high-j^riced  beverages. 

Spirits  and   Spirituous   Liquors 

are  all  those  alcoholic  fluids  that  are  pre- 
pared by  distillation,  or  by  compounding 
or  treating  distilled  products  for  the 
fabrication  of  beverages  stronger  than 
wines  ;^  including  (1)  the  simple  or 
''  commercial "  alcohols  that  are  used  for 
mechanical,  scientific,  medicinal  and 
similar  purposes,  or  for  the  "  doctoring  '' 
of  drinks;  (2)  the  common  distilled  bev- 
erages, like  whiskey,  brandy,  rum  and 
gin,  which  are  distinguished  from  ordi- 
nary spirits  by  a  more  acceptable  taste ; 
and  (3)  the  complex  articles,  known  as 
liqueurs  and  cordials,  which  are  obtained 
by  combinations  of  spirits  with  aromatic 
and  like  substances.  Dr.  Benjamin  W. 
Eichardson  declares  that  it  is  impossible 
by  any  process  of  fermentation  to  pro- 
duce a  liquor  of  above  17  per  cent,  alco- 
holic strength;  and  most  natural  fer- 
ments are  much  weaker,  some  containing 
only  2  per  cent.  The  method  of 
manufacturing  original  spirits  is  out- 
lined under  Distillation  and  Rectifi- 
cation. 

To  the  three  classes  of  spirits  and 
spirituous  liquors  indicated  above  a 
fourth  may  be  added,  embracing  the  dis- 
tilled drinks  of  different  nations  which 
are  characteristic  of  localities  but  are 
little  known  to  American  commerce. 

COMMERCIAL   SPIRITS. 

Under  this  name  are  classed  non-beverage 
spirits  of  all  degrees  of  strength  and  all  grades 
of  purity.  When  grain  or  fruit,  etc.,  is  dis- 
tilled, the  immediate  product  is  a  mixture  of 
water,  ethylic  alcohol  (C^HeO)  and  other  and 
more  poisonous  alcohols  (propylic  [OsHsO], 
butylic  [CH.oO],  amylic  [CsH.^O],  etc.).  This 
immediate  product  is  subjected  to  different 
methods  of  treatment,  according  to  the  purpose 
in  view.  If  the  purpose  is  to  make  of  it  a 
marketable  beverage  liquor  of  superior  quality, 
it  is  barreled  and  stored  ^a  the  warehouse  for 
two  or  three  years,  when  through  the  operation 
of  natural  chemical  changes  the  impurer  ele- 
ments disappear;  and  the  work  of  nature  is  sup- 


*  United  states  Consular  reports,  vol.  24,  pp.  80-3. 
«  Ibid,  vol.  28,  pp.  40-1. 


3  Spirits  are  also  used  on  a  great  scale  for  "fortifying  " 
wines. 


Spirits  and  Spirituous  Liquors.]    G15    [Spirits  and  Spirituous  Liquors. 


plemented  by  arts  that  give  the  liquor  a  dis- 
tinctive flavor  and  color.  If  the  purpose  is 
simply  to  obtain  alcoholic  spirits  without  re- 
gard to  beverage  qualities,  strength  or  purity, 
the  crude  article  is  accepted  and  utilized  in  its 
existing  form;  if  a  strong  and  pure  spirit  is 
desired  it  is  carefully  redistilled  at  a  tempera- 
ture low  enough  to  vaporize  ethylic  alcohol, 
but  not  high  enough  to  vaporize  water  or  the 
above-mentioned  corruptions.  Thus  commer- 
cial spirits  are  alcohols  proper ;  spirituous 
liquors,  on  the  other  hand,  are  intoxicating  dis- 
tilled drinks  proper. 

The  use  of  commercial  spirits  is  by  no  means 
confined  to  the  arts,  manufactures  and  similar 
legimate  fields.  It  is  true  that  in  their  original 
form  they  are  not  consumed  as  beverages  to 
any  important  extent;  the  average  toper  would 
prefer  a  dram  of  the  meanest  and  deadliest 
whiskey  to  a  potion  of  the  purest  refined  alcohol. 
But  alcohol  being  the  basis  of  all  inebriating 
drinks,  commercial  spirits  are  available  for 
the  fabrication  of  special  liquors  of  all  kinds. 
In  practice  by  far  the  largest  part  of  distilled 
beverages  is  produced  by  adding  various  color- 
ing, flavoring  and  other  substances  to  common 
spirits;  all  varieties  and  brands  of  wines  may  be 
and  are  concocted  from  commercial  spirits.' 


'As  is  stated  on  p.  19  the  quantity  of  spirits  used  in 
the  United  States  in  the  arts  and  manufactures,  and  for  all 
other  purposes  than  beverage  consumption,  has  been  esti- 
mated by  a  large  firm  of  alcohol-dealers  as  only  10  per 
cent,  of  the  entire  distilled  product.  Since  p.  19  was  electro- 
typed,  an  official  estimate  has  been  published  by  the 
Census  Bureau  in  a  '"preliminary  report"  (Census  Bulletin 
No  33,  .Tan  30,  1891).  Returns  were  obtained  by  the  Cen- 
sus authorities  from  wholesale  druggists  and  manufac- 
turers, eleemosynary  institutions  (dispensatories,  homes, 
asylums  -md  others  of  like  nature)  and  retail  apothecaries: 
and  they  show  that  the  total  consumption  of  distilled 
spirits  ''in  the  arts,  manufactures  and  medicine  during  the 
year  ending  Dec.  31,  1889,"  was  10,976,842.  This  quantity 
includes,  besides  various  kinds  of  commercial  spirits, 
2.703,()50  proof  gallons  of  whiskey,  brandy,  rum  and  gin. 
It  is  well  known  that  much  whiskey,  brandy,  rum  and  giu 
is  sold  by  apothecaries  for  other  than  medicinal  purposes — 
in  fact  for  beverage  purposes  pure  and  simple;  therefore 
the  10,9~(),843  proof  gallons  reported  by  the  Census  Bu- 
reau includes  an  element— possibly  a  considerable  element 
— of  spirits  consumed  for  beverage.  But  if  it  is  at-sumed 
that  this  element  will  be  balanced  by  quantities  consumed 
for  art,  manufacturing  and  similar  purposes  not  reported 
to  the  Census  Bureau,  and  consequently  that  the  10,976,- 
842  gallons  represents  the  exact  consumption  for  other 
than  beverage  purposes,  we  find  that  the  aggregate  quan- 
tity so  consumed  was  only  13  per  cent,  of  the  entire  num- 
ber of  proof  gallons  (8,t,043,33G)  withdrawn  for  consump- 
tion during  the  fiscal  year  ending  June  30,  1890.  (It  should 
be  borne  in  mind  that  this  13  per  cent,  is  the  maximum 
percentage,  as  determined  by  official  investigation  ;  it  is 
probable  that  the  actual  percentage  is  noticeably  smaller.) 

The  Census  Bureau's  tigures  are  of  further  interest 
from  the  fact  that  they  show  the  volumes  of  business  in 
alcohol  and  distilled  liquors  done,  respectively,  by  whole- 
sale druggists  and  manufacturers,  eleemosynary  institu- 
tions and  retail  apothecaries,  as  follows: 


Spirits 

Wholesale 

AND    Dis- 

Druggists 

Eleemosy- 

Retail 

tilled 

AND  Manu- 

nary Insti- 

Apotheca- 

Liquors. 

facturers. 

tutions. 

ries. 

Proof  Galls. 

Proof   Galls. 

Proof   Galls. 

.\lcohol. . .  . 

5,435,791 

30,092 

1,389.369 

Col.  Spirits. 

1,334.033 

4,374 

114.641 

High  Wines 

54,737 

883 

20,.373 

Whiskey.  . . 

879,282 

59,222 

1.085,396 

Brandy 

100,482 

6,599 

159,793 

Rum 

87.378 

841 

101,362 

Gin 

Totals.... 

84,937 
7,966,640 

779 

136,579 
2,907.412 

103,790 

Official'  returns  shows  that,  taking  into  ac- 
count all  kinds  of  spirits,  both  commercial  and 
beverage,  4.27  gallons  are  now  produced  in  the 
United  States  from  one  bushel  of  grain,  and 
that  0.754  gallon  of  rum  is  produced  from  one 
gallon  of  molasses.'' 

To  distinguish  with  technical  accuracy 
between  the  different  kinds  of  commercial 
spirits  would  necessitate  very  elaborate  expla- 
nations. For  Federal  revenue  purposes  there  is 
one  classification,  the  drug  trade  has  another, 
and  the  ordinary  alcohol-dealers  have  their  own 
peculiar  varieties.  Terms  and  names  are 
frequently  used  interchangeably  or  with  but 
slight  distinctions.  The  fundamental  point  is 
this  :  all  commercial  spirits  are  classed  accord- 
ing to  their  alcoholic  strength  and  purity,  and 
no  other  properties  are  recognized.  "Proof 
spirit "  (having  an  alcoholic  strength  in  the 
United  States  of  50  per  cent.)  is  the  basis 
from  which  strength  is  determined  for  revenue 
purposes.  Avoiding  technical  classifications 
which  are  made  only  for  trade  convenience,  we 
give  below  a  table,  prepared  by  Alonzo  Robbins, 
showing  the  actual  alcoholic  strength  of  cer- 
tain strictly-classified  commercial  alcohols,  the 
percentages  being  obtained  by  averaging  the 
results  of  analyses  of  spirits  sold  in  the  market 
under  the  specified  names: ' 


Commercial  Alco- 

Per cent. 

Per  cent. 

Specific 

hols. 

BY  Volume. 

BY  Weight. 

Gravity. 
".7962  ~ 

1  Absolute  Alcohol . 

99.60 

99.19 

i  E.xtra  Colo'ne  Spt 

94.75 

92.03 

.8170 

5  Cologne  Spirit  .. . 

93.75 

91.02 

.8199 

1  95  per  ct.  .\lcohol. 

93.25 

90.19 

.8323 

>  Proof  Spirit' 

52.00 

44.50 

.9:303 

;  Neutral  Swt   Spt.. 

41  ..50 

44.80 

.9494 

'This  '"in-oof  spirit"  embraces  one  part  (by  weight)  of  "95 
per  cent,  alcohol"  and  one  part  of  water;  or  by  a  more 
common  formula,  50  parts  of  alcohol  and  50  parts  of 
water. 

The  individual  comm(;rcial  spirits  as  known 
to  trade  are  briefly  noticed  below. 

Alcohol,  generally  speaking,  is  any  commercial  spirit ; 
and  this  is  the  name  by  which  all  such  spirits  are  knowa 
and  retailed  to  the  public  at  large.  But  in  the  drug  trade 
it  is  applied  to  only  two  officinal  spirits,  one  called 
"  alcohol,"  having  a  strength  of  91  percent,  by  weight, 
and  the  other,  called  "  diluted  alcohol,"  a  strength  of  '& 
per  cent,  by  weight.  The  "  diluted  alcohol  "  of  the  Phar- 
macopceia,  it  will  be  noticed,  is  nearly  eauivalent  in 
strength  to  ordinary  spirits;  but  it  is  obtained  by  dilut- 
ing strong  and  pure  alcohol  with  water.^  Ninety-five 
per  cent,  alcohol  is  a  name  not  so  much  in  use  now 
as  it  was  formerly;  it  is  a  general  designation  for  the 
regular  high-grade  alcohol  of  commerce.  In  the  table  above 
its  percentage  of  strength  is  given  as  93.25  by  volume  and 
90.19  by  weight.  The  revisers  (1880)  of  the  United  States 
Pharmacopoeia  state  that  the  present  officinal  91  per 
cent,  alcohol  corresponds  to  the  so-called  "95  per  cent', 
alcohol." 

Absolute  alcohol,  theoretically,  is  perfectly  pure  alco- 
hol. But  practically  the  commercial  article  known  as 
"absolute"  contains  some  water,  the  percentage  varying 
from  5  or  6  to  less  than  1,  according  to  the  carefu  neas 
exercised  in  preparing  and  preserving  it.  Extraordinary 
caution  is  required  to  obtain  absolute  (or  even  nearly  abso- 
lute) alcohol  and  to  keep  it  free  from  water.  The  strongest 
and  purest  spirit  that  can  be  produced  by  repealed  distil- 
lations contains  only  about  91  percent,  of  alcohol,  unless 
the  process  is  carried  on  very  delicately  in  a  perfect  vacuum. 
To  further    purify   the    spirit    it    must   be   treated  with 

2  Internal  Revenue  report  for  1890,  p.  58. 

'United  States  Dispensatory,  1887. 

■•The  United  States  Dispensatory  (edition  of  1887) 
sounds  this  warning  to  druggists,  and  incidentally  to  the 
drinking  public: 

"The  apothecary  should  never  substitute  the  commercial 
proof  spirit  for  diluted  alcohol,  even  though  it  be  of  the 
same  strength,  on  account  of  the  impurities  iu  the  former." 


Spirits  and  Spirituous  Liquors.]   GIG   [Spirits  and  Spirituous  Liquors. 


caustic  lime  or  other  substances  that  will '  absorb  the 
water,  and  be  filtered  through  charcoal,  etc.  By  threat 
painstaking  an  alcohol  can  be  produced  in  which  the 
qnantity  of  water  will  be  almost  infinitesimal— much  less 
than  1  per  cent  It  must  be  carefully  sealed,  for  its  affin- 
,  ity  for  water  is  so  strong  that  it  will  be  quiclily  weakened 
from  the  absorption  of  moisture  if  the  atmosphere  has  ac- 
1  cess  to  it. 

t      Cologne  spirit  has  a  strength  of  from  90  to  95  and  is  an 
,  article  supposed  to  be  especially  free  from  all  impurities. 

Extra  coloqne  spirit  is  of  somewhat  higher  grade. 
I      French  spirits  is  one  of  the  commercial  names  for 
'  high-grade  alcohol  of  about  the  same  quality  as  cologne 
spirits;  dealers  in  this  country  recognize  practically  no 
difference  between  these  articles. 

High  proof  spirit  is  a  term  applicable  to  any  spirit 
with  an  alcoholic  percentage  greater  than  that  of  proof 
spirit.    {See  proof  spirit,  below.) 

High  wines  is"  the  distiller's  name  for  the  product  of 
the  second  distillation  in  the  manufacture  of  any  spirit 
from  a  fermented  infusion,  the  spirit  resulting  from  the 
first  distillation  being  called  "low  wines." 

Low  proof  spirits  are  spirits  of  any  sort  which  upon 
t«st  disclose  an  alcoholic  strength  below  that  of  proof 
spirit.    (See  proof  spirit.) 

Low  wines  is  a  name  given  to  the  product  of  the  first 
distillation  of  an  alcoholic  ferment. 

Neutral  spi7-its  and  neutral  sweet  spirits  are  numeB 
used  without  much  discrimination;  they  may  imply  a 
commercial  alcohol  of  about 45  percent,  strength,  but  alco- 
hols of  higher  percentages  are  also  denoted  and  articles  of 
about  the  grade  of  cologne  spirit  are  often  indicated  by 
these  names  as  used  by  American  dealers. 

Plain  spirit  is  the  ordinary  product  of  simple  distilla- 
tion—the crudest  product  of  the  sii  1.  It  is  the  article 
used  in  enormous  quantities  as  the  principal  basis  of  com- 
mon gin,  British  bn.niy,  wines  and  other  counterfeited 
beverages  of  all  kinds.  It  is  too  offensive  to  be  tolerated 
by  the  palate  unless  disguised,  and,  beinz  frequently  below 
proof,  it  is  even  more  corrupt  than  common  proof  spirit. 

Proof  spirit  is  an  arbitrary  name  adopted  by  the  Gov- 
ernment to  indicate  the  standard  from  which  the  strengths 
of  all  distilled  products  are  measured  for  revenue  pur- 
poses. In  the  United  States  spirits  are  said  to  be  proof 
when  one-half  the  volume  is  alcohol  at  a  temperature  of 
60°  F.  and  of  a  specific  gravity  of  0.7939;  the  parts  of 
water  are  nominally  50,  but  actually  53.71,  owing  to  the 
contraction  of  the  liquids  when  mixed.  The  proof  spirit 
of  the  British  Excise  system  is  49.3  per  cent,  strong  by 
weight,  or  .57.09  per  cent,  by  volume.  But  the  name 
"proof  spirit"  indicates  a  mere  standard,  and  articles  sold 
nnder  this  name  may  vary  several  degrees  above  and  be- 
low actual  proof.  The  word  "proof"  refers  exclusively 
to  strength,  implying  nothing  whatever  as  to  purity. 
The  most  infamous  rum  or  whiskey  may  answer  the 
"proof"  test  as  satisfactorily  as  an  article  reduced  by 
water-dilution  from  absolute  alcohol.  The  percentage  of 
water  to  be  added  to  or  taken  from  a  given  spirit  in  order 
to  bring  it  to  proof  indicates  the  number  of  degrees  that 
that  spirit  is  "'above  proof"  or  "below  proof."  In  Great 
Britain  the  special  terms,  second  proof  spirit,  third 
proof  spirit  and  fo-Mh  -proof  spirit,  are  applied  to 
spirits  60,  70  and  SO'per  cent,  strong,  respectively. 

Pu  re  spirits  is  a  name  for  the  purest  and  strongest  prod- 
ucts of  ordinary  distillation. 

Bectified  spirit  ia  a  hifrh-gi&de  officina.]  alcohol  of  the 
British'Pharmacopoeia,  about  6  per  cent,  weaker  than  tlie 
United  States  91  per  cent,  officinal.  In  a  non-technical 
sense  "rectified  spirit"  is  any  alcohol  that  has  been  redis- 
tilled. 

Spiritus  tenvior.  one  of  the  two  officinals  of  the 
British  Pharmacopoeia,  is  identical  in  strength  with  the 
British  proof  spirit. 

Spirit  of  wine  (spiritus  vini)  is  a  term  formerly  era- 
ployed  comprehensively  to  designate  alcohol,  because  that 
article  was  originally  extracted  from  wine:  now  applied 
in  a  general  way  to  the  higher-grade  alcohols  and  espe- 
cially to  the  common  liigh-grade  commercial  spirits  rang- 
ing in  alcoholic  strength  from  89  to  95  per  cent. 

Wood  spirit  or  methyl  alcohol  is  distilled  from  wood, 
and  is  entirely  distinct  from  all  the  spirits  (ethylic)  above 
considered.  Its  chemical  formula  is  0  H4O,  that  of  ethylic 
alcohol  being  C„  H„  O.  It  is  sometimes  inaccurately 
called  naphtha  (true  naphtha  being  distilled  from  petro- 
leum). Wood  spirit  is  never  used  as  a  beverage.  Methyl- 
ated spirit  is  ethylic  spirit  mixed  with  about  one-ninth 
its  volume  of  wood  spirit,  and  this  preparation  is  em- 
ployed in  various  arts  and  manufactures. 

THE   COMMON   DISTILLED  BEVERAGES. 

These  are  of  four  principal  varieties  : 
•whiskey,  braudy,  rum  aud  gin.     All  are  dis- 


tinguished from  commercial  spirits  by  a  dis- 
tinctive taste,  imparted  in  each  case  by  a  special 
mode  of  preparation.  When  genuine  they  are 
never  placed  on  the  market  until  two  or  three 
years  after  distillation ;  but  they  can  be  readily 
counterfeited  from  ordinary  newly  -  distilled 
spirits,  and  in  practice  the  quantity  so  counter- 
feited is  much  greater  than  the  quantity  that  is 
genuine.  All  these  four  liquors  are  bases  of 
numerous  popular  barroom  drinks.  Punches, 
cocktails,  fizzes,  smashes,  slings  aud  the  like 
are  seductive  concoctions  of  spirituous  liquors 
(sometimes,  however,  of  vinous  liquors  instead) 
with  su.<5ar,  spices,  fruit  juices  and  various 
other  articles;  grog  is  plain  distilled  liquor  and 
cold  water;  toddy  is  a  mixture  of  liquor,  hot 
water  and  sugar. 

The  percentages  of  alcohol  in  the  leading 
beverage  spirits  are  diiferently  stated  by  differ- 
ent authorities.  This  will  be  seen  by  compar- 
ing the  following  table  (from  the  United  States 
Dispensatory,  1887)  with  Mulhall's  list  on  p.  19:  > 


Liquors. 

PEn  CENT.     Per  cent. 
byWeight.  btVolume. 

Scotch  Whiskey 

42.8 
42.3 
52.2 
41.9 
47.3 
43.3 
40.3 
37.9 
W.2 

50.3 
49.9 
60.0 
49.4 
55.0 
49.7 
47.8 
45  J) 
62.0 

Irish            "        

American    "        (old)' 

English        "        

French  Cognac  (brandy) 

Gin 

(lerman '■  Schnapps  " 

Russian  "  Dobry  Wutky  "" . . . 

'The  actual  alcoholic  percentage  of  American  whiskey 
is  less  than  these  figures  indicate.     ^  Good  vodka. 

The  liquors  ara  separately  considered  below. 

Whiskey  (from  usige-beatha,  Celtic  for  "water  of  life"; 
later  forrh,  vsquebavgh,  Irisii  or  Gaelic  for  the  early 
whiskey  of  Ireland  and  Scotland).— Most  of  the  whiskey 
of  the  United  States  is  distilled  from  corn;  the  remainder 
from  rye,  malt.wheat.oats,  barley  and  mill-feed.  (See  table, 
p.  172.)  Bourbon  ivhiskey  (named  from  Bourbon  County, 
Ky.)  and  rye  whiskey  are  the  common  commercial  kinds. 
As  is  explained  on  pp.  375-8,  the  honest  whiskey  of  this 
country  is  almost  exclusively  the  product  of  Kentucky, 
Pennsylvania  and  Maryland;  and  the  annual  production  of 
what  passes  as  honest  whiskey  is  about  15,000,000  gallons, 
constituting  only  15  to  20  per  cent,  of  the  entire  quantity 
of  grain  spirits.  But  much  of  the  so-called  honest  or 
"straight"  whiskey  is  hastily  thrust  upon  the  market  and 
poisonously  adulterated  with  oil  of  creosote  or  pyroxvlic 
acid,  etc.  The  characteristic  color  of  whiskey  can  be 
given  to  crude  spirits  in  less  than  12  hours'  time  by  artifi- 
cial processes.  "There  appears  to  be  a  class  of  distillers," 
says  the  Interna!  Revenue  report  for  1889  (p.  60),  "  who 
desire  to  market  their  product  as  soon  as  possible,  and 
who,  by  heavily  charring  their  barrels,  adding  a  little  car- 
amel or  prune  juice,  or  by  some  of  the  so-called  ageing 
processes,  endeavor  so  to  color  their  new  and  colorless 
whiskies  as  to  deceive  the  consumer."  The  Scotch  and 
Irish  whiskies  are  produced  largely  from  maltand  barley, 
and  are  highly  esteemed;  but,  as  "analysis  discloses,  they 
are  frequently  "made  up,"  like  the  American,  from  alco- 
hol, water,  sugar,  and  tannic  acid,  acetic,  pyroligenous  and 
pyroxylic  ^  acids.  At  the  present  day  it"  is  exceedingly 
difficult  to  obtain  a  pure  article  of  whiskey  through  the 
ordinary  channels  of  trade.  In  other  count>-|es,  as  Ger- 
many and  Russia,  whiskey  is  manufactured  from  potatoes 
and  beets. 

Brandy  (older  forms  of  the  word,  brnndywine  and 
brandwine,  meaning  burnt— or  distilled— wine;  akin  to  the 
present  German  branntwein  [burnt  wine]  ).— As  its  name 
indicates,  brandy  proper  is  distilled  wine;  and  all  brandy, 
as  distinguished  from  whiskey  and  other  spirits,  is  sup- 
posed to  be  the  distilled  product  of  the  grape  or  other 
fruits.  For  many  years  past  most  of  the  superior  grape 
brandy  has  been  supplied  from  the  cognac  districts  of 
France.    By  turning  to  pp  480-1  the  reader  will  see  that 

'The  second  column  of  i)ercentages  (by  volume)  is  the 
one  with  which  comparisons  should  be  made. 

'  Ten  drops  of  this  acid  (oil  of  creosote)  will  kill  a  man  in 
15  minutes,  and  no  counteractive  is  known  in  medicine. 


Spirits  and  Spirituous  Liquors.]    017    [Spirits  and  Spirituous  Liquors. 


thig  supply  has  beeneuormoiigly  decreased  by  the  phyllox- 
era's ravages.  The  production  of  genuine  grape  brandy  in 
other  countries  is  <  omparati  velv  small ;  in  tiie  United  States 
it  is  really  influitesimal.  Vintners  cannot  afford  to  distill 
their  all  too  precious  grape  juice  into  lirandy  when  this 
article  can  be  so  easily  imitated  from  raw  corn,  potato  and 
other  spirits.  One  of  the  commonest  counterfeits  is  a 
grain  whiskey  or  beet-root  spirit,  colored  and  aromatized 
with  cognac-flavored  tenanthic  ether  or  Hungarian  oil.' 
Besides  the  very  scarce  grape  product  the  only  articles 
worthy  of  being  regarded  as  brandies  are  the  distillates  of 
various  fruits  like  the  apple  (yielding  the  familiar  apple- 
jack), peach,  blackberry  and  fig.  But  these  fruit  spirits  are 
adulterated  and  marketed  before  they  have  been  properly 
aged,  the  same  as  the  grain  alcohols. 

Rum  (contracted  from  rumbullion,  provincial  English 
for  a  great  tumult). — This  liquor  is  distilled  from  the  juice 
of  the  sugar  cane  direct,  or  from  molasses  or  other  sugar 
cane  products  or  refuse.  The  b>jst  rums  come  from  the 
West  Indies,  especially  Jamaica  (see  pp.  259-60)  and  St. 
Croi.x.  In  the  United  States  there  are  several  rum  dis- 
tilleries, using  molasses  as  their  material  ;  and  in  the 
fiscal  year  ending  June  30,  1890,  they  manufactured  1,057,- 
808  proof  gallons.  Much  of  this  is  of  the  meanest  quality 
and  is  shipped  to  Africa  (see  pp.  240-1).  Neiu  England 
rum  was  formerly  made  in  great  quantities  and  was  a 
favorite  drink,  notably  the  Medford  rum  (from  the  town 
of  Medford,  Mass.).  But  the  cheapness  of  grain  ■spirits 
has  operated  to  reduce  botb  the  supply  and  the  demand. 
All  sugar- producing  countries  distill  rum.  There  are 
hardly  any  alcoholic  articles  so  vile  and  poisonous  as  the 
native  rums  of  South  Africa  and  adjacent  islands,  the 
negro  rum  of  the  West  Indies  and  the  rum  or  cana  of  the 
South  American  nations. 

Gin  (contracted  from  geneva,  another  common  name 
for  the  same  liquor,  which  is  derived  from  the  French 
genievn  [juniper]). — A  strong  spirit,  slowly  and  carefully 
distilled  from  uumalted  barley  or  rye  (sometimes  from 
other  grain),  combined  with  the  juniper  berry  and  other 
lugredients  ;  after  distillation  it  is  rectified,  sweetened 
and  aromatized.  The  name  Hollands  is  also  frequently 
applied  to  gin,  Holland  being  the  country  where  it  was 
originally  produced  and  still  the  most  important  center 
of  its  manufacture.  The  Dutch  varieties,  known  com- 
mercially as  geneva,  Hollands  and  Schiedam,  are  con- 
sidered the  best.  The  English  gins,  which  are  staple 
drinks  throughout  Great  Britain  and  the  United  States, 
are  made  from  raw  sfraiii  spirit  as  a  basis,  the  product 
being  highly  and  perniciously  flavored  ;  frequently  such 
adulterants  as  oil  of  turpentine,  essential  oils,  alum, 
potassium  carbonate,  acetate  of  lead,  sulphate  of  zinc, 
grains  of  i)aradise  and  cayenne  pejiper  are  introduced.  ^ 
The  appalling  effects  of  gin  drinking  and  the  multiplica- 
tion of  gin-shops  caused  tiie  English  Parliament  to  pass 
stringent  laws  early  in  the  18th  Century  (see  pp.  273-4); 
and  it  was  this  legislation  that  gave  rise  to  Lord  Chester- 
field's speech  in  the   House  of    Lords    in    li-ti.  ^     The 

'Very  much  of  the  brandy  sold  in  (ireat  Britain  and 
Ireland  is  prepared  at  home  from  ordinary  grain  alcohol  by 
adding  thereto  argol,  bruised  French  plums,  some  French 
wine-sugar,  a  little  good  cognac,  and  redistilling,  when  the 
spirit  which  passes  over  may  be  colored  with  burnt  sugar  or 
by  being  kept  in  an  empty  sherry  cask.  Occasionally  grains 
of  paradise  and  other  acrid  matters  are  added  to  give  the 
brandy  a  lictilious  strength,  and  catechu  or  oak-bark  to 
give  it  an  astringent  taste. — Chambers's  Encyclopcedia, 
article  '•'Brandy.'''' 

2  In  38  specimens  of  gin  examined  by  Dr.  Hassall,  the  al- 
coholi ;  strength  ranged  from  22.35  to  48.80 degrees,  and  the 
sugar  present  varied  between  2.43  and  9.38  per  cent.;  7 
were  foi.ud  to  contain  cayenne  pepper,  2  bad  cinnamon  or 
caisia  oil  and  nearly  all  contained  sulphates. — Etuiyclo- 
piedia  lir'itannica,  article  "  G-in." 

3  The  following  is  a  part  of  that  speech  : 

"  Lu.xury,  my  Lords,  is  to  be  taxed,  but  vice  prohibited, 
let  the  difficulties  in  executing  the  law  be  what  they  will. 
Would  you  lay  a  tax  on  the  breach  of  the  Ten  Cominand- 
raeuts  ?  Would  not  such  a  tax  be  wicked  and  scandalous, 
because  it  would  imply  an  indulgence  to  all  those  who 
would  pay  the  tax  ?  Is  not  this  a  reproach  must  justly 
thrown  by  Protestants  upon  the  Church  of  Rome  ?  Was 
it  not  the  chief  cause  of  the  Reformation  ?  And  will  you 
follow  a  precedent  which  brought  reproach  and  ruin  upon 
those  who  introduced  it  ?  This  is  the  very  case  now  be- 
fore us.  You  are  going  to  lay  a  tax,  and  consequently  to 
indulge  a  sort  of  drunkenness,  which  almost  necessarily 
produces  a  breach  of  every  one  of  the  Commandments.  .  . . 
The  bill  [to  license  gin-shops  for  the  sake  of  revenue] 
contains  only  the  conditions  on  which  the  people  of  this 
kingdom  are  to  be  allowed  henceforward  to  riot  in  de- 
bauchery, licensed  by  law  and  countenanced  by  the  magis- 
trates.   For  there  is  no  doubt  that  those  on  whom  the  in- 


United  States  manufactures  comparatively  little  gin  ;  in 
the  fiscal  year  1889-90  the  entire  product  was  1,202,940 
proof  gallons. 

LIQUEURS   AND   CORDIALS. 

The  numerous  alcoholic  beverages  classed 
under  these  names  are  mixtures  (or  the  dis- 
tillates of  mi.xtures)  of  brandy,  alcohol  or 
any  .spirit  with  other  substances,  generally  sweet- 
ened with  the  syrup  of  refined  sugar,  and 
perfumed  and  highly  seasoned  with  spices 
and  various  vegetable  extracts.  Some  liqueurs 
are  compounded  from  many  substances  by 
intricate  processes,  others  are  produced  by 
comparatively  simple  methods  ;  some  depend 
upon  the  infusion  of  flowers,  fruits,  woods  or 
herbs  in  water  or  alcohol,  others  upon  the  dis- 
tillation of  aromatics  or  combinations  of  aro- 
matics.  The  distinction  between  liqueurs  and 
cordials  is  not  very  clear,  but  there  is  a  disposi- 
tion to  classify  as  cordials  those  liqueurs  that  re- 
quire no  very  complex  mode  of  manufacture  and 
are  rehitively  simple  in  composition;  thus  a 
beverage  wliich  is  merely  a  sweetened  spirit,  or 
but  slightly  aromatized,  is  generally  spoken  of 
as  a  cordial.  Bittern  form  a  distinct  group  of 
liqueurs  whose  chief  characteristic  in  common  is 
their  claim  to  possess  certain  tonic  properties 
which  give  them  a  medicinal  value.  They  are 
generally  prepared  by  steeping  some  herb,  leaf, 
blossom  or  root,  dried  or  fresh,  in  spirits  and 
otherwise  doctoring  the  liquid  to  tickle  the 
palate  or  excite  the  nerves  and  stomach  and  thus 
create  a  commercial  demand  for  them. 

Absinthe  is  one  of  the  most  powerful  liqueurs,  made 
from  alcohol  and  the  leaves  and  tops  of  varieties  of 
artemisia  (especially  the  common  wormwood,  arleiiusia 
absinthium,  from  which  the  name  "absinthe"  is 
derived),  together  with  other  aromatics,  like  sweet  flag- 
root,  angelica  root,  the  fruit  of  star  anise  and  the  leave  :j 
of  dittauy  of  Crete.  It  has  an  emerald  hue.  The  pure 
liqueur  is  a  sufficiently  violent  poison,  but  drugs  like 
tumeric,  indigo  and  blue  vitrol  are  added  to  deepen  the 
color.  It  came  into  use  as  a  beverage  after  the  return  of 
the  French  soldiers  from  the  Als;erian  wars  of  1844-7; 
these  soldiers  had  made  it  a  practice  to  mingle  absinthe 
with  their  wines.  The  absinthe  habit  is  regarded  by 
many  as  the  very  worst  one  that  drinkers  can  contract. 
The  results  are  so  alarming  that  the  usa  of  absinthe  has 
been  prohibited  in  the  French  army  and  navy.  Epilepsy 
is  one  of  the  diseases  that  speedily  overtake  the  absinthe 
victim.  This  liqueur  is  being  consumed  in  increasing 
quantities  ia  the  United  States,  and  several  firms  are 
engaged  in  manufacturins  it  here.  But  nearly  all  the 
absinthe  is  produced  in  Switzerland  and  France. 


spectors  of  this  tax  shall  confer  authority,  will  be  directed 
to  assist  their  masters  in  their  design  to  encourage  the 
consumption  of  that  liquor  from  which  snch  large  reve- 
nues are  expected,  and  to  multiply  without  end  those 
licenses  which  are  to  pay  a  yearly  tribute  to  the  crown.  .  .  . 

"  When  I  consider,  my  Lords,  the  tendency  of  this  bill, 
I  find  it  only  for  the  propagation  of  disease,  the  suppres- 
sion of  industry  and  the  destruction  of  mankind.  I  find 
it  the  most  fatal  engine  that  ever  was  pointed  at  a  people; 
an  engine  by  which  those  who  are  not  killed  will  be  dis- 
abled, and  those  who  preserve  their  limbs  will  be  deprived 
of  their  sei.ses.  .  .  . 

"As  little,  my  Lords,  am  I  affected  with  the  merit  of 
the  wonderful  skill  which  the  distillers  are  said  to 
have  attained,  that  it  is  in  my  opinion  no  faculty  of  great 
use  to  mankind  \q  prepare  palatable  poison  ;  nor  shall  I 
ever  contribute  my  interest  for  the  reprieve  of  a  mur- 
derer, because  he  has.  by  long  practice,  obtained  great 
dexterity  in  his  trade.  If  their  liquors  are  so  delicious 
that  the  people  are  tempted  to  their  own  destruction,  let 
us  at  length,  my  Lords,  secure  tliem  from  the  fatal 
draughts  by  bursting  the  vials  that  contain  them  ;  let  us 
crush  at  once  these  artists  in  slaughter,  who  have  recon- 
ciled their  countrymen  to  sickness  and  to  ruin,  and 
spread  over  the  pitfalls  of  debauchery  such  baite  as 
cannot  be  resisted." 


Spirits  and  Spirituous  Liquors.] 


G18 


[State. 


Anisette  or  aniseed  cordial  is  a  French  liqueur  pre- 
pared by  flavoring;  weals  spirit  vvi;h  coriaiicUr.  seed  of 
anise  and  sweet  fennel  seed,  and  sweetening  with  liuely- 
clarifled  syrup  of  refined  sutrar. 

Cassis  (Preucli)  is  made  irom  black  cnrrunta. 

Chartreuse,  one  of  the  most  celebrated  of  liqueurs,  is 
produced  by  the  monlvs  of  La  Grande  Chartn'use,  near 
Grenoble,  Prance.  There  are  three  diflVrent  kinds, 
green,  yellow  and  white.  The  mode  of  manufacture  is  a 
secret  carefully  s^uarded  by  tlie  monks.  The  cliief  aro- 
matics  are  believed  to  be  wormwood,  carnatious  and  tlie 
young  buds  of  the  pine  tree.  Spurious  chartreuse  is  com- 
mon. 

Cherry  braruhj'is  a  name  sometimes  erroneously  uiven 
to  kirschvvasser.  Common  cherry  brandy  is  made  by 
mixing  brandy  or  spirits  with  cherry  juice  or  steeping 
cherries  in  spirits. 

Kirsebaer,  which  comes  from  Copenhagen,  is  a  cherry 
brandy. 

Clove  cordial,  much  in  vogue  among  the  English  lower 
classes,  is  a  sjiirit  flavored  with  bruised  cloves  and 
colored  with  burnt  sugar. 

The  well-known  ciiracoa  takes  its  name  from  the 
Caribbean  island  Curacoa,  where  it  was  flrst  manufac- 
tured. Large  quantitie's  are  now  made  in  Holland  by 
digesting  in  sweetened  spirits  the  small  curacoa  orange 
or  orange  peel  and  adding  cinnamon  and  often  a  litiie 
mace  or  cloves. 

Kirsch,  kirschwasser  or  kirschenivasser  (German, 
meaning  cherry  water),  is  distilled  in  Switzerland  and 
the  Black  Forest  region  of  Germany  from  the  small  black 
cherry.  The  ferment  is  made  exclusively  from  the  pulp 
of  the  cherry,  but  before  distillation  the  stones  are 
broken  and  their  kernels  are  cast  into  the  feriuent. 
Various  flavoring  subst.inces  are  frequently  added.  A 
most  dangerous  imitation  is  produced  in  France  by  treat- 
ing spirits  with  cherry-liiurei  water,  a  rank  poison.' 

Kuinmel,  doppel-h  iiumi  I  or  allasch,  a  Russian 
liqueur,  much  used  also  (as  well  as  imitated)  in  Germany 
and  other  countries,  consists  of  a  sweetened  spirit 
flavored  with  cumin  and  caraway  seeds,  the  extract  of 
the  latter  being  so  strong  as  to  conceal  all  other  flavors. 

Maraschino  is  the  distilled  product  of  a  very  fine  and 
delicately-flavored  clierry  called  marasques.  grown  only 
in  Dalmatia,  an  Austrian  dependency.  The  liqueur  is 
Bweetened  with  sugar. 

JVoi/ai/ or  cri'ine  de  noyau  (also  written  noyeaii)  is  a 
liqueiir  or  cordial  of  two  varieties  (white  and   pink),  pre- 

Cared  by  flavoring  brandy  with  the  bruised  kernels  of  the 
itier  almond.    Peach  and  apricot  kernels  are  sometimes 
subsiituted  for  or  combined  with  the  almond. 

PepperiniKf  liqueur  has  peppermint  as  its  predomi- 
nating flavoring  extract.  It  is  usually  nothing  more 
than  ordinary  sweetened  gin  mixed  with  the  essential 
oil  of  peppermint. 

/?rt/t7/!"tf  (writl;eu  also  7'rt/<^(/ and  ratafee),  a  Prussian 
liqueur,  is  aromatized  with  the  kernels  of  cherries, 
peaches,  apricots  and  other  fruits,  spices  au  1  sugar  being 
added.  Katafla  is  also  the  name  of  a  flavoring  essence 
having  for  its  basis  the  essential  oil  of  bitter  almonds. 
In  France  the  name  ratafia  is  often  applied  to  various 
liqueurs  flavored  with  the  kernels  of  fruit  stones  or 
seasoned  with  spices. 

Trappistine  (French)  derives  its  name  from  its  manu- 
faciurers,  the  Trappist  monks  of  the  Abbey  de  la  Gr  ice 
l):eu.  It  is  marktted  in  two  varieties,  a  yellow  and  a 
green. 

Vermuth  or  vermo'uth  CPrench)  is  one  of  the  lijhter 
liqueurs  and  has  white  wine  rather  tiian  spirits  for  its 
base.  Absinthe  and  various  aromatic  drugs  are  ingre- 
dients. 

The  foregoing  are  the  chief  commercial  liqueurs. 
Among  the  remaining  ones  are  henedicline,  cacao,  cafe, 
6T.  rue  de  rose,  cr  me  de  vuriille  (called  also  vanille), 
mandarine,  menthe,  parfait  amour,  pomeranza,  and 
the. 

OTHER   DISTILLED   DRINKS. 

The  distinctive  names  for  the  common  di.s- 
tilled  drinks  of  variou.s  nations — drinks  that  are 
counterparts  of  the  different  grades  of  commer- 
cial spirits,  whiskey,  etc.,  as  known  to  Ameri- 
cans— are  of  very  wide  range.  A  few  of  the 
leading  ones  are  mentioned  below. 

Arak  (or  rakee)  is  the  common  distilled  drink  of  Pales- 
tine and  Syria,  made  chiefly  from  damaged  figs  and  the 
refuse  of  wine-grapes.  Arrack  is  a  name  of  broad 
signification,  covering,  in  a  general  way,  the  spirituous 


»  See  the  United  States  Dispensatory  (1887),  p.  340. 


liquors  of  many  Oriental  countries,  especially  Arabia, 
Egypt,  India.  Java,  Ceylon,  Siam  and  Cochin  China;  it 
is  made  from  difTerent  materials  in  difl'orent  countries — 
from  jjalm  toddy,  rice,  molasses,  cocoanut  milk,  dates, 
grape  refuse,  etc.  Other  well-known  Eastern  articles  are 
distilled  /•'o;f?;ii«s  (otherwise  known  jis  avaca.  arsa  and 
arara  asa),  from  fermented  mares'  milk,  long  in  use 
among  the  Tartars ;  sake,  the  Japanese  whiskey  (from 
rice,  molasses,  etc.).  and  samshu,  Chinese  spirits  (princi- 
pally from  rice).  Eau  de  vie  is  French  for  brandy  ; 
t'cA/^fy-iyjs  is  German  for  spirits  of  all  kinds  ;  poteen  or 
potheen  is  Irish  for  whiskey  (especially  for  whiskey 
illicitly  distilled  by  the  Irish  peasantry)  ;  vodka  is  Rus- 
sian for  spirits  or  whiskey. 

State. — Just  where  the  functions  of 
civil  Government  begin  and  end,  has, 
from  the  dawn  of  history,  been  a  theme 
for  discussion.  Two  diverging  schools 
may  be  traced  more  or  less  distinctly 
throughout  the  discussion.  With  one 
the  constant  aim  has  been  to  curtail  the 
powers  of  Government  and  to  enlarge 
those  of  the  individual  ;  and  as  all 
philosophy  will  run  at  times  to  the  ex- 
treme, this  philosophy  that  the  best  Gov- 
ernment is  the  one  which  governs  least, 
has  run  to  its  extreme  in  Anarchism.  The 
other  school  has  contended  that,  with  the 
increasing  perplexities  of  social  and  in- 
dustrial life,  and  the  growing  density  of 
population,  the  necessity  arises  for  more 
and  more  interference,  on  the  part  of 
Government,  with  the  activities  of  the 
individual.  At  the  extreme  of  this  school 
is  Communism,  with  its  ownership  of  all 
things  in  common. 

It  is  of  interest  to  note  the  bearing  of 
these  two  schools  under  different  forms 
of  Government.  Under  monarchical 
forms  the  school  that  sought  to  enlarge 
civil  functions  became  associated  in  his- 
tory with  resistance  to  liberty  and  pro- 
motion of  despotism.  The  "Liberal^* 
was  he  who  sought  to  lesson  the  rights  of 
the  King  and  to  increase  those  of  the 
individual.  But  under  republican  gov- 
ernment this  attitude  becomes  almost 
exactly  reversed.  In  England  to-day 
the  Tories  or  Conservatives,  who  are  the 
most  strenuous  opponents  of  any  enlarge- 
ment of  governmental  functions,  now 
that  Government  has  come  into  the  hands 
of  the  people,  are  the  political  and  as  a 
rule  the  lineal  descendants  of  those  who 
contended  for  the  enlargement  of  those 
functions  when  Government  was  in  the 
hands  of  a  King.  In  the  meantime  the 
Liberalism  Avhich  a  few  centuries  ago 
meant  opposition  to  all  extension  of 
governmental  powers,  has  come  to  mean 
rather  the  opposite. 

It  is  easy  to  conceive  from  which  school 
come  the  philosophical  objections  to  the 


state.] 


619 


[State. 


principle  of  Prohibition.  By  those  who 
hold  with  Mill  and  Spencer  that  the  line 
of  progress  for  society  is  in  the  direction 
of  less  law  rather  than  more,  Prohibition 
is,  at  first  glance,  viewed  as  a  retrograde 
step,  as  an  unwarrantable  invasion  upon 
the  domain  of  personal  habits,  as  an 
attempt  of  the  majority  to  dictate  what 
a  man  shall  drink. 

The  objection  on  this  score  will  be 
found,  however,  to  arise  from  a  miscon- 
ception, in  most  cases,  of  the  scope  and 
purpose  of  the  Prohibitory  law,  as  re- 
garded at  least  by  its  leading  advocates. 
For  no  Prohibitory  statute  has  been 
framed  that  j^roposed  to  treat  with  a 
man's  personal  habits  or  private  appetite. 
Such  law  deals  entirely  with  the  traffic — 
with  the  barter  and  sale  of  liquor,  or  with 
the  manufacture  for  purposes  of  barter 
and  sale.  In  preventing  the  traffic,  the 
law  may  indeed  remove  many  of  the 
facilities  for  gratifying  the  appetite,  and 
it  is  hojied  that  with  the  removal  of  these 
facilities  the  gratification  will  cease.  But 
the  law  does  not,  even  indirectly,  compel 
it  to  cease.  One  may  still,  under  Prohib- 
itory law,  brew  his  own  beer  or  distill  his 
own  whiskey,  for  j^rivate  use.  It  is  only 
when  he  places  it  in  the  market  that  the 
State  claims  the  right  to  interfere. 

The  right  of  the  State  to  regulate,  re- 
strain or  forbid  any  form  of  tra;^c  which 
is  considered  inimical  to  the  common 
weal,  is  one  which  it  is  useless  to  cite 
authorities  to  establish.  As  a  matter  of 
fact,  every  Government  retains  the  right 
of  control  over  all  forms  of  public  traffic, 
and  a  large  proportion  of  the  statutes  of 
any  State  are  those  dealing  with  traffic. 
There  is,  indeed,  no  form  of  traffic  to 
which  the  State  does  not,  to  some  extent, 
dictate  the  conditions  under  which  it  can 
be  prosecuted.  For  instance,  the  State 
determines  a  certain  standard  of  weights 
and  measures.  A  circulating  medium  is 
established  as  legal  tender  for  all  mercan- 
tile transactions.  '  The  number  of  hours 
of  labor  is  frequently  determined.  Bank- 
rupt laws  are  made.  Forms  of  contract 
are  settled  by  law.  At  almost  every 
point  trade  and  traffic  encounter  the 
provisions  of  law  determining  the  con- 
ditions for  their  existence.  Prohibition 
is  (despite  the  word  itself)  but  the  defin- 
ing by  law  of  the  conditions  under  which 
the  traffic  in  liquor  shall  be  prosecuted. 
The  conditions  are  more  stringent  than 


with  most  forms  of  traffic,  solely  because 
the  public  dangers  are  greater  and  much 
more  difficult  to  guard  against.  Whether 
or  not  these  conditions  are  ones  it  is  wise 
to  impose,  there  can  be  little  doubt  of 
the  State's  legal  and  constitutional  right 
to  impose  them  if  it  thinks  them  wise. 
This  right  has  been  affirmed  by  the  high- 
est Court  in  the  land. 

Another  phase  of  the  question  is 
awakened  by  the  thought  that  the  State 
cannot,  in  the  case  of  a  traffic,  refuse  to 
do  one  of  two  things,  namely,  either  to 
protect  or  to  prohibit.  It  must  do  one 
or  the  other.  If  it  refuses  to  prohibit,  it 
must  in  the  nature  of  the  case  protect. 
There  are  many  forms  of  personal  con- 
duct, not  in  themselves  wise  or  prudent, 
with  which  the  State  refuses  to  interfere. 
Its  refusal  cannot  be  construed  by  any 
into  a  sanction  of  the  conduct.  A  man 
may  over-eat,  or  abuse  his  eyes  by  over- 
reading,  or  expose  himself  foolhardily — 
Government  simply  refuses  to  interfere. 
So  with  drinking :  a  man  may  over-drink, 
and  Government  pays  no  attention  to  the 
fact  till  the  results  begin  to  affect  others 
than  the  drinker.  The  Government,  in 
these  cases,  neither  sanctions  nor  con- 
demns ;  it  simply  refuses  to  interfere. 
But  in  the  case  of  a  traffic  the  State  must 
necessarily  take  either  the  attitude  of 
protection  or  of  prohibition.  At  every 
step  the  traffic  calls  upon  the  State  for 
protection,  and  if  there  is  not  prohibition 
the  protection  is  forthcoming.  The 
property  rights  of  liquor  are  established. 
Contracts  are  enforced.  Debts  are  sued 
for  and  their  payment  compelled.  In 
fact,  if  it  were  not  for  the  protection 
which  the  Courts  give,  it  would  be  next 
to  impossible  for  the  business  to  be  car- 
ried on  except  in  the  most  meager  di- 
mensions. 

If,  then,  the  State  must  either  protect 
or  prohibit,  shall  it  not  have  the  right  to 
say  which  it  shall  do  ?  and  shall  it  not 
decide  the  question  with  a  view  to  con- 
serving public  order,  public  health  and 
public  morality,  rather  than  with  a  view 
to  furnishing  facilities  for  the  gratifica- 
tion of  personal  appetites  ? 

The  advocates  of  Prohibition  base  their 
appeal  to  the  State  upon  the  recognized 
public  evils  which  flow  from  the  saloon. 
They  ask,  not  that  the  State  shall  inter- 
fere to  prevent  the  drinker  from  injuring 
himself,  but  to  prevent  the  saloon,  by 


Stewart,  Gideon  T.] 


620 


[Stimulants. 


the  alkirements  it  necessarily  presents, 
from  injuring  the  public  interests,  en- 
dangering public  order  and  increasing 
the  burdens  of  taxation.  "  Trade  is  a 
social  act,"  says  John  Stuart  Mill  in  his 
"  Essay  on  Liberty."  It  is  this  "  social 
act "  of  barter  and  sale,  not  the  individual 
act  of  drinking,  with  which  the  State  is 
asked  to  deal. 

There  is  no  theory  of  government  (ex- 
cept the  theory  of  no-government)  which 
denies  the  duty  of  the  State  to  prevent 
one  member  of  society  from  violating  the 
rights  of  another.  The  advocates  of 
Prohibition  rest  their  entire  case  on  the 
assertion  that  the  saloon  is  an  infringe- 
ment not  so  much  on  the  rights  of  the 
drinker  as  of  the  non-drinker;  that  it  en- 
dangers public  order  and  public  health, 
foments  crimes  of  violence,  increases 
taxation  and  counteracts  to  a  great  extent 
all  the  remedial  forces  which  society  has 
set  in  action  and  is  supporting.  If  this 
assertion  cannot  be  established  the  case 
for  Prohibition  falls  to  the  ground  con- 
fessedly. If  it  is  established,  then  there 
is  no  theory  of  civil  government  with 
which  Prohibition,  rightly  understood, 
is  not  in  harmony. 

E.  J.  Wheeler. 

Stewart,  Gideon  T.,  second  candi- 
date of  the  Prohibition  party  for  Vice- 
President;  born  at  Johnstown,  N.  Y., 
Aug.  7, 1824.  His  parents  removed  to 
Oberlin,  0.,  when  he  was  13  years  old. 
Here  he  obtained  his  education  and  be- 
gan the  study  of  law,which  he  completed 
at  Columbus,  0.  He  commenced  the 
practice  of  his  profession  at  Norwalk, 
0.,  in  1846.  For  the  next  20  years  he 
was  engaged  chiefly  in  newspaper  work, 
as  editor  of  the  Norwalk  lieftedor  and 
Dubuque  (la.)  Daily  Times,  and  as  one 
of  the  proprietors  and  publishers  of  the 
Toledo  Blade  and  Comnierrial.  He  op- 
posed slavery  and  supported  the  Union, 
and  was  active  in  the  Whig  and  Republi- 
can parties.  He  has  been  identified  with 
the  temperance  reform  since  his  early 
youth.  In  1847  he  helped  organize  the 
Norwalk  Division  of  Sons  of  Temper- 
ance, and  he  is  still  a  member  of  that 
body.  Uniting  with  the  Good  Templars, 
he  was  three  times  chosen  the  chief  of 
that  Order  in  Ohio.  In  1853,  during 
the  Maine  law  campaign,  he  made  an 
attempt  to  form  a  permanent  Prohibi- 


tion party,  and  in  1857  he  was  Chair- 
man of  a  State  Convention  held  at  Co- 
lumbus with  a  view  to  establishing  sucli 
a  party.  He  took  a  prominent  part  in 
the  work  which  resulted  in  the  creation 
of  the  new  party  in  1869  ;  has  been  its 
candidate  three  times  for  Governor  of 
Ohio,  eight  times  for  Supreme  Judge 
and  twice  for  Circuit  Judge;  was  for 
four  years  Chairman  and  for  15  years  a 
member  of  the  National  Committee,  and 
was  the  nominee  for  Vice-President  in 
1876.  The  Ohio  Prohibition  Conventions 
of  1876,  1880  and  1884  indorsed  him  for 
the  Presidency,  but  he  refused  to  permit 
his  name  to  be  presented  in  the  National 
Conventions.  He  is  now  (1891)  engaged 
in  the  practice  of  law  in  Norwalk,  where 
he  has  lived  since  1866. 

Stimulants. — The  normal  invigor- 
ation  of  the  human  organism  can  be 
effected  only  by  wholesome  food,  sleep, 
fresh  air,  exercise  and  judicious  changes 
of  temperature.  The  belief  in  the  possi- 
bility of  accomplishing  the  same  result 
by  means  of  drastic  drugs  is  one  of  the 
most  mischievous  popular  fallacies,  and 
owes  its  origin  probably  to  the  circum- 
stance that  exceptional  and  altogether 
abnormal  conditions  of  the  system  may 
now  and  then  justify  the  employment  of 
such  drugs  for  the  purpose  of  (tempo- 
rarily) arousing  special  organs  from  a 
state  of  morbid  lethargy.  The  frequent 
or  habitual  resort  to  such  expedients 
has  become  a  principal  cause  of  disease, 
and  is  based  on  a  delusion  which  may  be 
defined  as  the  tendency  to  mistake  a  pro- 
cess of  irritation  for  a  jirocess  of  invigor- 
ation. 

Every  poison  (see  Poisons)  can  in  that 
sense  be  abused  for  the  purposes  of  stim- 
ulation, and  may  reduce  the  organism  to 
a  state  of  abject  dependence  on  its  bane- 
ful influence.  Under  the  spur  of  a  vir- 
ulent drug  the  prostrate  vitality  rises  as 
a  weary  sleeper  would  start  at  the  touch 
of  a  venomous  serpent,  and,  as  danger 
will  momentarily  overcome  the  feeling  of 
fatigue,  the  organism  labors  with  restless 
energy  till  the  jjoison  is  expelled.  This 
feverish  reaction  dram-drinkers  and  the 
dupes  of  the  "  bitters  "  quack  mistake  for 
a  sign  of  returning  vigor,  persistently 
ignoring  the  circumstance  that  the 
excitement  is  every  time  followed  by  a 
prostration  worse  than  that  preceding  it. 


strong  Drink.] 


621 


[Sumptuary  La-ws. 


Feeling  tlie  approach  of  a  relapse  the 
stimulator  then  resorts  to  his  old  remedy, 
thus  inducing  another  sham-revival, 
followed  by  an  increased  prostration,  and 
so  on  ;  but  before  long  the  dose  of  the 
stimulant,  too,  has  to  be  increased,  the 
stiraulant-dupe  becomes  a  slave  to  his 
"  tonic,"  and  passes  his  life  in  a  round  of 
morbid  excitements  and  morbid  exhaus- 
tions— the  former  at  last  nothing  but  a 
feeble  flickering-up  of  the  vital  flame, 
the  latter  soon  aggravated  by  sick  head- 
aches, "  vapors  "  and  hypochondria. 

The  stimulant  habit  in  its  most  prev- 
alent forms — "  exhilarating  beverages," 
"tonic  medicines"  and  "prophylactic 
bitters  "^is  a  delusion  that  has  wrought 
more  mischief  than  any  other  single 
cause  of  disease.  A  healthy  man  needs 
no  artificial  excitants;  the  vital  principle 
in  its  normal  vigor  is  an  all-sufficient 
stimulus.  The  scant  vital  resources  of 
an  invalid  should  not  be  wasted  in  the 
paroxysm  of  a  poison-fever.  Inspiration 
bought  at  the  rumshop  is  but  a  poor  sub- 
stitute for  the  spontaneous  exaltations  of 
a  healthy  mind  in  a  healthy  body.  Play- 
ing with  poisons  is  a  losing  game;  the 
sweetness  of  the  excitement  is  not  worth 
the  bitterness  of  the  inevitable  reaction. 
In  sickness  stimulants  of  that  sort  can- 
not further  the  actual  recovery  by  a 
single  hour.  There  is  a  strong  restora- 
tive tendency  in  our  physical  constitu- 
tion; nature  needs  no  prompter;  as  soon 
as  the  remedial  process  is  finished  the 
7iormal  functions  of  the  organism  will 
resume  their  work  as  spontaneously  as 
the  current  of  a  stream  resumes  its  course 
after  the  removal  of  an  obstruction.  All 
the  objections  against  the  use  of  such 
drugs  as  hasheesh  and  opium  can  with 
equal  force  be  urged  against  all  forms  of 
alcoholic  "tonics."  Alcohol  has,  with 
absolute  conclusiveness,  been  proved  to 
have  no  nutritive  value  and  to  be  devoid 
of  any  elements  available  for  the  pro- 
duction of  organic  warmth  and  vigor; 
its  stimulating  effect  is  invariably  fol- 
lowed by  a  depressing  reaction,  and  its 
influence  on  the  system  is  in  all  respects 
that  of  a  virulent  poison. 

Felix  L.  Oswald. 

Strong  Drink  is  one  of  the  general 
terms  for  alcoholic  beverages  of  all  kinds, 
including  beer  and  wine,  and  other  so- 
called  light  liquors.     It  has  a  special 


application  to  the  distilled  articles,  but 
the  fermented  ones  also  are  suggested  by 
the  term. 

Stuart,  Moses. — Born  in  Wilton, 
Conn.,  March  26,  1780;  died  in  Andover, 
Mass.,  Jan.  4,  1852.  He  graduated  from 
Yale  College  in  1799;  studied  law  and 
was  admitted  to  the  bar  in  1802 ;  was  a 
Yale  tutor  for  the  next  two  years;  stu- 
died theology  and  was  ordained  pastor  of 
a  Congregational  church  in  New  Haven  in 
1806;  was  elected  Professor  of  Sacred 
Literature  in  Andover  Theological  Sem- 
inary in  1810,  and  occupied  this  chair 
for  38  years.  He  wrote  several 
Greek  and  Hebrew  grammars  and  vari- 
ous works  on  biblical  literature.  In  1830 
he  prepared  a  competitive  temperance 
essay  which  was  awarded  a  prize  of  $250. 
It  dealt  with  the  duties  of  Christians  and 
churches.  In  it  Dr.  Stuart  earnestly 
championed  the  opinion  that  "  Wherever 
the  Scriptures  speak  of  wine  as  a  com- 
fort, a  blessing  or  a  libation  to  God,  and 
rank  it  with  such  articles  as  corn  and  oil, 
they  mean — they  can  mean  only — such 
wine  as  contained  no  alcohol  that  could 
have  a  mischievous  tendency ;  that  wher- 
ever they  denounce  it,  prohibit  it  and 
connect  it  with  drunkenness  and  revel- 
ling, they  can  mean  only  alcoholic  or 
intoxicating  wines."  He  was  one  of  the 
earliest,  ablest  and  most  scholarly  writers 
on  the  Bible  Wines  question. 

Sumptuary  Laws  are  measures 
whose  peculiar  and  direct  object  is  to 
control,  modify  or  regulate  certain  prac- 
tices or  affairs  of  individuals  that  are 
usually  governed  by  private  right,  pref- 
erence, interest  or  enterprise,  by  circum- 
stances of  association,  etc.  These  meas- 
ures give  extreme  application  to  the 
theory  of  paternal  government  for  the 
individual ;  prescribing  style  and  cost  of 
dress  for  different  classes  of  citizens  (or 
forbidding  the  wearing  of  particular 
articles  or  limiting  the  expenditure),  in- 
dicating kinds  of  food  that  may  be  or 
must  not  be  consumed,  fixing  prices  at 
which  commodities  are  to  be  sold,  regu- 
lating the  stipends  to  be  paid  employes, 
and  in  other  respects  providing  rules  of 
more  or  less  strictness  for  the  direction 
of  daily  life  and  personal  conduct.  Such 
laws  were  numerous  in  ancient  Greece, 
especially   among    the  Lacedgemonians ; 


Sumptuary  Laws.] 


622 


[Sunday-Closing. 


the  requirements  that  no  Spartan  shonld 
possess  gold  or  silver  •  money,  and  that 
Spartan  women  (prostitutes  excepted) 
should  dress  with  the  utmost  simplicity, 
are  specimens  of  these  enactments.  The 
Eomans  had  elaborate  sumptuary  regu- 
lations both  in  the  early  days  of  the  Re- 
public and  in  the  reigns  of  the  most  dis- 
solute and  wasteful  of  the  Emperors.  In 
medieval  times  the  enactments  of  France 
and  England  and  other  countries  rivaled 
the  most  oppressive  ones  of  Sparta.  An 
English  law  of  1363  provided  that  serv- 
ants should  not  eat  more  than  one  meal 
of  meat  or  fish  in  a  day.  Rigid  sumptu- 
ary legislation  came  practically  to  an 
end  in  England  during  the  17th  Century. 
The  American  colonists,  notably  the 
New  Englanders,  instituted  many  curi- 
ous and  arbitrary  restraints.  The  sumptu- 
ary spirit  was  still  active  during  the 
Revolution :  in  1777  a  committee  of  Con- 
gress submitted  a  report  recommending 
that  the  States  fix  by  law  the  prices  of 
labor,  manufactures  and  internal  produce, 
as  well  as  the  charges  of  inn-holders; 
and  in  consequence  of  this  recommenda- 
tion the  States  of  New  York  and  Con- 
necticut passed  the  suggested  legisla- 
tion.^ 

Laws  prohibiting  or  otherwise  inter- 
fering with  the  liquor  traffic  are  not 
properly  sumptuary.  They  are  not  rec- 
ognized as  such  by  standard  legal 
\vi-iters.  They  deal  essentially  with  the 
public  traffic  as  a  public  evil,  and  never 
question  the  right  of  the  individual  to 
drink  unless  by  the  act  of  drinking  he 
publicly  violates  the  policy  which  the 
State  has  inaugurated  solely  for  the  pro- 
motion of  the  general  welfare.  They 
abridge  incidentally  the  liberty  to  drink, 
but  this  abridgment  is  for  the  sake  of 
lessening  the  fearful  burdens  and  ills 
that  rest  upon  the  State,  and  not  for  the 
sake  of  dictating  to  the  individual. 
Blackstone  carefully  distinguishes  be- 
tween different  forms  of  liberty— natural, 
civil  and  political, — and  shows  the  justice 
and  necessity  of  laws  for  the  correction 
of  the  public  effects  of  drunkenness,  re- 
gardless of  the  effects  upon  apparent 
natural  liberty.  (See  Personal  Lib- 
erty.) It  is  significant  also  that  Black- 
stone  (Commentaries,  19th  Eng.  ed.,  vol. 
4,  p.  170)  formally  alludes  to  different 

»  Kent's  Commentaries,  13th  ed.,  pp.  331-2. 


sumptuary  acts  of  England  but  does  not, 
in  this  connection,  make  any  mention  of 
Excise  or  other  liquor  measures,  although 
the  enacting  clauses  of  such  measures 
frequently  announced  that  their  purpose 
was  to  attack  the  vice  of  intemperance. 
The  derivation  of  the  word  "  sumptu- 
ary "  (from  the  Latin  snmjituarin!^,  from 
sumptus,  meaning  expense, cost)  indicates 
that  sumptuary  legislation  relates  pecul- 
iarly to  expense  or  expenditure. 

Sunday-Closing  of  saloons  is  re- 
quired by  law  in  all  but  four  States  of  this 
country — California,  Montana,  Nevada 
and  Texas;  in  California  and  Texas  it 
may  be  compelled  by  ordinance.  It 
is  required  throughout  Canada,  in  Scot- 
land (since  1853),  in  Ireland,  excepting 
in  certain  cities"  (since  1888),  in  Wales 
(since  1886),  in  New  Zealand  and  in 
most  of  the  Australian  colonies.  It  is 
desired  by  a  large  majority  of  the  citi- 
zens of  England,  as  attested  by  petitions 
from  more  than  5,000,000  people  in  six 
recent  years,  by  the  favorable  answers  of 
four-fifths  out  of  a  million  householders 
whose  opinions  were  recently  taken  and 
by  a  two-thirds  vote  of  the  House  of 
Commons  (March  24, 1886).  (N.  B.— By 
Sunday-closing,  as  the  term  is  here  used, 
is  meant  complete  closing,  not  a 
closing  for  certain  hours.  England 
already  has  partial  '  Sunday-closing, 
the  traffic  being  prohibited  during  the 
ordinary  hours  of  church  services.) 

Few  question  the  propriety  and  prac- 
tical benefits  of  Sunday-closing.  It  is 
notorious  that  there  are  violations;  side- 
doors  and  back-doors  are  utilized  for  the 
Sunday  business  and  the  dealers  are 
often  so  bold  that  they  admit  customers 
with  little  or  no  discrimination,  not  fear- 
ing the  interference  of  the  police.  But 
even  where  secret  violations  are  general 
and  systematic,  it  is  manifest  to  every- 
body that  conditions  are  markedly  better 
than  where  "  wide-open  "  saloons  are  tol- 
erated on  Sunday.  An  unwonted  out- 
ward respect  is  shown  for  the  better  sen- 
timent of  the  community,  the  quiet  of 
the  day  is  less  seriously  disturbed  and 
loafers  and  blackguards  do  not  congre- 
gate around  the  saloon  entrances.  Sun- 
day-closing is  an  object-lesson  of  the 
good  tendencies  of  Prohibition.  If  en- 
forcement  is   satisfactory    there    is    an 

«  See  p.  358. 


S"weden.] 


623 


[Sweden. 


instant  and  great  decrease  in  the  num- 
ber of  arrests  for  drunkenness,  disorder 
and  crime.  The  improvement  in  Phila- 
delphia during  the  first  year  of  the 
Brooks  law  was  due  chiefly  to  the  largely 
reduced  number  of  Sunday  commit- 
ments: these  commitments  aggregated 
679  from  June  1  to  Nov.  1,  1887  (when 
Sunday-closing  was  not  enforced),  but 
there  were  only  194  such  commitments 
from  June  1  to  Nov.  1,  1888  (when  the 
saloons  were  closed  on  Sundays).  In 
Scotland  the  number  of  Sunday  arrests 
was  reduced  seven-eights  by  the  enforce- 
ment of  Sunday  Prohibition. 

Sweden.  —  The  manufacture  and 
even  the  use  of  spirits  were  prohibited 
by  various  early  Kings  of  Sweden: 
Gustavus  Vasa(16tli  Century)  repeatedly 
forbade  the  use;  Gustavus  Adolphus  pro- 
hibited whiskey  in  1623,  and  the  prohi- 
bition was  well  enforced  until  his  death 
(1632) ;  Charles  XII.  prohibited  the  man- 
ufacture of  this  liquor  in  1698,  and  in 
1718  (his  Cabinet  meantime,  in  his 
absence,  having  revoked  the  prohibition) 
he  limited  the  number  of  distilleries  to 
four;  in  1756  the  party  called  the  "Hats" 
succeeded  in  enacting  Prohibition  again, 
the  eminent  naturalist,  Carl  von  Linne 
(Linnaeus),  giving  his  approval  to  the 
movement;  and  finally  in  1771  Gustavus 
III.,  in  deference  to  public  seniiment,  be- 
gan his  reign  with  Prohibition  of  the 
whiskey  traffic.  But  Gustavus,  following 
the  example  of  Russia,  decided  to  procure 
revenue  from  spirits,  and  notwithstanding 
the  blessings  resulting  from  the  law  he 
repealed  it  in  1774  and  established  crown 
stills  on  the  Russian  plan.  In  1787 
"  leasehold  "  stills  were  introduced,  and 
in  1809  "domestic"  stills.  Distilleries 
multiplied  until  in  1834  their  number 
was  estimated  at  170,000  in  a  population 
of  three  millions,  and  it  was  reckoned 
that  45,000,000  gallons  of  spirits  were 
consumed  annually. '  Efforts  to  check  the 
evil  were  now  begun.  The  King  (Charles 
XIV.)  encouraged  the  formation  of  tem- 
perance societies.  (See  p.  40.)  In  1835 
the  renowned  Archdeacon  Wieselgren 
commenced  his  active  work  for  temper- 
ance, speaking  and  writing  indefatigably. 
The  cause  advanced  with  considerable 
rapidity,  and  in  1854  the  labors  of  Wie- 
selgren (who  was  assisted  by  Magnus 
«_ . 

1  Dawson  Burns's  "  Temperance  History,"  part  1,  p.  86. 


Huss  and  other  able  men)  were  rewarded 
by  very  encouraging  words  from  a  Spe- 
cial Committee  of  the  Diet.  "  The 
researches  of  the  philosopher  and  the 
honest  feelings  of  the  ordinary  man," 
said  this  Committee  in  its  report,  "  have 
led  us  to  the  conclusion  .  .  .  that  the 
comfort  of  the  Swedish  people — even 
their  existence  as  an  enlightened,  indus- 
trious and  loyal  people — -is  at  stake  un- 
less means  can  be  found  to  check  the 
evil."  In  1855  was  passed  a  licensing  act 
which  abolished  domestic  stills,  gave  to 
parochial  authorities  (subject  to  the  ap- 
proval of  the  Provincial  Governor)  the 
right  to  fix  annually  the  number  of 
spirit-shops  and  public  houses,  instituted 
a  system  of  so-called  "  factory  distilla- 
tion "  and  classified  the  different  kinds 
of  drinking  establishments.  The  num- 
ber of  distilleries  was  immediately 
reduced  from  44,000  in  1850  to  4,500; 
and  in  1869  the  number  had  decreased 
to  457.  The  annual  product  of  spirits 
fell  from  26,000,000  gallons  to  6,900,000 
gallons. 

In  1864  the  Council  of  the  city  of 
Gothenburg  took  steps  that  led  to  the 
inauguration,  the  next  year,  of  the  famous 
Gothenburg  system.  Gothenburg  is  a 
thriving  seaport,  the  second  city  of 
Sweden,  with  fine  educational  and 
religious  institutions.  Yet  great  poverty 
and  wretchedness  prevailed  among  its 
common  people,  and  in  1855  the  police 
figures  showed  that  the  annual  arrests 
for  drunkenness  were  in  the  ratio  of  11.14 
for  every  100  of  the  population.  The 
Council,  not  wishing  to  go  to  the  extreme 
of  Prohibition,  decided  to  remove  from 
the  whiskey  traffic  all  incentives  to  gain 
and  to  restrict  it  with  the  utmost  riwor. 
Accordingly  a  company  (or  Bolag)  was 
formed,  which  was  to  operate  a  limited 
number  of  public  houses,  to  make  of 
them  eating-houses  where  spirits  could 
be  obtained  only  in  connection  with 
food,  to  make  no  sales  of  spirits  on 
credit,  to  employ  as  managers  only 
respectable  persons  (who  should  derive 
no  profits  whatever  from  the  sale  of  dis- 
tilled drinks,  but  only  from  food  and 
malt  liquors),  to  pay  into  the  city  treas- 
ury all  the  net  profits  and  to  secure  strict 
supervision  of  all  the  public  houses  by 
co-operating  with  the  police  and  appoint- 
ing private  inspectors.  The  Bolag  began 
its  career  in  1865,  when  all  public  house 


Sweden.] 


634 


[Tax. 


licenses  excepting  seven  (which  were  held 
by  private  persons  under  certain  vested 
rights)  were  transferred  to  it.  In  1875 
all  the  grocers'  licenses  were  given  to  the 
company.  The  original  licenses  granted 
to  the  Bolag  were  61  in  number  ;  and 
all  but  41  of  these  were  gradually  ex- 
tinguished. Of  the  41  remaining,  25 
were  used  for  ordinary  public  houses, 
nine  were  transferred  to  restaurants  and 
seven  were  reserved  for  retail  shops  sell- 
ing exclusively  for  consumption  off  the 
premises.  Of  the  20  grocers'  licenses 
acquired  by  the  company  in  1875,  seven 
were  suppressed  and  the  remaining  13 
were  turned  over  to  private  wine-mer- 
chants, "exclusively  for  the  sale  of  the 
higher  class  of  spirits  and  liquors  not  in 
ordinary  use  by  the  working-classes." 
This  Gothenburg  system  is  probably  the 
most  honest  restrictive  license  method 
ever  devised.  It  has  been  highly  praised 
by  many  v^riters,  but  the  results  have 
been  far  from  satisfactory.  Intemper- 
ance is  still  an  evil  in  Gothenburg,  and 
the  drink  business  is  given  high  respec- 
tability and  great  fiscal  importance.  The 
temperance  radicals  of  Sweden  complain 
quite  as  bitterly  against  this  method  as 
the  Prohibitionists  of  America  do  aafainst 

o 

High  License.  It  is  noticeable  that  so 
prominent  a  newspaper  as  the  Gothen- 
burg Handelstidui)ig  {Commercial  Jour- 
nal), formerly  a  supporter  of  the  policy, 
now  approves  the  idea  of  whiskey  pro- 
hibition. 

Many  parishes  or  communes  are  under 
absolute  Prohibition.  In  the  cities  the 
Gothen])urg  system  is  generally  in  force. 

The  production  of  spirits  in  1886  was 
10,611,412  United  States  gallons ;  impor- 
tation, 7,821,440;  exportation,  6,786,127; 
consumption,  11,646,725,  or  2.47  per 
capita.  The  revenue  of  the  National 
Government  from  spirits  is  about  one- 
sixth  of  the  total  revenue,  and  ranges 
from  13,000,000  to  above  14,000,000 
annually. 

Total  abstinence  societies  are  strong, 
the  Good  Templars  and  Blue  Ribbon 
Union  being  especially  conspicuous.  The 
clergymen  (notably  those  of  dissenting 
denominations)  show  much  interest. 
There  is  a  growing  political  demand  for 
Prohibition.  The  Swedes  in  America 
give  generous  support  to  the  aggressive 
Prohibition  work. 

C.  A.  Wenjstgken. 


Switzerland.'— The  drink  customs 
of  Switzerland  closely  resemble  those  of 
France  and  Germany.  The  population 
in  1888  was  2,933,612.  The  quantities 
consumed  in  1884  were,  in  round  num- 
bers :  spirits,  7,000,000  gallons ;  wine,  50,- 
000,000  gallons;  beer,  25,000,000  gallons, 
mead,  cider,  etc.,  25,000,000  gallons.  In 
the  same  year  the  number  of  places  of  all 
kinds  where  drinks  were  sold  was  21,633. 
According  to  the  records  of  the  insane 
asylums  3,874  patients  were  cared  for  in 
these  institutions  during  the  years 
1877-81,  and  825  of  these  (or  21.3  per 
cent.)  were  victims  of  alcoholism.  May 
16,  1887,  by  a  two-thirds  vote  of  the 
people,  the  manufacture,  importation  and 
sale  of  spirits  became  Government 
monopolies.  This  change  was  made  after 
long  discussion  in  the  Federal  Council 
and  among  the  people.  It  was  opposed 
by  some  (especially  church  newspapers) 
on  moral  grounds,  the  argument  being 
raised  that  the  Government  should  not 
become  a  party  to  a  traffic  so  injurious  to 
the  people,''  The  advocates  of  the  new 
system  maintained  that  a  purer  article 
of  spirits  would  be  produced  if  the  Gov- 
ernment conducted  the  stills,  and  that  a 
larger  revenue  would  be  secured.  These 
claims  seem  to  be  sustained  by  experience. 
It  is  also  asserted  that  there  has  been  a 
reduction  in  the  per  capita  consumption 
of  distilled  liquors  since  the  present  law 
took  efiect,  and  these  definite  figures  are 
given :  consumption  of  spirits  per  head  in 
1885  (before  Government  control),  7.25 
liters;  in  1888  (under  Government  con- 
trol), 5.50  liters.  Indemnity  was  paid  the 
distillers  and  liquor-dealers.  The  wine 
and  beer  traffic  is  undisturbed  by  the  new 
regulations.  The  total  abstinence  move- 
ment in  Switzerland  has  not  made  much 
headway.  In  1877  the  total  abstinence 
Societe  de  la  Croix  Bleue  (Blue  Cross) 
was  started  at  Geneva  by  Rev.  L.  L. 
Rochat,  and  in  1887  it  had  about  4,000 
adult  members.  Prohibition  has  not  yet 
been  seriously  proposed.  Swiss  scientific 
writers  (notably  Dr.  Farel  of  Zurich  and 
Prof.  Bunge  of  Basle)  are  giving  much 
attention  to  alcoholism. 

Tax.— Some  anti-Prohibitionists,  to 
meet  the  moral  objections  to  the  license 

'  Prof.  R.W.  Moore  of  Strassburg,  Germany,  furnishes 
the  Government  statistics  in  tliis  article  ;  Mr.  Joseph 
Malins  of  Eniihmd  contributes  other  particulars. 

*  United  States  Consular  reports,  vol.  33,  pp.  45-8. 


Taxes.] 


G25 


[Temptation. 


system  that  are  so  strennonsly  urged, 
advocate  the  taxing  of  the  liquor  traffic; 
without  formerly  licensing  it.  The  tax, 
as  distinguished  from  the  license  method, 
is  the  policy  of  the  United  States  Govern- 
ment, which  simply  takes  cognizance  of 
the  existence  of  liquor  manufacturers  and 
sellers  and  requires  them  to  contribute 
to  the  Federal  revenues,  but  does  not  in 
so  many  words  decree  that  those  so  con- 
tributing shall  have  the  sanction  of 
license.  The  practical  distinction  be- 
tween tax  and  license,  even  on  moral 
grounds,  is,  however,  of  little  importance. 
A  tax  may  not  formally,  but  it  does  im- 
pliedly, recognize  the  taxed  business  as 
a  proper  one;  for  nothing  can  more 
distinctly  indicate  public  sanction  of  a 
traffic  than  the  Government's  willingness 
to  accept  a  part  of  its  profits.  The  States 
of  Michigan  and  Ohio  have  prohibited 
tlie  issuance  of  liquor  licenses;  but  the 
intent  of  the  prohibition  has  been  cir- 
cumvented by  the  enactment  of  tax  laws. 
In  both  these  States  the  actual  effects  of 
the  tax  method  have  been  quite  as  un- 
satisfactory as  the  effects  of  undisguised 
license  statutes. 

Taxes  as  Affected  by  Prohi- 
bition.— See  pp.  545-51. 

Temperance. — This  word,  as  appjlied 
to  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors,  is  vari- 
ously defined.  The  liquor-dealers  and 
drinkers  insist  that  "  true  temperance  " 
is  moderation.  But  moderation  itself  is 
a  very  indefinite  term ;  that  which  is  (or 
is  supposed  to  be)  moderation  for  one 
drinker  may  be  excess  for  another. 
Besides,  one  of  the  peculiar  and  best- 
understood  developments  of  so-called 
temperate  or  moderate  drinking  is  the 
gradual  creation  of  an  intemperate  and 
immoderate  tendency  and  habit.  Un- 
deniably, the  best  temperance  is  purity, 
the  purity  that  comes  from  the  proper 
use  of  right  things  and  entire  abstmence 
from  evil  things.  "By  abstaining  from 
sensual  indulgences,"  says  Aristotle,  '•'  we 
l)ecome  temperate."  Xenophon  declares 
that  the  term  '"temperance"  means,  first, 
moderation  in  healthful  indulgence,  and 
second,  abstinence  from  things  danger- 
ous, as  the  use  of  intoxicating  wines. 
(See  p.  221.)  St.  Thomas  Aquinas  says  : 
'•  There  are  things  contrary  to  soundness 
or  a  good  condition  of  life,  and  the  tem- 
perate man  does  not  use  these  in  any 


measure,  for  this  would  be  a  sin  against 
temperance."  (See  p.  599.)  It  is  by 
virtue  of  good  authority,  therefore,  that 
the  word  "  temperance,"  as  specifically 
used  at  this  day,  is  generally  recognized  as 
an  equivalent  for  '•  total  abstinence."  By 
the  temperance  creed,  the  temperance  so- 
cieties and  the  temperance  movement,  as 
spoken  of  in  the  press  and  in  ordinary 
conversation,  are  meant  the  creed,  soci- 
eties and  movement  of  the  abstainers  and 
the  radicals. 

Temperance  Hotels. — See  Coffee 

HoUSEvS. 

Templars  of  Honor  and  Tem- 
perance.— A  secret  fraternal  Order, 
organized  Dec.  5,  1845,  by  members  of 
the  Sons  of  Temperance.  In  1849  it 
separated  from  the  latter  Order.  It  was 
the  first  secret  total  abstinence  organi- 
zation to  admit  women,  which  it  began 
to  do  on  separating  from  the  parent 
society.  It  was  also  the  first  to  form  a 
junior  department,  for  boys.  Such  a 
department  was  organized  in  1880.  Its 
object  is  wholly  educational.  There  are 
now  (1891)  15  Grand  Temples,  with  sub- 
ordinate Temples  in  most  of  the  States. 

Temptation. — Races,  like  individ- 
uals, have  special  proclivities.  There 
are  certain  vices  to  which  they  are  prone. 
Climate,  heredity  and  environment 
are  the  three  strands  in  this  cable  of  pre- 
disposition. The  tropics,  for  instance, 
breed  languor.  Tropical  races  find  their 
bane  in  idleness  and  licentiousness.  The 
frigid  and  temperate  zones,  on  the  other 
hand,  provoke  gluttony  and  drunken- 
ness. "  If  you  w^ould  know  what  are  the 
fundamental  traits  of  a  race,"  remarks 
Carlyle,  "catch  it  and  study  it  before 
Christianity  and  civilization  have 
tamed  it." 

Look  at  our  race  in  the  light  of  this 
maxim.  Tacitus  describes  the  ancient 
Britons  as  having  ravenous  stomachs, 
filled  with  meat  and  cheese,  heated  with 
strong  drink.  Taine  paints  them  as 
gluttons  and  drunkards  (History  of 
English  Literature,  vol.  1.,  p.  26,  seq.). 
To  the  same  effect  is  the  testimony  of 
Bede  (lib.  1.).  And  the  greatest  of 
American  orators,  summarizing  the 
classic  authorities,  shows  that  our  Ger- 
man ancestors,  before  they  streamed  out 
into  Christian  civilization,  coiiceived  of 
heaven  as  a  drunken  revel,  and  regarded 


Temptation.] 


G26 


[Tobacco. 


the  drinking  of  blood  from  the  skulls  of 
their  enemies  as  a  foretaste  of  Paradise. 
(Speeches,  Lectures  and  Letters,  by 
Wendell  Phillips,  p.  498.)  What  is  bred 
in  the  bone  will  come  out  in  the  flesh. 
Witness  England,  Scotland,  Ireland,  Hol- 
land, Germany  and  North  America  to- 
day; all  of  them  the  victims  of  what  an 
old  poet  calls  "liquid  damnation." 
Drunkenness  is  in  tlie  Anglo-Saxon 
blood. 

As  though  this  racial  inheritance  and 
tendency  were  not  enough,  chemistry 
invents  a  new  devil,  alcohol,  and  makes 
it  so  cheap  that  everybody  may  have  a 
familiar  spirit.  The  Roman  legions  that 
trod  the  world  into  servitude  had  no 
stimulant  stronger  than  vinegar  and 
water.  To-day  there  is  not  a  hod-carrier 
who  cannot  earn  in  a  forenoon  the  means 
of  getting  and  keeping  drunk. 

Nor  is  this  all.  With  such  blood  in 
our  veins,  and  with  this  cheap  stimulus 
in  the  market,  we  have  multiplied  dram- 
shops until  the  great  centers  of  popu- 
lation are  honey-combed  with  them. 
Like  the  ship-wrecked  sailor,  who,  when 
he  saw  a  gallows,  thanked  God  that  he 
had  been  cast  ashore  in  a  Christian 
country,  so  we  recognize  in  the  groggery 
a  distinctive  symbol  of  modern  civili- 
zation. Long  after  all  honest  places  are 
shut  and  barred  the  groggery  flames  out 
to  entice  and  engulf — the  "  blazing  light- 
house of  hell."  It  is  the  most  prominent 
and  obtrusive  feature  of  city  life,  and  it 
is  only  less  frequent  and  frequented  in 
our  villages  and  hamlets. 

By  common  acknowledgment  the 
saloons  are  the  manufactories  of  crime 
and  criminals,  the  trysting-places  of  vice, 
the  allies  of  the  brothel,  the  breeders  of 
poverty,  dealing  at  wholesale  and  re- 
tail in  misery;  the  saloon  system  is  tbe 
despair  of  law  and  order,  the  raison 
(Vetre  of  police  and  prison,  a  chronic 
assault  upon  property  and  life,  organized 
anarchy.  Yet  the  State  licenses  the 
saloons — it  legalizes  temptation  !  The 
thief — it  sends  him  to  jail.  The  mur- 
derer— him  it  hangs.  But  the  thief- 
maker,  the  manufacturer  of  murderers, 
it  commissions.  For  so  many  dollars 
dropped  into  its  palm,  the  State  per- 
mits this  temptation  to  ensnare  and 
damn.  Thus  with  one  hand  it  strangles 
the  victim  and  with  the  other  it  protects 
the   victimizer.      Will    not    the    future 


Tacitus,  when  he  looks  back  to  study  our 
times,  count  this  as  the  most  curious  of 
historic  monstrosities  ? 

With  drunkenness  in  our  blood,  with 
alcohol  cheap  and  with  temptation  made 
legal,  we  have  adopted  democratic  insti- 
tutions where  the  law  has  no  sanction 
but  the  purpose  and  virtue  of  the  masses. 
"  Here,"  exclaims  an  eminent  authority, 
"  the  statute-book  rests  not  on  bayonets, 
as  in  Europe,  but  on  the  hearts  of  the 
people.  A  drunken  people  can  never  be 
the  basis  of  a  free  government.  It  is  the 
corner-stone  neither  of  virtue,  prosperity 
nor  progress.  To  us,  therefore,  the  title- 
deeds  of  whose  estates  and  the  safety  of 
whose  lives  depend  upon  the  tranquillity 
of  the  streets,  upon  the  virtue  of  the 
masses,  the  presence  of  any  vice  which 
brutalizes  the  average  mass  of  mankind 
and  tends  to  make  it  more  readily  the 
tool  of  intriguing  and  corrupt  leaders, 
is  necessarily  a  stab  at  the  very  life  of 
the  nation."  Shall  we  legalize  that  stab  ? 

Carlos  Martyn. 

Tennessee. — See  Index. 
Texas. — See  Index. 

Thompson,  H.  A.,  third  Vice-Presi- 
dential candidate  of  the  Prohibition  party ; 
born  in  Center  County,  Pa.,  March  23, 
1837.  Graduated  at  Jefferson  College  in 
1858;  was  elected  President  of  Otterbein 
Universit3',Westerville,  0.,in  18i2,  having 
been  for  several  years  before  Professor 
of  Mathematics  in  that  institution.  He 
has  been  identified  with  the  Prohibition 
party  from  its  foundation,  and  was  a 
candidate  for  Congress  from  the  8th 
District  of  Ohio  in  1874,  candidate  for 
Lieutenant-Governor  of  Ohio  in  1875 
and  for  Governor  in  1877.  In  1876  he 
was  Chairman  of  the  National  Prohibi- 
tion Convention,  and  he  has  been  Chair- 
man of  the  Ohio  State  Committee  for 
many  years  and  was  President  of  the 
National  Prohibition  Alliance  since  its 
organization  in  1877. 

Tobacco. — The  name  of  the  plant  is 
said  to  be  derived  from  the  island  Tabaco, 
or  from  Tabasco,  a  Mexican  province 
where  Spaniards  first  saw  this  narcotic 
used  as  a  luxury.  Others  derive  the  word 
from  tabacos,  a  Caribbean  pipe  in  which 
the  drug  was  smoked.  In  15(SU  Nicot  gave 
the  weed  to  Catherine  de  Medici;  hence 
the  familiar  name,  "  Nicotian  weed." 
The  virulent  alkaloid  nicotine,  found  in 


Tobacco.] 


62^ 


[Tobacco, 


the  dry  leaf,  takes  its  name  from  Jean 
Nicot.  Monumental  sculptures  in  China 
suggest  great  antiquity  in  the  use  of 
tobacco.  Humboldt  says  that  it  has  been 
cultivated  from  time  immemorial.  For 
many  centuries,  some  writers  contend,  its 
use  Avas  confined  to  South  America,  but 
since  the  days  of  Columbus  it  has  ex- 
tended through  the  world,  notwithstand- 
ing the  oj^position  of  Governments  and 
the  efforts  of  reformers.  In  1590,  Shah 
Abbas  affixed  penalties  to  the  indulgence, 
but  many  fled  to  the  mountains  rather 
than  forego  it.  In  1624,  the  Pope  anathe- 
matized all  who  defiled  the  house  of  God 
by  carrying  even  snuff.  The  next  year 
the  Grand  Sultan  Amurath  IV.  pro- 
hibited smoking  as  unnatural  and  irreli- 
gious. The  penalty  was  death.  The 
Muscovite  who  was  found  snuffing  had 
his  nostrils  split.  The  Grand  Duke  of 
Moscow  made  chastisement  the  penalty 
for  the  first  offense  of  bringing  tobacco 
within  his  realm,  and  death  that  for 
the  second.  Queen  Elizabeth  declared 
that  its  use  reduced  one  to  the  condition 
of  the  savages  whose  habits  were  thus  im- 
itated. King  James  I.  wrote  in  his 
"  Counterblaste  to  Tobacco,"  that  smok- 
ing was  "  loathsome  to  the  eye,  hateful 
to  the  nose,  harmful  to  the  brain  and 
dangerous  to  the  lungs,"  and  that  the 
stench  nearest  resembled  "the  horrible 
Stygian  smoke  of  the  pit  which  is  bot- 
tomless." In  his  "Anatomy  of  Melan- 
choly "  Burton  admits  the  medicinal  vir- 
tues of  the  weed,  but  says  :  "As  it  is 
used  by  most  men  it  is  a  plague,  a  mis- 
chief, a  violent  purger  of  goods,  lands  and 
health;  hellish,  devilish;  the  ruin  and 
overthrow  of  body  and  soul." 

In  1G16  its  cultivation  began  in  Vir- 
ginia. In  1620,  90  respectable  English 
women  were  imported  by  Jamestown 
planters  for  wives  at  the  price  of  1 20  lbs. 
of  tobacco,  then  worth  50  cents  a  pound. 
The  next  year  they  were  worth  $75  in 
tobacco.  Cigars  were  not  generally 
known  in  Europe  till  about  181-1,  when 
Austria  began  State  factories  for  their 
manufacture.  During  the  next  42  years, 
6.000,000,000  were  made  in  those  factories. 
About  two  thousand  million  cigars  have 
been  exported  from  Cuba  in  a  single 
year.  In  1850,  four  hundred  thousand 
acres  of  our  soil  were  devoted  to  this 
plant.  Gen.  John  H.  Cooke  of  Virginia 
wrote:  " Tobacco  exhausts  the  land  be- 


yond all  other  crops.  As  a  proof  of  this, 
every  homestead  from  the  Atlantic  bor- 
der to  the  head  of  tide-water  is  a  mourn- 
ful monument.  It  has  been  the  besom 
of  destruction  Avhich  has  swept  over  this 
once  fertile  region."  Thomas  Jefferson 
said:  "We  find  it  easier  to  make  one 
hundred  bushels  of  wheat  than  one 
thousand  pounds  of  tobacco,  and  they  are 
worth  more  when  made.  The  culture  of 
tobacco  is  productive  of  infinite  wretched- 
ness." The  United  States  leads  with  an 
average  yearly  crop  of  more  than  280,000 
tons.  In  1888  the  total  product  was  565,- 
795,000  lbs.,  of  which  Kentucky  con- 
tributed 283,306,000,  Virginia  64,034,000, 
Tennessee  45,641,000,  Ohio  35,195,000, 
North  Carolina  25,755,000  and  Pennsyl- 
vania 24,180,000.1  The  value  of  the  (un- 
manufactured) crop  in  1888  was  843,666,- 
665.  Leroy  Beaulieu  gives  the  consump- 
tion per  100  of  inhabitants  in  European 
countries  thus:  Spain,  110  lbs.;  Italy, 
128;  Great  Britain,  138;  Russia,  182; 
Denmark,  224;    Norway,  229;    Austria, 

/•J  t  o. 

Tobacco  belongs  to  the  genus  Nicotiana, 
and  natural  order  solanacew.  It  is  a 
near  kin  to  stramonium  or  thorn-apple, 
to  hyoscyamus  or  henbane,  to  belladonna 
or  deadly  night-shade.  It  may  be 
administered  as  an  infusion,  an  oil,  an 
ointment,  or  as  the  wine  of  tobacco.  The 
acrid,  volatile  principle  is  nicotine.  It 
contains  malic  acid,  albumen,  super- 
malate  of  lime,  a  soluble  red  matter, 
chlorophyl,  nitrate  of  potash,  chloride  of 
potassium,  sal  ammonia  and  water.  There 
is  about  7  per  cent,  of  nicotine  in  the 
strongest  tobacco.  The  dark,  acrid,  em- 
pyreumatic  oil  in  tobacco-smoke  is  an 
active  poison.  The  ashes  of  the  weed 
contain  carbonates  of  lime  and  magnesia, 
sulphate  of  potash  and  chloride  of  potas- 
sium. Free  carbon  settles  on  the  back 
of  the  throat  of  confirmed  smokers,  says 
Dr.  B.  W.  Richardson,  and  on  the  bron- 
chial membrane,  creating  often  a  copious 
secretion,  and  when  coughed  up  a  coal- 
colored  sputum.  The  biting  sensation 
on  the  tongue  is  caused  by  ammonia, 
which    dries    the    throat   and   leads   to 


1  Our  imports  of  tobacco  (leaf  and  mnnufactured)  for 
the  fiscal  year  ending  June  30.  1890,  asaregated  in  value 
S^l, 710,454;  the  imports  fnun  Cuha  alone  were  valued  at 
$ll,083,t>40.  The  exports  of  all  kinds  of  tobacco  in  the 
same  year  had  a  value  of  $-5,3o5,t;01.  More  than  two-fifths 
of  our  unmanufactured  tobacco  product  is  exported,  the 
exports  of  leaf  tobacco  in  1890  having  aggregated  244,- 
313,740  lbs. 


Tobacco.] 


628 


[Tobacco. 


drinking.  The  dioxide  present  is  the 
cause  of  tlie  lassitude  and  headache  which 
the  fumes  occasion.  He  admits  that  the 
use  of  tobacco  was  harder  for  him  to  aban- 
don than  that  of  wine.  Tobacco  is  a  power- 
ful physiological  antagonist  of  strychnia, 
being  an  immediate  depressant.  When 
introduced  into  the  stomach  and  lungs 
or  by  rectal  and  hypodermic  injection  in 
lethal  doses,  tlie  motor  nerves  are  par- 
alyzed and  the  pupils  contracted.  De- 
lirium follows,  with  cold,  clammy  per- 
spiration. Nothing  but  prussic  acid 
equals  tobacco  in  this  rapidity  of  action. 
Count  Bocarme  killed  Fougnies  in  five 
minutes  by  a  toxic  dose.  Another  case 
IS  quoted  in  Bartholow's  "  Materia  Med- 
ica,''  when  death  followed  in  three  minutes. 
Necropsy  reveals  either  an  empty  heart 
or  black  fluid.  Clonic  spasms  may  pre- 
cede the  paralysis.  Death  comes  from 
the  paralyzing  action  of  the  drug  on  the 
muscles  of  respiration. 

Itch  and  other  skin  diseases  have  been 
treated  by  the  local  application,  but  the 
use  is  perilous.  Before  ether  was  intro- 
duced this  poison,  in  the  form  of  an 
enema,  was  employed  to  relax  the  muscles 
in  reducing  hernia  and,  dislocations,  but 
soon  fell  into  disrepute.  Asthma  and 
chronic  bronchitis  have  been  relieved  by 
inhalation  of  tobacco-smoke,  and  the 
wine  of  tobacco  is  used  as  a  laxative. 
The  cigar,  like  the  wine-cup,  is  claimed 
by  its  victims  to  aid  digestion.  The 
drunkard  makes  the  same  assertion  as  to 
his  bottle.  Dr.  McAllister  of  Utica  says 
that  the  habitual  smoker  "  weakens  the 
organs  of  digestion  and  assimilation  and 
at  length  plunges  iiito  all  the  horrors  of 
dyspepsia."  It  is,  unquestionably,  use- 
ful as  an  antaphrodisiac ;  but  there  is  the 
opposite  peril  of  impotence.  It  is  anti- 
parasitic ;  but  the  poison  harms  the  tis- 
sues more  than  the  invader,  oftentimes. 
Lockjaw  is  greatly  relieved  by  this  poi- 
son; but  there  is  danger  of  asphyxia  if 
unskilfully  administered.  It  is  service- 
able, says  Bartholow,  in  cardiac  dropsy. 
"  It  is,  however,  so  disagreeable  in  action 
that  few  practitioners  have  the  temerity 
to  prescribe  it,  and  few  patients  are 
willing  to  swallow  it.  So  many  unfor- 
tunate accidents  have  resulted  from  the 
external  application  of  tobacco  that  its 
use  in  this  way  is  rarely  justifiable." 

The  burden  of  testimony  from  indi- 
vidual users  and  scientific  writers  is  de- 


cidedly against  tobacco.  It  is  true  that 
in  the  case  of  tobacco  as  in  the  case  of 
alcoholic  liquors  many  claim  that 
"  moderation "  does  little  or  no  harm. 
But  the  difficulty  or  uncertainty  of  moder- 
ation and  the  possibility  or  probability 
of  alarming  excess  are  candidly  recog- 
nized. Intelligent  men,  Avho  are  con- 
firmed slaves  of  the  habit,  almost  invari- 
ably declare  that  they  advise  others  not 
to  contract  it;  and  it  is  with  the  greatest 
disapprobation  and  sorrow  that  smokers 
and  chewers  find  that  their  examples  are 
copied  by  their  sons.  Such  dissuasives 
as  these  are  re-enforced  by  many  familiar 
facts :  the  tobacco  habit  in  all  its  forms 
is  extremely  offensive  to  multitudes  of 
people,  especially  to  women;  it  induces 
the  use  of  intoxicating  drink ;  it  is  very 
expensive ;  it  is  accompanied  by  the  dis- 
gusting vice  of  spitting;  the  conviction 
is  widespread  among  medical  authorities 
that  it  is  at  least  an  occasion  of  cancer ; ' 
in  general  and  in  particular  it  impairs  the 
value  of  life ;  the  carelessness  of  smokers 
is  responsible  for  innumerable  disastrous 
fires,  etc.,  etc.  Though  it  is  willingly 
conceded  that  the  public  ills  occasioned 
by  tobacco  are  not  so  conspicuous  as 
those  resulting  from  the  liquor  traffic — 
that  it  does  not  bear  comparison  with 
that  traffic  as  a  contributor  to  the  volume 
of  crime,  violence,  disorder,  pauperism 
and  political  corruption, — the  general 
consequences  are  similar  in  tendency  to 
the  results  of  the  alcohol  vice.  Yet  if 
the  public  evils  are  left  entirely  out  of 
consideration,  the  injurious  effects  upon 
individuals  are  so  manifest  and  so  general 
as  to  excite  the  gravest  concern. 

The  student  of  the  subject  is  referred 
to  the  following  authorities  :  Dr.  J.  Bige- 
low,  in  "  Nature  and  Disease,"  pp.  323-36 ; 
Sir  Benjamin  C.  Brodio,  "  Use  and  Abuse 
of  Tobacco,"  vol.  1 ;  Sir  Andrew  Clarke, 
vol.  2,  "  Detached  Pieces  ;"  J.  H.  Gris- 
com,  "Evils  of  Tobacco;"  T.  W.  Higgin- 
son,  "  A  New  Counterblast,"  in  his  "  Out- 
door Papers,"-  pp.  177-99;  J.  Lizars, 
"Use  and  Abuse  of  Tobacco;"  James 
Parton,  "Smoking  and  Drinking;"  Dr. 
B.  W.  Richardson,  "  Diseases  of  Modern 
Life,"  pp.  272-323;  J.  Shew,  "Effects  of 


»  The  Medical  T'nnes  and  Gazette,  Oct.  6.  1860,  records 
the  excision  of  127  cancers  from  the  lips,  and  nearly  every 
one  of  the  patients  a  smoker.  Dr.  J.  C.  Warren  of  Boston 
jjave  his  experience  as  surgeon  for  30  years,  just  before 
his  death,  on  the  same  point.  "  Smokina;  is  the  most  com- 
mon cause  of  cancer  in  the  mouth,"  says  Prof.  Bouisson. 


Tobacco.] 


629 


[Tobacco. 


Tobacco ;"  Dr.  E.  P.  Thwing,  "Facts  about 
Tobacco/'  1879 ;  F.  W.  Faircliild,  ''  His- 
tory of  Tobacco ;"  J.  Jennings,  "  History 
of  Tobacco;"  H.  P.  Prescott,  "Tobacco 
and  Strong  Drink;"  H.  L.  Hastings, 
Boston,  "  Trask  Tracts." — Magazine 
articles :  Harper's,  vol.  5,  "  History  and 
Mystery  of  Tobacco,"  by  T.  B.  Thorpe ; 
vol.  20',  "A  Pipe  of  Tobacco,"  by  0. 
Nordhoff;  Bentley's  Miscellany,  vol.  15; 
Atlantic  Monthly,  1860,  "Effects  of 
Tobacco;"  North  American  Review,  1869, 
Dr.  W.  A.  Hammond  on  Tobacco;  Black- 
wood, 1856,  "  Drinking  and  Smoking." 

E.  P.  Thwing. 

The  tobacco  taxes  are,  next  to  the 
liquor  taxes,  the  most  important  ones 
levied  by  the  United  States  Government 
on  domestic  articles.  In  the  fiscal  year 
ending  Jane  30, 1890,  the  revenues  from 
tobacco  were: 

Cis^ars  and  cheroots,  |12,363,669.95;  cigar- 
ettes^ 11,116,637.34  ;  snuff,  $737,731.27;  chew- 
ing and  smoking  tobacco,  $18,335,481.36  ; 
special  taxes  on  dealers  in  leaf  tobacco, 
$44,493.40  ;  special  taxes  on  dealers  in  manu- 
factured tobacco,  $1,331,118.34;  special  taxes 
on  manufacturers  of  tobacco,  $5,197.50;  special 
taxes  on  manufacturers  of  cigars,  $133,896.49  ; 
special  taxes  on  peddlers  of  tobacco,  $11,776.51 
—total,  33,958,991,00. 

The  numbers  of  persons  engaged  in 
the  different  branches  of  the  tobacco 
trade  in  1890  are  shown  by  the  follow- 
ing figures: 

Manufacturers  of  cigars,  21,197;  dealers  in 
leaf  tobacco  (in  quantities  not  exceeding  35,000 
lbs.),  4,090;  the  same  (exceeding  35,000  lbs.), 
1,364  ;  retail  dealers  in  leaf  tobacco,  3;  dealers 
in  manufactured  tobacco,  603,068 ;  manufac- 
turers of  tobacco,  907;  peddlers  of  tobacco, 
1,600— total,  633,339. 

The  tax  provisions  (both  internal  and 
customs)  of  the  different  Federal  laws 
enacted  since  the  foundation  of  the  Gov- 
ernment are  summarized  below : 

Act  of  1794,  c.  51. — Snuff  manufactured  in 
United  States  taxed  8  cents  per  pound  ;  snuff 
imported,  12  cents  per  pound  ;  imported  tobac- 
co, 4  cents  per  pound. 

Act  of  1795,  c.  43. — Each  mortar  in  a  snuff 
mill  worked  by  water,  $560  ;  each  pair  of  mill- 
stones and  each  pestle  in  mills  not  worked  by 
band,  $140  ;  worked  by  hand,  $113  ;  each  mill 
manufacturing  snuff  by  stampers  and  gi'inders, 
$3,340  per  annum.  Penalties. — Failure  to  make 
entry  of  particulars  in  regard  to  mills,  forfeit- 
ure of  mill  and  $500  fine  ;  manufacturing  with- 
out license,  a  tine  treble  the  duties  charged. 
Six  cents  per  pound  drawback  on  snuff  exported. 
These  duties  were  repealed- in  1800,  c.  36. 

Tariff  Act  of  I'S'i:^. — Imported  leaf  tobacco, 
30  per  cent,  ad  valorem  ;  cigars,  40  cents  per 


pound  ;  snuff,  13  cents  per  pound  ;  other  manu- 
factured tobacco,  10  cents  per  pound. 

Tariff  Act  of  1861,  c.  68.— Cigars  valued  at 
$5  or  less  per  1,000,  30  cents  per  pound;  valued 
at  $5  to  $10,  40  cents;  valued  over  $10,  60  cents 
and  10  per  cent  ad  valorem.  Snuff,  10  cents  per 
pound;  leaf  tobacco,  25  per  cent.;  manufac- 
tured, 30  per  cent. 

Tariff  Act  of  1862,  c.  163.— Duties  on  cigars 
increased  to  60  cents  to  $1  per  pound,  ac- 
cording to  grades  as  above,  and  10  per  cent,  ad 
valorem  added  on  highest  grade.  Snuff,  35 
cents  per  pound;  leaf  tobacco,  35  cents;  manu- 
factured, 35  cents. 

Internal  Revenue  Act  of  1863,  c.  119.— Retail 
tobacco-dealers  taxed  $10  per  annum.  Chew- 
ing tobacco,  valued  at  more  than  30  cents  per 
pound,  15  cents;  less,  10  cents;  smoking  tobac- 
co made  partly  with  stems,  5  cents;  made  ex- 
clusively of  stems,  3  cents;  snuff,  30  cents; 
cigars,  valued  at  $5  per  1,000  or  less,  $1.50;  $5 
to  $10  per  1,000,  $3;  $10  to  $30  per  1,000,  $3.50; 
over  $30  per  1,000,  $3.50. 

Act  of  1SQ4:  {Internal),  c.  173.— Tax  on  chew- 
ing tobacco  raised  to  35  cents;  smoking,  to  35 
cents;  smoking  (all  stems),  to  15  cents;  snuff, 
to  35  cents.  Cigarettes  in  paper,  not  worth 
over  $5  per  100  packages,  $1  per  100  packages; 
all  tobacco,  or  cheroots,  valued  at  not  over  $5 
per  1,000,  .$3  per  1,000.  Cigars,  $5  to  $15  per 
1,000,  !ti;8;  $15  to  $30,  $15;  $30  to  $45,  $35; 
over  $45,  $40. 

7'«mjfJ.c<  0/1864,  c.  171.— Duties  on  cigars 
valued  at  less  than  $15  per  1,000,  75  cents  per 
pound  and  20  per  cent,  ad  valorem;  $15  to  $30, 
$1.35  and  30  per  cent.;  $30  to  $45,  $2  and  50 
per  cent. ;  over  $45,  $3  and  60  per  cent.  Snuff 
and  manufactured  tobacco,  50  cents  per  pound ; 
unmanufactured  tobacco,  35  cents. 

Act  of  1H65  (Internal),  c.  78. — Cigars,  cheroots 
and  cigarettes  all  of  tobacco,  $5  per  1,000  irre- 
spective of  value;  cigarettes  in  paper,  5  cents 
per  package  of  not  more  than  25.  Tax  on  to- 
bacco raised  about  5  cents  per  poimd. 

Act  of  1866  {Internal),  c.  184. — Chewing 
tobacco,  40  cents  per  pound.  Cigars  valued  at 
less  than  ,$8  per  1,000,  .$3  per  1,000;  $8  to  $13, 
$4;  over  $13,  $4  and  30  percent,  ad  valorem. 

Act  0/1868  {Infernal),  c.  186.— Dealers  in  leaf 
tobacco  who.se  annual  sales  did  not  amount  to 
over  $10,000,  $35;  above  that,  $3  per  $1,000  of 
annual  sales.  Manufacturers  of  tobacco,  $10, 
with  $3  per  $1,000  if  the  bond  exceeded  $5,000. 
Manufacturers  of  cigars,  $10,  with  $3  per  $1,000 
additional  if  sales  exceeded  $5,000.  Tax  on 
manufactured  tobacco  slightly  reduced.  Cigars 
reduced  to  $5  per  1,000,  cigarettes  to  $1.50  per 
1,000,  when  weighing  not  exceeding  three 
pounds  per  1,000. 

2'anjf  (?«<«/ (1868)  on  imported  cigars,  $3  per 
pound  and  30  per  cent,  ad  valorem,  and  the 
Internal  Revenue  tax  in  addition. 

^c?  0/1873  {Internal),  c.  315. — Retail  dealers 
in  leaf  tobacco,  $500  if  their  sales  did  not  ex- 
ceed $1,000,  and  50  cents  for  each  additional 
dollar  of  sales.  All  dealers  in  tobacco,  $5 ; 
manufacturers,  $10;  peddlers  afoot  or  in  public 
conveyances,  $10  ;  with  one  horse,  $15  ;  two 
horses,  $35  ;  more  than  two  horses,  $50. 

Act  of  1875  {Internal),  c.  137.— Tobacco,  24 
cents  per  pound;  cigars,  $6  per  1,000, 


Tobacco.] 


630 


[Total  Abstiueuce. 


Act  of  1879  (Internal),  e.  125— Tobacco,  16 
cents  per  jjound. 

Tariff  Act  o/ 1883,  c.  131.— Cigars,  $2.50  per 
1,000  and  25  per  cent,  ad  valorem  ;  leaf  tobacco 
for  wrappers,  75  cents  per  pound  ;  if  stemmed, 
$1;  other  immanufactiired  tobacco,  unstemmed, 
30  cents  ;  manufactured  tobacco,  40  cents;  snuff, 
50  cents. 

Act  of  \S%'i  {Internal),  c.  121.— Manufactured 
tobacco,  8  cents  per  pound;  taxes  on  dealers  re- 
duced about  one-half;  cigars,  $3  per  1,000 ; 
cigarettes  weighing  under  three  pounds  per 
1,000,  50  cents. 

Tariff  {McKinley)  Act  o/1890,  c.  1244.— Leaf 
tobacco  suitable  for  cigar  wrappers,  unstemmed, 
$3  per  pound;  stemmed,  $2.75;  unmanufactured 
tobacco,  unstemmed,  35  cents ;  stemmed,  50 
cents  ;  manufactured  tobacco,  40  cents  ;  snuff, 
50  cents;  cigars,  $4.50  per  pound  and  25  per 
cent. 

Act  of  1890  {Internal). — Manufactured  to- 
bacco, 6  cents  per  pound  ;  all  special  taxes  on 
dealers  removed. 

Among  the  most  interesting  State  acts 
of  recent  years  are  those  prohibiting  the 
sales  (sometimes  also  the  giving)  of  cigar- 
ettes and  other  kinds  of  tobacco  to 
minors,  except  (as  provided  in  most  in- 
stances) on  the  written  consent  of  parent 
or  guardian.  These  are  analyzed  in  the 
following  table : 


When  Maxi- 

States. 

Pass-  mum 

ED.    1  Age. 

Penalty. 

Arkansas 

1889 

15 

$10  to  $50. 

Connecticut'  . 

18K9 

16 

*50. 

Georgia 

1889 

Misdemeanor. 

Idaho 

1889 

21 

SI  00. 

Illinois 

1887 

16 

$20. 

Indiana 

1889 

16 

%\  to  $10. 

Kansas"-^ 

1889 

16 

|5  to  $25. 
$5  to  $25,  or 

Kentucky 

1890 

18 

imp.  .30  days  max.,  or 

both. 

Maine 

1889 

16 

$.50  max. 

Maryland^ 

188ti 

14 

$10  to  $100,  or 
imp.  5  to  30  days. 

Massachusetts 

188(i 

16 

$50  max. 

Michigan 

1889 

n 

$5  to  $50, 

or  imp.  10  to  30  days. 

Minnesota 

1889 

$.50  max.,  or 

imp.  30  days  max.,  or 

both. 

Nebraska 

188.T 

15 

$25. 

Nevada 

1887 

18 

$200  max.,  or  imp. 
60  days  max.,  or  both 

NewHa'pshire 

1889 

$20  to  $50. 

New  Jersey* . . 

1883 

16 

$20. 

New  York^. . . 

1889 

16 

Misdemeanor. 

North  Dakota. 

1890 

16 

$.50  max.,  or 

imp.  30  days  max.,  or 

both. 

Ohio  

1888 

15 

$5  to  $20,  or 
imp.  30  days  max. 

Pennsylvania 

1889 

16 

$300  max. 

South  Carolina 

1889 

18 

$25  to  $100,  or  imp.  two        | 

months  to  one  year  or 

both. 

South  Dakota 

1890 

16 

$.50  max.,  or 

imp.  10  days  max.,  or 

both. 

Ftah2 

1890 

18 

$10  to  $100. 

Vermont 

1888 

16 

.$20  mux. 

Washington... 

1883 

16 

$10  to  $50. 

'  A  minor  using  tobacco  in  any  form  to  be  fined  $7. 
*  Prohibits  furnishing  tobacco  in  any  form  to  minors,  ex- 
cept upon  proecription  of  a  physician.  ^  ^,|  amendment 
added  in  189U  pres^cribes  the  same  penalty  for  furnishing 
toba<Ho  to  any  minor.  ■»  Suit  to  be  prosecuted  by  parent  or 
guardian  ;  tine  to  go  to  the  county.  '  Another  law  (1890) 
forbids  minoris  inider  16  to  use  tobacco  In  any  public 
place  under  penalty  of  $2  to  $10  fine. 


An  act  of  Congress  for  the  District  of 
Columbia,  approved  Feb.  7,  1891,  forbids 
the  selling,  giving  and  furnishing  of 
tobacco  in  any  form  to  a  minor  under 
16;  the  penalty  being  a  fine  of  $3  to  $10, 
or  imprisonment  5  to  20  days. 

Total  Abstinence  from  all  in- 
toxicating beverages,  though  incul- 
cated and  practiced  from  the  earliest 
times  by  Jewish,  pagan  and  Christian 
sects,  and  enjoined  by  the  founders  of 
gTeat  religions,  as  the  Mohammedan 
and  Buddhist,  did  not  become  a  dis- 
tinct popular  creed  in  modern  Chris- 
tian nations  until  after  the  first  quarter 
of  the  present  century  had  expired.  The 
foundations  for  the  movement  were  laid 
in  the  United  States;  throughout  the 
world  it  is  recognized  that  this  country  was 
the  first  one  to  practically  inaugurate  and 
nourish  the  reform.  The  period  of 
preparation  may  be  said  to  date  from 
1785,  the  year  in  which  Dr.  Benjamin 
Eush  published  his  essay  against  ardent 
(distilled)  spirits.  Various  temperance 
societies  were  instituted  in  the  next  40 
years,  notably  the  society  at  Moreau, 
Saratoga  County,  N.  Y.,  in  1808  (see 
p.  82),  and  the  Massachusetts  Society  in 
1813.  This  Massachusetts  Society  did 
not  go  so  far  as  Dr.  Rush  had  gone,  for 
its  object,  as  stated  in  its  constitution, 
was  to  "  discountenance  and  suppress  the 
too  free  use  of  ardent  spirits."  A  prime 
cause  of  the  conservatism  of  the 
early  reformers  was  the  general 
belief  that  the  intoxicating  ingredient 
in  wine  and  beer  was  one  of  the 
natural  elements  of  fruit  and  grain. 
In  1826  Justin  Edwards, D.D.  (seep.  161), 
with  Leonard  Woods,  D.D.,  issued  a  call 
for  a  meeting  in  Boston,  which  was  held 
on  Jan.  10  of  the  same  year ;  and  on  Feb. 
13  the  organization  of  the  "American 
Society  for  the  Promotion  of  Temper- 
ance'' was  effected.  Its  basis  was  absti- 
nence, but  for  several  years  there  was  no 
general  application  of  the  principle  to 
fermented  drinks,  although  some 
eschewed  all  intoxicants.  By  1834,  as 
shown  by  Dr.  Edwards's  seventh  annual 
report,  the  movement  had  spread  to  21 
States  and  more  than  5,000  county  and 
local  societies  had  been  organized,  with 
a  membership  exceeding  a  million ;  the 
liquor  business  had  been  made  odious 
and  many  good  men  had  withdrawn  from 


Total  Abstinence.] 


631 


[Total  Abstinence. 


it ;  the  importations  of  distilled  liquors  had 
A      decreased  from  5,774,774  gallons  in  1824 
to  2,810,140  in  1S3'.',  and  there  had  also 
been   a   very   striking  reduction  in  the 
domestic   output.     Yet  the  use  of  wine 
and  cider  luid  increased,    5,431,031   gal- 
lons  of   wine  having  been  imported  in 
1832  as  against  1,310,731  gallons  in  1824. 
The  first  National  Temperance   Con- 
vention met  in  Philadelphia,  May,  1833, 
Avith  more  than  400  delegates  in  attend- 
ance from  21   States.     It   expressed   the 
conviction  that  "the    traffic  in    ardent 
spirit  as   a   drink,   and    the  use  of  it  as 
such,  are  morally  wrong,  and  ought  to  be 
abandoned  throughout  the  world."     But 
there   was   no   declaration    against   fer- 
mented liquors.     The  second  Convention, 
at   Saratoga,  in  August,   1836,  took  the 
final   step,   extending    the   principle   of 
abstinence  so  as  to  cover  "  all  intoxicat- 
ing liquors,"  and  the  American  Temper- 
ance Union  was  organized.  From  this  radi- 
cal action  all   the   aggressive   work    of 
later  years   has    been    developed.     The 
American  Temperance  Union,  under  the 
direction  of  devoted  men  like  Dr.   John 
Marsh  (see  p.  416)  faithfully  represented 
the   uncompromising  opinion    until,   in 
1866,  it   Avas   replaced   by    the    equally 
zealous    National    Temperance    Society. 
At  the  succeeding  National  Temperance 
Conventions  (Saratoga,  July,  1841;  Sara- 
toga,  August,    1851;  Saratoga,  August, 
1865;   Cleveland,  July,   1868;   Saratoga, 


August,  1873;  Chicago,  June, 


1875, 


and 


Saratoga,  June,  1881),  the  total  absti- 
nence doctrine  was  enthusiastically 
favored  and  the  growing  demand  for 
Prohibitory  legislation,  enforcement  of 
laws,  political  action,  etc.,  was  reflected.  ^ 
The  latest  of  the  general  Conventions  of 
the  temperance  people  was  held  in  the 
Broadway  Tabernacle,  New  York,  June 
11  and  12,  1890,  and  about  800  delegates 
were  chosen  by  various  organizations, 
churches,  etc.;  all  who  disagreed  with 
the  total  abstinence  and  other  radical 
ideas  had  full  liberty  to  send  representa- 
tives, and  some  of  their  recognized 
champions  were  present;  but  the  senti- 
ment in  favor  of  the  most  advanced 
opinions  was  overwhelming — indeed, 
practically  unanimous. 

'  An  extended  account  of  the  total  abstinence  movement 
from  1785  to  1885  liiicludin!,'  the  tests  of  pledijes  adopted 
by  numerous  orgauizutions,  aud  other  valuable  verbatim 
matter)  is  given  by  11.  K.  Carroll.  LL.D  ,  in  'One  Hun- 
dred Years  of  Temperance,"  pp.  121-41, 


The  total  abstinence  cause  is  now 
represented  in  the  United  States  by  sev- 
eral powerful  national  organizations,  the 
most  important  being  the  National  Tem- 
perance Society,  Woman's  Christian 
Temperance  Union,  Independent  Order 
of  Good  Templars,  Sons  of  Temperance, 
Catholic  Total  Abstinence  Union,  Loyal 
Temperance  Legion,  Eoyal  Templars  of 
Temperance  and  Templars  of  Honor  and 
Temperance.  These  are  noticed  under 
the  appropriate  titles  in  this  work.  Other 
societies,  like  the  Eechabites  (p.  582), 
United  Order  of  the  Golden  Cross  (mem- 
bership, about  17,500)  and  Sons  of  Jona- 
dab  are  more  or  less  active.  Nearly  every 
State  has  a  State  Temperance  Society. 
Besides,  there  are  countless  local  and  un- 
affliliated  bodies;  and  hundreds  of  thou- 
sands of  citizens  not  identified  with 
organizations  are  in  full  sympathy  with 
the  movement.  At  this  day  there'^  is  but 
one  national  association  of  temperance 
people  that  does  not  insist  on  total  absti- 
nence (p.  81). 

The  propaganda  has  the  fervid  sup- 
port of  the  clergy  as  u  class,  of  number- 
less professional,  business  and  public  men, 
the  representative  leaders  of  the  working 
people  and  a  very  great  majority  of  the 
women.  The  zeal  of  its  adlierents  is  re- 
markable, and  the  greatest  generosity  is 
exhibited  by  interested  individuals.  Very 
large  sums  of  money  are  contributed  for 
advancing  special  phases  of  the  agitation. 
Through  the  liberality  of  Mr.  W.  Jen- 
2iings  Demorest  of  New  York,  elocution- 
ary contests  for  silver,  gold  and  diamond 
medals  are  held  in  all  parts  of  this 
country  and  in  nearly  all  foreign  coun- 
tries. The  youthful  participants  in  these 
contests  vie  with  each  other  in  delivering 
carefully  selected  and  striking  pleas 
against  the  drink  curse  and  the  license 
system.  The  chief  object  of  Mr.  Demo- 
rest and  those  associated  with  him  is  to 
cultivate  the  most  radical  sentiment, 
especially  in  behalf  of  uncompromising 
Prohibition,  and  to  encourage  the  young 
people  to  enlist  earnestly  in  the  work 
against  the  traffic.  Mr.  Demorest's 
generosity  has  been  unbounded,  and  he 
welcomes  every  new  occasion  for  prac- 
tical expenditure.'' 

-  The  Bemorest  medal  contests  were  inaugurated  in 
188().  During  the  first  two  years  about  1  OnO  medals  were 
awarded.  In  1888  and  1889  the  work  was  ext<-nded  to 
Europe,  especially  EuL'land  and  Scotland.  In  1889  the 
number  of  contests  was  three  times  as  many  as  in  all  the 


Total  Abstinence.] 


632 


[Treatin 


The  principles  on  which  total  absti- 
nence, in  opposition  to  so-called  *'  mod- 
erate "  drinking,  are  based,  are  summar- 
ized in  the  article  on  ModeratiojsT.  The 
proofs  of  the  benefits  of  the  entire  dis- 
use of  alcoholic  drinks  are  so  explicit 
and  authoritative  (see  especially  Longev- 
ity and  Medicine  ^)  that  no  argument 
against  the  expediency  of  total  abstinence 
can  now  be  maintained.  The  head  of 
the  most  widespread  and  conservative 
religious  denomination  of  Christendom 
declares  that  "  it  cannot  at  all  be  doubt- 
ed" that  "the  noble  resolve  to  abstain 
totally  from  every  kind  of  intoxicating 
drink ''  is  "  the  proper  and  the  truly  effi- 
cacious remedy."  (See  p.  598.)  In  all 
departments  of  life  (except,  perhaps, 
among  the  most  ignorant  and  prejudiced 
people)  the  individual  who  uses  no  in- 
toxicating drink  is  regarded  as  more  re- 
liable and  estimable  (qualifications,  etc., 
being  of  an  acceptable  nature)  than  the 
drinker.  There  is  a  constantly-increas- 
ing tendency  among  large  employers  of 

preceding  years.  In  1890  about  10,000  medals  were  dis- 
tributed, ttie  expenses  being  in  the  nein^hborliood  of 
$2'(,0i)0.  Mr.  Demoresfs  total  outlay  since  the  beg-inning 
lias  been  fully  ^30,01)0.  Number  of  medals  awarded  up 
the  Ist  of  January,  1S91:  14,934  silver,  1.0-21  small  gold, 
6:!  grand  tiold,  and  3  diamond.  The  State  of  Nebraska 
leads,  having  won  2.5U0  of  the  medals,  including  all  the 
three  diamond  ones.  Contests  have  been  held  in  every 
State  and  Territory.  Fn  Now  York  City  alone  I'iO  churches 
are  represented.  Bulgaria  has  secured  l(j  of  the  medals, 
and  among  the  other  remote  foreign  countries  in  which 
tlie  work  has  been  introduced  are  India,  the  Sandwich 
Islands,  China,  Japan.  Australia  and  Tasmania.  The 
motto  adopted  is,  '•  From  Contest  to  Conquest."  Mrs. 
Ch.'irlotrc  F.  Woodbury  of  New  York  is  the  Super- 
intendent. 

1  Besides  the  different  "medical  declarations"  quoted 
on  pp.  423-4,  the  following  resolutions,  adopted  by  tlie 
Section  on  Medicine  of  the  International  Medical  Con- 
gress held  in  Philadelphia  in  1876.  are  of  special  interest: 

"  1.  Alcohol  is  not  shown  to  have  a  definite  food  value 
by  any  of  the  usual  methods  of  chemical  analysis  or 
physiological  investigation. 

"2.  Its  use  as  a  medicine  is  chiefly  that  of  a  cardiac 
stimulant,  and  often  admits  of  substiution. 

'■3.  As  a  medicine  it  is  not  well  fitted  for  self  prescrip- 
tion by  the  laity,  and  the  medical  profession  is  not 
accountable  for  such  administration  or  for  the  enormous 
evils  arising  therefrom. 

"4.  The  purity  of  alcoholic  liquors  is  in  general  not 
as  well  assured  as  that  of  articles  used  for  medicine 
el  ould  be.  Thevarious  mixtures  when  usedas  medicine 
should  have  definite  and  known  composition  and  stiould 
not  be  interchanged  promiscuously." 

Ifc  should  be  espi'cially  borne  in  mind  that  there  is  the 
very  highest  scientific  authority  for  the  assertion  that 
total  abstinence  may  be  resorted  to  af  once  and  suddenly 
without  any  injurious  results.  ••  Persons  accustomed  to 
buch  drinks  may  uitli  perfect  safety  discontinue  them 
■entirely,  either  at  once,  or  gradually  after  a  short  time," 
said  the  eminent  signers  of  the  second  English  medical 
declaration  (p.  423).  The  Voice.  Sept.  4,  18110,  printed 
letters  from  the  officials  of  43  prisons  in  the  most  popu- 
lous counties  of  several  States.  The  officials  were 
asked  to  state  whether  it  was  their  practice  to  deprive 
prisoners  of  liquor  instantly  and  eniirelv.  or  to  pursue 
tlie  "  tapering-ofl"'  plan,  and  whether  the'etfects  of  cut- 
ting ott'  at  once  were  beneficial  or  hurtful.  A  ^'reat 
majority  testified  that  each  inmate  was  refused  liquor 
absolutely  from  the  first  day  of  coQflnemeut,  and  that 
Uie  results  were  uniformly  good. 


labor  to  discriminate  against  persons 
using  liquors,  and  the  regulations  of  the 
railway  corporations  in  particular  are 
remarkable  for  their  stringency." 

Treating. — Perhaps  in  no  other 
country  in  the  world  is  the  fashion  of 
treating  more  in  vogue  than  in  the 
United  States.  This  custom  is  the  cause 
of  much  drinking  and  drunkenness  that 
would  otherwise  be  avoided.  Men  who 
are  habitual  partakers  of  beer,  whiskey, 
brandy,  etc.,  are  not  satisfied  to  indulge 
their  personal  appetites,  but  must  needs, 
for  politeness's  sake,  as  they  imagine,  or 
in  order  not  to  appear  mean,  or  to  return 
favors  received,  invite  their  companions 
to  drink  with  them.  Treating  begins 
often  in  childhood  in  things  innocent, 
and  has  its  origin  in  unselfish  motives 
and  noble  impulses;  but  when  trans- 
ferred from  the  sphere  of  the  harmless 
to  the  deadly,  the  peril  is  great  and  the 
disaster  national.     It  may  safely  be  said 

2  The  New  York  Independent,  Aug.  28,  1800.  printed 
letters  from  the  officials  of  0(5  railway  companies  stating 
the  policy  pursueil  in  relation  to  drinking  habits.  The 
Independf-nV »  object  in  securiu'j  this  correspondence  was 
to  show  "what  is  expected  of  railway  employes,  who  form 
the  best-drilled  army  of  workmen  in  the  country."  The 
following  are  s!)ecimeu  rules: 

Philadelphia  &  Reading. — "  As  the  habitual  use  of  in- 
toxicating liquors  is  incompatible  with  the  duties  of 
railway  employes,  those  who  abstain  from  their  use  will 
be  more  favorably  considered  for  promotiim.  The  use 
of  such  liquors  by  employes  on  duty  is  positively  forbid- 
den, and  the  penalty  for  disregard  of  this  order  is  dis- 
missal from  the  service." 

Lake  Erie  &  IFestov;.—  "  Intoxication  or  the  use  of  in- 
toxicating liquors  will  be  sufficient  cause  for  dismissal. 
Persons  employed  in  any  caiiacity  who  frequent  saloons 
where  liquor  is  sold,  or  gambling  houses,  will  not  be  re- 
tained in  the  service." 

Norlhern  Pacific. —'^Tha  continued  or  excessive  peri- 
odical use  of  mult  or  alcoholic  liquors  should  be  ab- 
stained from  by  every  one  engaged  in  operating  the  road, 
not  only  on  account  of  the  great  risks  of  life  and  prop- 
erty incurred  by  intrusting  to  them  the  oversight  of 
those  whose  intellects  may  be  dulled  at  times  when  mos^t 
care  is  needed,  but  also,  and  especially,  because  haiiitual 
drinking  has  a  very  bad  eflfect  upon  the  constitution, 
which  is  a  serious  matter  for  men  so  liable  to  injury  as 
railway  employes  always  are.  It  so  lessens  the  recupe- 
rative powers  of  the  body  that  simple  wounds  are  fol- 
lowed bj'  the  most  serious  and  dangerous  complica- 
tions. Fractures  unite  slowly,  if  at  all.  and  wounds  of  a 
grave  nature,  such  as  those  requiring  the  loss  of  a  limb, 
are  almost  sure  to  end  fatally.  No  employe  can 
afi'ord  to  take  such  risks,  and  the  railway  com- 
pany cannot  assume  such  responsibilities." 

Mtusonri  Picific.  — '•  The  use  of  beer  or  other  intoxicat- 
ing liquors  by  any  employe  of  tlii'^  company  while  on 
duty  is  strictly  jirohiliiled,  and  no  employe  will  be 
allowed  to  have  any  such  liquors  in  or  about  any  station, 
shop  or  yard  or  other  premises  of  this  company  at  any 
time  or  under  any  circumstances.  Any  conductor,  train- 
man, engineer,  firemiin.  switchman  or  other  employe 
who  is  known  to  habitually  use  intoxicating  liquors, 
either  while  on  or  ofl:  duty,  will  be  promptly  and  jierma- 
nently  dismissed  from  the  service  of  the  company." 

Siniilar  rules,  written  or  unwritten  tin  some  instances 
stronger  and  in  othw-s  somewhat  milder,  but  all  agreeing 
in  requiring  employes  to  be  strictly  temperate  at  at! 
times,  on  pain  of  discharge),  were  reported  by  the  officials 
of  every  other  company  represented  in  the  replies.  The; 
words,"  preference  will  always  he  given  to  those  who  do 
not  indulge  at  all  in  intoxicating  drink,"  recur  fre- 
quently. 


Treating.] 


633 


[Turkey. 


that  if  the  American  habit  of  "  treating  " 
could  be  allowed  to  fall  into  "  innocuous 
desuetude,"  or  reformed  away,  a  large 
decrease  of  drunkenness  would  at  once 
be  noticed.  Many  young  men  fall  and 
fill  the  drunkard's  grave  because  their  in- 
stincts are  social  and  their  temperament 
exposes  them  to  conviviality,  even  though 
theii  natural  aversion  to  liquor  is  great 
and  they  may  at  first  loathe  that  which  at 
last  bites  like  a  serpent.  Not  only  tem- 
perance, but  manly  independence  also, 
would  be  promoted  by  the  abolition  of 
treating  and  the  return  to  the  ancient 
(lis Iter  a  escot,  where  each  man  pays  for 
himself,  and  puts  himself  under  no  obli- 
gation, owing  no  man  anything.  In  the 
common  colloquial  phrase,  "Jersey 
treat,"  where  each  settles  his  own  bill, 
and  neither  tempts  another  nor  binds 
himself,  thero  is  a  reference  to  the  early 
days  in  New  Jersey  when,  under  salutary 
customs,  morality,  temperance  and  good 
order  prevailed  ;  so  that  the  term  con- 
veys a  compliment  where  a  sneer  is  pos- 
sibly meant.  It  is  possible  that  to  the 
majority  of  men  who  live  and  die  drunk- 
ards, the  first  glass  came  in  the  form  of 
social  temptation.  In  such  a  time  the 
young  man  invited  to  a  "treat"  may 
well  repeat  the  prayer  wdiich  the  Rev. 
T.  De  Witt  Talmage,  when  a  theological 
student,  prayed  in  reference  to  the  snares 
of  a  great  city :  "  0  Lord,  may  we  hear 
the  serpent's  rattle  in  our  ears,  before 
we  feel  his  fang  in  our  flesh."  "  The  old 
dram-drinker,"  says  the  proverb,  "  is  the 
■  devil's  decoy."  With  fiendish  pleasure, 
the  man  able  to  drink  without  being 
made  drunken  too  often  puts  the  bottle 
to  his  neighbor's  mouth,  the  strong  man 
tempts  the  weak  to  gloat  over  it, 
and  to  chuckle  to  himself  in  Pharisaic 
glee  because  his  stomach  and  nerves  (and 
conscience)  are  not  as  weak  as  other 
men's.  Such  kindness  is  brutal  cruelty ; 
or,  as  the  proverb  has  it,  "  Drinking 
kindness  is  drunken  friendship."  The 
history  of  words  mirrors  the  steady  deg- 
radation of  the  man  who  accepts  the 
first  invitation  to  partake  of  liquor.  The 
Italian  word  tope,  at  first  meaning  "'  I 
accept  your  offer,"  "  done,"  or  "  agreed," 
soon  began  to  mean  "  to  drink  heavily,"  or 
'•  lustily,"  and  in  due  time  developed  into 
'•  toper,"  which  is  now  synonymous  with 
"  sot." 

William  Elliot  Gkiffis. 


Turkey.' — Throughout  the  domin- 
ions of  the  Sultan  there  has  been  a  grow- 
ing tendency  to  modify  in  practice  the 
prohibition  of  wine  contained  in  the 
Koran.  While  the  use  of  wine  is  for- 
bidden by  that  book,  the  manufacture  is 
not ;  and  grapes  are  grown  and  converted 
into  intoxicants  by  many  Mohammedans. 
Again,  those  who  seek  excuses  for  drink- 
ino-  arsfue  that  while  wine  must  not  be 
touched  by  good  Mohammedans  there  is 
nothing  said  against  spirits ;  and  although 
spirits  are  much  stronger  than  wine  the 
products  of  the  still  are  quite  freely  used. 
There  is  not  much  visible  intemperance, 
and  comjoaratively  little  wine-drinking, 
outside  the  Europeanized  sections;  but 
there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  vice  of 
drinking  has  made  serious  inroads.  Any 
observer  in  Constantinople  will  find  that 
distilled  liquor  (or  rakee,  as  it  is  called) 
is  used  openly  by  many  Turks.  In  the 
capital  there  are  no  Prohibitory  laws 
against  strong  drink,  and  no  punishment 
is  enforced  by  the  authorities  against  the 
violator  of  religious  doctrines.  The 
Turkish  Government  actually  collects  a 
large  revenue  from  taxes  on  spirits  and 
wines,  both  domestic  and  imported,  and 
it  strives  through  its  agents  to  augment 
this  revenue  by  extending  the  sales  to 
new  places.  Statistics  of  the  liquor 
revenue  are  not  published.  In  1883-4 
the  imports  of  alcohol  into  Turkey  were 
valued  at  15,400,471  piastres  (about 
$675,000) ;  in  188G-7  the  exports  of  wine 
had  a  value  of  31,150,910  piastres  (about 
$1,370,600),  and  the  exports  of  opium 
79,818,194  piastres  (about  13,500,000). 
Bulgaria  and  Eoumelia,  formerly  integral 
parts  of  European  Turkey  but  now  semi- 
independent  States,  produce  much  wine 
and  support  a  considerable  retail  liquor 
traffic.  In  Roumelia  the  wine-yield  in 
1883  was  in  excess  of  9,000,000  gallons. 
The  Prefect  for  Pliilipjjopolis  and  222 
surrounding  villages  in  Bulgaria  (total 
population,  226,013,  about  one-tenth  of 
the  entire  pojiulation  of  that  country) 
published  statistics  in  1889  showing  that 
2,603,888  gallons  of  wine,  valued  at 
$284,698,  were  made  in  1888  in  the  terri- 
tory covered  by  the  report,  and  that  \n 
Philipiiopolis  (pojiulation,  33,032)  there 
were  400  licensed  driuking-saloons. 


1  The  editor  is  indebted  to  Zoe  M.  Loclie,  Philippopolis, 
Bulgaria. 


Unfermented  Wines.] 


G?A 


[United   States  Government. 


Unfermented  Wine.— See  Bible 
Wines,  Communion  AVines,  and  Pass- 
over Wines. 

Unitarians. — In  their  formal  rela- 
tions to  the  temperance  movement  the 
Unitarians  are  represented  by  the  "  Uni- 
tarian Church  Temperance  Society,"  or- 
s^anized  at  the  National  Conference  held 
at  Saratoga,  N.  Y.,  Sept.  23,  1886. 

"Its  purpose  is  '  to  work  for  the  cause  of  tem- 
perance in  whatever  Mays  may  seem  to  it  wise 
and  right;  to  study  the  social  problems  of  pov- 
erty, crime  and  disease  in  their  relation  to  the 
use  of  intoxicating  drinks,  and  to  diffuse  what- 
ever knowledge  may  be  gained ;  to  discus.5  meth- 
ods or  temperance  reform ;  to  devise  and  so  far 
as  possible  to  execute  plans  for  practical  reform; 
to  exert,  by  its  meetings  and  by  its  membership, 
such  influence  for  good  as  by  the  grace  of  God 
it  may  possess.'  It  is  composed  of  branch  soci- 
eties in  sympathy  with  the  above-named  pur- 
pose, either  in  churches  or  Sunday-schools,  and 
the  regular  meetings  will  be  held  once  in  two 
years  in  connection  with  the  National  Confer- 
ence, each  branch  society  being  represented  by 
two  delegates." ' 

United   Brethren  Church. — The 

following  is  a  part  of  the  temperance 
utterances  of  the  General  Conference  of 
the  church,  held  at  York,  Pa.,  in  May, 

1889: 

"  We  believe  total  abstinence  from  all  intoxi- 
cating drinks  to  be  the  law  of  duty  for  the  in- 
dividual. AVe  believe  total  Prohibition  to  be 
the  divine  law  of  duty  for  the  State.  We  are 
iinalterably  and  forever  opposed  to  any  and  all 
forms  of  license  and  taxation,  by  whatever  name 
called,  which  provide  for  the  continuance  of 
the  traffic  and  not  its  destruction.  .  .  .  The 
Government  which  authorizes  such  a  business 
and  the  voter  who  directly  or  indirectly  con- 
sents to  it  are  alike  guilty  of  a  great  wrong." 

United  Kingdom.  —  See  Great 
Britain,  Ireland  and  Scotland. 

United  Kingdom  Alliance. — See 

pp.  196,  197. 

United  Presbyterian  Church. — 

The  General  Assembly  of  the  United 
Presbyterian  Church  of  North  America, 
in  Springfield,  0.,  May,  1889,  made  the 
following  declarations : 

"  That  any  form  of  license  or  taxation  of  the 
liquor  traffic  is  imscriptural  in  principle  and  con- 
trary to  good  government,  and  ought  to  be  dis- 
couraged by  every  Christian,  philanthropist  and 
patriot. 

' '  That  we  continue  to  indorse  the  proposition 
of  former  Assemblies,  that  total  abstinence  is 
the  only  safe  rule  for  the  individual,  and  Pro- 
hibition by  law  of  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  in- 
toxicatiug  liquors  as  a  beverage  the  true  method 
of  dealing  with  this  terrible  evil  by  the  State." 

'  Year-Book  of  the  American  Unitarian  Association, 
1891. 


United  States  Government  and 
the  Liquor  Traffic.'' — Under  the  Con- 
stitution Congress,  with  the  consent  of 
the  President  (or  by  setting  aside  his  veto 
by  a  two-thirds  vote),  has  exclusive 
power  to  legislate  upon  questions  of 
national  revenue  and  expenditure,  to 
"  provide  for  the  common  defense  and 
the  general  welfare  of  the  United  States," 
to  enact  laws  for  the  District  of  Columbia 
and  the  Territories  ^  as  well  as  for  the 
sites  of  forts,  dockyards  and  all  other 
national  property,  and  to  regulate  inter- 
course with  other  nations  and  commerce 
between  the  States.  Thus  the  National 
Government  is  able,  at  its  own  instance, 
without  the  co-operation  of  the  separate 
States  or  despite  their  opposition,  to 
foster  or  discountenance,  tax  or  prohibit 
the  liquor  traffic  on  an  extensive  scale ; 
it  may  levy  taxes  on  the  entire  internal 
traffic  for  Federal  revenue  purposes  and 
thereby  give  a  certain  recognition  and 
sanction  to  it,  or  it  may  refuse,  for  vari- 
ous reasons,  to  take  money  from  this 
business;  it  may  lay  duties  on  imported 
liquors,  or  admit  them  free,  or  prohibit 
them  absolutely ;  it  may  interfere  or  de- 
cline to  interfere  with  the  exportation 
of  liquors  in  general  or  to  particular 
countries  (as  Africa);  it  may  by  treaty 
stipulations  join  in  international  agree- 
ments respecting  the  liquor  trade ;  it  may 
arbitrarily  license,  ignore  or  prohibit  the 
traffic  in  all  the  'J'erritories  and  the  Dis- 
trict of  Columbia,  in  all  Federal  build- 
ings and  on  all  Federal  grounds,  among 
the  Indians  (who  are  the  wards  of  the 
nation),  in  the  army  and  navy,  etc. ;  in 
short  it  may  inaugurate  a  general  policy 
of  Prohibition  or  anti-Prohibition,  of 
significant  friendship  for  the  temperance 
idea  or  of  equally  significant  hostility  or 
unconcern.  On  the  other  hand  the 
National  Government  cannot  enact  liquor 
laws  of  any  descri2:)tion  for  individual 
States;  and  it  cannot  disturb  the  meas- 
ures that  the  States  adopt  for  themselves, 
unless  certain  provisions  of  these  meas- 
ures  are    in   conflict   with   the  Federal 

2  The  editor  is  indebted  to  E)i  F.  Ritter,  A.  M.  Powell, 
Wilbur  Aldrich,  Henry  B.  Fernald,  Mrs.  Sarah  A.  McClecs 
and  Rev.  Henry  Ward,  D.D. 

3  Congress  may,  however,  waive  the  right  to  perform  the 
ordinarv  legislative  worlv  for  the  District  of  Columbia  and 
the  Territories,  and  delegate  this  right  to  them.  Accord- 
inglv  the  Territories  (excepting  Alaska  and  the  Indian) 
have  local  legislative  bodies;  but  the  District  of  Columbia 
is  under  the  immediate  control  of  t'ongress.  Yet  no  dele- 
gation of  ordinary  legislative  powers  deprives  Congress  of 
authority  to  pass  special  acts  for  any  or  all  the  Territories 
and  the  District  of  Columoia. 


United  States  Government.] 


635 


[United  States  Government. 


that  the  purpose  of  the  Government,  in 
all  the  acts  passed  by  it  touching  the 
general  liquor  traffic  of  the  country,  has 
been  purely  mercenary.  The  first  act 
(LT91,  which,  with  the  act  of  1792,  gave 
rise  to  the  Whiskey  Rebellion)  contained 
a  clause  providing  that  the  liquor  taxes 
levied  by  it  were  to  cease  when  the  public 
debt  should  be  paid.  Much  reluctance 
and  caution  were  manifested  in  these 
and  all  the  other  early  liquor  measures. 
The  Government,  while  desiring  to  pro- 
cure revenue  from  the  spirit-manufac- 
turers, established  no  restrictions  except 
such  as  were  necessary  for  collection. 
Even  petty  private  stills,  which  could 
not  be  properly  inspected,  were  at  first 
complete  authority  to  control  or  suppress  (acts  of  1791  and  1792)  permitted  to  op- 
the  traffic  in  all  its  forms,  has  explicitly  erate  without  hindrance  upon  payment 
authorized  them  to  deal  with  transported  of  the  ordinary  gallon  tax,  the  quantities 
or  imported  liquors  in  the  same  way  that  of  liquor  produced  to  be  certified  by  the 
they  deal  with  the  liquors  manufactured      owners;    but  this  system    gave   rise  to 


Constitution  as  interpreted  by  the  Su- 
preme Court.  Thus  the  States  are  at 
liberty  to  license  or  prohibit  the  whole 
liquor  business  within  their  borders,  sub- 
ject only  to  the  approval  of  the  Supreme 
Court;  and  all  the  essential  details  of 
State  Prohibitory  acts  are  held  to  be 
valid  by  that  highest  tribunal  excepting 
the  ones  which  forbid  the  importation, 
and  the  sale  in  original  packages,  of  alco- 
holic drink  from  other  States  or  from 
foreign  countries,  and  which  (in  the 
opinion  of  a  majority  of  the  Supreme 
Court)  interfere  with  the  exclusive  right 
of  Congress  to  regulate  foreign  and  inter- 
State  commerce.  But  Congress,  recog- 
nizing the  necessity  of  giving  the  States 


frauds,  and  in 


1797 


the  private   stills 


within  their  territorial  limits ;  so  that  the 

National  Government's  powers  embrace  were  taxed  according  to  capacity,  though 

only  the  right  of  taxation,  the  right  of  the  details  were  so  adjusted  that  no  tax 

legislation  and  administration  in  spheres  was  to  be  paid  when  the  distilleries  were 

beyond   the   jurisdiction   of  the  States,  not  running.     Spirits  distilled  from  for- 

and  the  right  to  submit  to  the  States  and  eign  materials  were  to  pay  higher  rates 

with  their  consent  ultimately  to  adopt  a  of  taxes  than  those  made  from  domestic 


Constitutional  Amendment, 

Notwithstanding  the  freedom  that  the 
States  enjoy,  the  liquor  policy  of  the 
Federal  Government  cannot  fail  inciden- 
tally to  materially  influence  their  tend- 


materials ;  and  thus  distillation  from  the 
products  of  the  United  States  was  en- 
couraged. The  industry  was  further 
fostered  by  providing  that  taxes  paid  on 
spirits  were  to  be  refunded  in  case  the 


encies  and  to  affect  the  conditions  pre-  spirits  were  exported, 
vailing  in  them.  If  this  Federal  policy  Tlie  first  era  of  whiskey  taxation  was 
were  distinctly  hostile  to  the  drink  trade,  brought  to  an  end  in  1802,  when  all  the 
undoubtedly  the  strength  of  local  Pro-  former  laws  were  repealed.  The  emer- 
hibition  movements  would  be  vastly  in-  gencies  of  the  War  of  1812  caused  a  re- 
creased  ever3^where;  with  the  prestige  of  newal  of  the  system  in  1813,^  but  in 
active  sympathy  from  Congress  and  the 
Administration,  the  anti-saloon  agita- 
tion would  probably  sweep  the  country 
in  a  very  brief  time.  But  if  the  Govern- 
ment's attitude  is  clearly  antagonistic 
to  the  temperance  cause  its  example 
must  shape  the  inclinations  of  the  States ; 
moreover,  the  encouragement  that  the 
liquor-traders  derive  from  so  powerful  a 
patron  must  advance  their  interests  in  all 
parts  of  the  country,  advance  them  by 
the  negative  force  of  disfavor  for  Pro- 
hibition and  by  the  positive  results  of 
legislative  provisions  and  official  com- 
plaisance. 

INTERNAL   BE  VENUE. 

The  history  of  Internal  Revenue  legis- 
lation is  outlined  on  pp.  251-4.  It  shows 


1817  the  Internal  taxes  were  again  abol- 
ished and  no  new  ones  were  levied  on 
domestic  liquors  until  1862.  The  act  of 
July  1  of  that  year  became  the  basis  for 
all  the  elaborate  regulations  of  the  pres- 
ent day. 

Taxes  and  Regulations  Since  1862. — 
The  main  provisions,  concerning  liquors, 
of  the  Internal  Revenue  statutes  enacted 


'  The  act  of  1813  prescribed  these  rates:  Stills  using:  do- 
mestic materials  were  to  pay  nine  cents  per  gallon  of  ca- 
pacity if  operated  for  only  two  weeks,  18  cents  if  oper- 
ated for  a  month,  3'J  cents  if  operated  for  two  months, 
42  cents  if  operated  for  three  months,  52  cents  if  oper- 
ated for  four  months,  70  cents  if  operated  for  six  months, 
and  $1.08  if  operated  for  a  year  ;  thoc-e  using  foreign  ma- 
terials were  taxed  from  85  cents  per  gallon  of  capacity 
per  month  to  $1.35  per  year.  The  act  of  1814  retained 
these  rates  and  levied  additional  taxes  of  five  cents  per 
gallon  of  capacity  and  20  cents  for  each  gallon  distilled. 
These  additional  taxes  were  removed  by  the  act  of  1816, 
but  the  original  taxes  on  capacity  were  retained  until  1817. 


United  States  Government.] 


G36 


[United  States  Government. 


from  1862  to  1890,  inclusive,  are  shown  in 
the  following  summary: 

Distilled  spirits  and  malt  liquors  are  the  only 
alcoholic  articles  taxed,  domestic  wine '  and 
cider  being  exempt. 

Section  8343  of  the  Revised  Statutes  makes 
the  important  provision  that 

"  The  payment  of  any  tax  imposed  by  the  Internal 
Revenue  Jaws  for  carryin'a;  on  any  trade  or  business  shall 
not  be  held  to  exempt  any  person  from  any  penalty  or 
punishment  provided  by  the  la\v%  of  any  State  for 
carryina:  on  the  same  within  such  State,  or  in  any  manner 
to  autliorize  tlie  commencement  or  continuance  of  such 
trade  or  business  contrary  to  the  laws  of  such  State  or  in 
places  prohibited  by  municipal  law."' 

The  chief  Internal  Revenue  acts  are  those  of 
1862,  1864,  1865,  1866,  1867,  1868,  1872,  1875  and 
1879. 

Taxes  on  Spirits.— Act  of  July  1,  1862,  20 
cents  per  gallon.^  Act  of  March  7,  1864,  60 
cents.  Act  of  June  80,  1864,  spirits  from  what- 
ever materials  except  grapes,  $1.50;  from 
grapes,  25  cents.  Act  of  Dec.  22,  1864,  spirits 
from  whatever  materials  except  grapes,  to  April 
1,  1865,  $2;  from  whatever  materials  except 
apples,  grapes  and  peaches,  after  April  1,  1865, 
$2.  Act  of  March  8,  1865,  spirits  from  grapes, 
50  cents;  from  apples  and  peaches,  $1.50.  Act 
of  July  18,  1866,  spirits  from  apples,  peaches 
and  grapes,  $2.  Act  of  July  20,  1868,  spirits 
from  apples  and  peaches,  $2;  from  grapes,  $1. 
Act  of  July  20,  1868,  spirits  from  whatever 
materials,  50  cents.  Act  of  June  6,  1872,  spirits 
from  whatever  materials,  70'  cents.  Act  of 
March  3,  1875  (still  in  force),  spirits  from  what- 
ever materials,  90  cents.  ^ 

Taxes  on  Malt  Liquors. — Act  of  July  1,  1862, 
$1  per  barrel.''  Act  of  March  3,  1863,  60  cents 
per  barrel  until  April  1,  1864,  and  $1  per  barrel 
after  that  date.  (The  tax  has  remained  $1  ever 
since. ) 

Special  Taxes. — The  present  annual  rates  are: 
Brewers  making  more  than  500  barrels  per  year, 
$100;  less,  $50.  Manufacturers  of  stills,  $50, 
and  $20  for  each  still  made.  Rectifiers  pro- 
ducing more  than  500  barrels  ^  per  year,  $200 ; 
less,  $100.  Retail  dealers  in  distilled  liquors," 
$25;  wholesale  dealers  in  distilled  liquors,^  $100. 
Retail  dealers  in  malt  liquors  (selling  not  more 
than  five  gallons  at  a  time,  and  not  dealing  in 
spirituous  liquors),  $20 ;  wholesale  dealers  in 
malt  liquors,  $50. 

Athninistrative  Provisions,  Penalties,  etc.,  of 
the  Present  Law.'' — The  office  of  Commissioner 

1  For  a  short  time,  however  (act  of  1861),  domestic  wine 
made  of  grapes  was  taxed  5  cents  per  gallon.  Imitation 
wines,  prepared  by  mixing/o/'«jg«  wines  witli  spirits,  are 
now  taxed  10  cents  per  pint  (K.  S.,  §  3328). 

2  The  word  gallon,  when  used  in  connection  with  United 
States  taxes  on  spirits,  means  uniformly  fy?'oo7-g'aZ;ow  — 
i.  €.,  a  gallon  one-half  of  whose  volume  is  alcohol. 

3  For  certain  restricted  purposes  spirits  are  excepted 
from  tax.    (See  p  637.) 

■>  The  malt  liquor  barrel  in  the  United  States  contains  31 
gallons  (R.S.,  §3339). 

6  In  the  United  States  a  barrel  of  whiskey  or  spirits 
contains  40  proof  gallons  (R.  S.,  §3244). 

*  Designated  in  Internal  Revenue  parlance  as  "  retail 
liquor-dealers"  and  "  wholesale  li(iuor-deaU'r8,"  respect- 
ively. The  retailer,  in  the  meaning  of  the  Internal 
Revenue  law,  is  one  who  sells  in  quantities  of  not  more 
than  Ave  wine-gallons  at  a  time  (R.  S.,  §3244). 

■^  These  provisions  have  been  developed  gradually.  In 
the  Internal  Revenue  statutes  of  war  times  and  for  some 


of  Internal  Revenue,  as  a  branch  of  the  Treas- 
ury Department,  w.as  created  by  the  act  of  July 
1,  '1862.  The  act  took  effect  Sept.  1,  1862.  The 
Comnn.ssiouer  receives  a  yearly  salary  of  $6,000 
and  has  a  Chief  Clerk,  Deputy  Commissioner 
and  Solicitor.  The  country  is  divided  into  col- 
lection districts,  embracilig  separate  States, 
parts  of  States  or  combinations  of  States  and 
Territories,  and  the  affairs  of  each  district  are 
administered  by  a  Collector.  Under  each  Col- 
lector are  storekeepers  and  gangers,  assigned  to 
the  different  distilleries  and  charged  with  the 
duty  of  closely  watching  all  the  details  of 
manufacture  and  having  custody  of  the  liquors 
until  the  tax  is  paid.  No  revenue  officer  shall 
be  interested  in  the  manufacture  (R.  S.,  45  3168). 

Ever}'  one  liable  to  the  fax  must  make  de- 
tailed annual  returns,  according  to  the  forms  of 
the  Department;  and  any  one  neglecting  to  do 
this,  or  making  false  returns,  may  be  summoned 
to  testify  (§  3178);  and  the  Collector  or  his  Dep- 
uty may  enter  the  premises  and  make  up  the 
returns  from  his  own  observations  and  such 
evidence  as  he  can  get,  adding  100  per  cent,  in 
case  of  a  fraudulent  return  or  50  per  cent,  in 
case  of  no  return  (§  3176);  and  officers  may  at 
any  time  enter  the  premises,  resistance  or  res- 
cue of  property  to  be  punished  by  line  of  $500, 
or  double  the  value  of  the  property,  or  impris- 
onment not  exceeding  two  years  (^  8177). 
Monthly  retiu'ns  also  are  required,  with  monthly 
payment  of  taxes,  a  penalty  of  5  per  cent.,  with 
an  additional  1  per  cent,  per  month,  being  as- 
sessed in  case  of  delay  (§  3185).  The  tax  is  a 
lien  iqjon  all  the  property,  and  maybe  collected 
by  distraint,  and  real  estate  may  be  seized  for 
taxes  (§  8186-97). 

If  substances  are  added  to  create  a  fictitious 
proof  the  penalty  is  imprisonment  three  months 
to  six  years,  and  $100  to  $1,000  fine,  and  fori- 
feiture  of  the  liquor  (§  3252).  Penalty  for 
evading  the  tax,  double  the  amount  of  the  tax 
(§3256);  for  defrauding  the  United  States,  for- 
feiture of  the  distillery  and  apparatus  and  spir- 
its on  hand,  and  fine  of  $500  to  $5,000,  and  im- 
prisonment six  months  to  three  years  (§3257). 

Any  person  having  a  still  must  register  exact 
particulars  with  the  Collector,  on  pain  of  $100 
to  $1,000  tine  and  imprisonment  one  month  to 
two  years  (§3258).  Every  manufacturer  of 
stills  must  give  notice  of  each  still  made  and 
the  name  of  the  person  who  is  to  use  it  (§  8265). 
Stills  cannot  be  used  in  or  about  any  dwelling- 
house  or  boat,  or  any  premises  where  malt 
liquor  or  vinegar  or  ether  is  produced  or  sugar 
is  refined, or  where  any  other  business  is  carried 
on  (§  3266). 

Each  distiller  must  give  bond  not  less  in 
amoimt  than  the  tax  on  his  capacity  for  15  days 
(§  8260).  A  minute  plan  of  each  distillery  must 
be  filed  with  the  Commissioner  and  Collector 
and  posted  on  the  premises  (§  3263).  No  dis- 
tilling shall  be  done  between  11  p.m.  Saturday 


years  subsequently  the  penalties  were  comparatively 
weak  and  the  regulations  were  in  no  respects  so  exacting 
as  the  present  ones.  The  tirst  act  prescribed  a  fine  of 
$.500  for  fraudulent  marking  of  goods,  and  a  tine  of  S-'JOO 
with  forfeiture  of  the  goods  in  question  for  defrauding 
the  revenue.  Frauds  were  so  numerous  that  in  1864  the 
penalty  for  making  false  returns  or  no  returns  was  a  .50 
percent  increase  of  the  tax  and  a  fine  of  $1,000.  Impris- 
onment was  not  then  required. 


United  States  Government.] 


037 


[United  States  Government. 


and  1  A.M.  Monday  (^  3383).  In  each  distillery 
shall  he  a  receivini^^-eisteru  capahle  of  holding 
24  hours'  product  and  so  constructed  as  to  be 
elevated  from  the  floor  and  not  to  reach  the  ceil- 
ing, and  to  enable  the  officer  to  pass  all  around 
it;  and  this  cistern  and  the  room  in  which  it 
is  placed  shall  be  under  the  lock  and  seal  of  the 
ganger,  and  spirits  can  be  removed  from  it  only 
under  his  supervision  (§32(57);  and  anyone  tam- 
pering with  the  cistern  is  liable  to  fine  of  $.100 
to  $5,000  and  imprisonment  one  to  three  years 
(§  3288);'  and  all  furnaces,  tubs,  doublers,  worm 
tanks  and  pipes  are  to  be  built  with,  clear  space 
about  them  so  that  officers  can  have  easy  access 
to  them  (§3239);  and  the  Commissioner  may 
order  any  changes  made'  about  the  distillery 
premises  that  he  may  deem  necessary  (§  3270); 
and  keys  to  distilleries  must  be  furnished  to 
officers,  who  may  enter  at  any  time  of  the  day 
or  night  (§3278);  and  officers  may  break  up 
ground  or  walls  in  order  to  search  for  pipes, 
cocks  or  other  means  of  conveying  or  conceal- 
ing spirits,  mash  or  wort  (§3278);  and  no  recti- 
fying establishment  or  vinegar '  factory  can  be 
nearer  than  600  feet  to  a  distillery  (§§  3280, 
3282a). 

Every  distillery  must  have  a  warehouse  on  its 

__j>remises  for  the  storage  of  spirits  in  bond  until 
the  tax  is  paid,  to  be  in  charge  of  the  store- 
keeper and  under  the  joint  management  of 
storekeeper  and  proprietor  (§  3274).  Spirits  may 
remain  in  the  warehouse  for  three  years  from 
the  day  of  manufacture,  but  no  longer  ;  and  the 
tax  must  be  paid  not  later  than  three  years  after 
spirits  are  deposited  in  the  warehouse  (§  8293); 
but  the  distiller  may  remove  the"  goods  at  any 
time  upim  payment  of  the  tax  (§  3294).  If 
spirits  are  removed  to  any  place  but  a  bonded 
warehouse  the  tax  must  be  paid  immediately 
(§  3253);  but  spirits  for  export  ere  not  taxed 
(§  3330).^ 

The  taxes  on  spirits  accidentally  destroyed 
are  to  be  remitted  (§  3221),  unless  insured 
(§  3223).  Allowance  is  made  for  leakage  in  ac- 
cordance with  a  fixed  scale  of  maximums 
(§  3294  a).  The  tax  is  remitted  on  alcohol 
withdrawn  for  chartered  scientific  institutions 
and  colleges,  provided  this  alcohol  is  to  be  used 
solely  for  preserving  specimens  or  for  experi- 
ments,   etc.,    in   chemical  laboratories  (§  3297). 

/An  act  of  1890   provides   that  any   wine-maker 

/  may  withdraw  from  a  bonded  warehouse  spirits 

distilled   from   grapes  to   be  used  in  fortifying 

sweet  wines,  and  that  grape   spirits   thus   with- 

\    drawn  shall  be  free   from  tax.  ^    The  United 

\    States   Government   may    purchase    spirits    or 

I  liquors   of  any   kind   without   paying  the   tax 

U§  34G4). 

The  Commissioner,  with  the  approval  of  the 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  may  exempt  dis- 
tillers of  brandy  made  exclusively  from  apples, 
grapes  or  peaches  from  various  provisions  of 
the  Internal  Revenue  laws,  *  but  not   from  the 

'  Viiie2;ar  must  not  coutaiu  over  2  per  cent,  of  alcohol 
(§  3283«). 
2  Fermented  Jiquors  exported  are  also  exempt  from 

tax  (§34411. 

' — -  3  Enacted  at  the  demand  of  the  California  wine  manu- 
facturers. 

■"  This  section  operates  as  a  practical  susppusion  of  tho 
ordiiiar3'  Internal  Revenue  regulations  so  far  as  fruit  dis- 


tax  (§  3255);  and  grain  distillers  whose  daily 
capacity  is  only  30  gallons  may  be  exempted 
from  certain  provisions  (§3255  a). 

Sections  3287-3334,  covering  30  pages,  em- 
body the  most  minute  directions  for  gauging, 
warehousing,  stamping  and  moving  spirits,  all 
devised  for  the  purpose  of  keeping  the  product 
constantly  under  the  eye  of  the  Government 
officers  until  the  tax  is  paid. 

Brewers  do  not  pay  taxes  on  the  malt  or  other 
materials  that  they  use,  but  solely  on  the  beer, 
at  the  rate  of  $1  per  barrel  of  31  gallons 
(§  3337  a).  They  must  make  monthly  returns 
to  the  Collector  (§§  3337-8).  Any  brewer 
evading  the  tax  or  making  false  entries  is  sub- 
ject to  fine  of  $500  to  $1,000,  and  imprisonment 
for  not  more  than  a  year,  and  forfeiture  of  his 
brewery,  all  its  apparatus  and  all  the  beer  on 
hand  (§  3340).  Any  brewer  failing  to  keep 
books,  or  to  furnish  accounts  to  the  Collector, 
or  refusing  to  permit  the  proper  officer  to  ex- 
amine his  books,  shall  pay  $300  (§  3340). 

A  special  tax  payment  covers  only  one  place 
of  business  and  one  business  (§§  3234-6). 
Everyone  must  keep  his  special  tax  stamp  con- 
spicuously posted  in  his  place  of  business  on 
penalty  of  double  the  amount  of  the  special  tax 
(§  3239).  A  list  of  special  taxpayers  must  be 
kept  conspicuously  in  each  Collector's  office 
(§  3240).  A  manufacturer  of  or  dealer  in  distilled 
spirits  who  fails  to  pay  the  special  tax  is  liable 
to  a  fine  of  $100  to  $5,000,  and  imprisonment  30 
days  to  two  years,  and  forfeiture  of  the  liquor 
and  apparatus.  '  A  malt  liquor  manufacturer  or 
dealer  not  pajing  the  special  tax  must  pay  a  fine 
not  exceeding  $500. 

IMPORTED  LIQUOHS. 

The  rates  of  duty  levied  on  imported 
liquors  by  different  United  States  tariff 
laws  are  indicated  below : 

Act  of  1789. — Spirits  of  Jamaica  proof,  10 
cents  per  gallon;  all  others,  8  cents.  Madeira 
wine,  IS  cents;  all  other  wines,  10  cents.  Beer, 
ale  or  porter  in  casks,  5  cents  per  gallon;  cider, 
beer,  ale  or  porter  in  bottles,  20  cents  per  dozen; 
malt,  10  cents  per  bushel. 

Act  of  1790. — Spirits,  12  to  25  cents,  according 
to  proof.  Madeira  wine,  30  and  35  cents;  sherry, 
25  cents;  other  wines,  20  cents.  Malt  liquors 
and  malt,  no  change.     Cider,  free. 

Act  0/1791.— Spirits,  20  to  40  cents. 

Act  of  1792. — Spirits  (grain),  28  to  50  cents; 
others,  25  to  46  cents.  Madeira  win^e,  40  to  56 
cents;  sherry,  33  cents;  St.  Lucas,  30  cents; 
Lisbon,  25  cents  ;  Oporto,  25  cents  ;  Teneriffe 
and  Fayall,  20  cents  ;  all  other  wines,  40  per 
cent,  ad  valorem,  not  to  exceed  30  cents  per 
gallon.     Malt  liquors,  8  cents. 

Act  of  1795. — Wines,  in  no  case  less  than  10 
cents. 

Act  of  1800. — Wines,  from  23  cents  to  58  cents. 

Act  of  1816.— Spirits  (grain),  42  to  70  cents. 
Wines,  25  cents  to  $1.  Malt  liquors  in  bottles, 
15  cents;  others,  10  cents. 

Act  of  1819. — Duties  on  non-enumerated  wines 
reduced  from  70  and  25  cents  to  30  and  15  cents. 

tillers  arc  concerned.  These  distillers  are  not  subject  to 
th.-  constant  espionage  that  grain  distillers  must  endure. 
(See  footnote,  p.  375.) 


United  States  Government.] 


638 


[Unit3d  Soates  Government. 


Art  of  1S28. — Spirits,  15  cents  in  addition  to 
the  existing  rate. 

Act  of  1882.— French  wines,  until  1834,  6 
cents  for  red  and  10  cents  for  white  when  in 
casks,  and  23  cents  per  gallon  when  in  bottles; 
after  1834,  half  these  rates;  other  than  French 
wines,  half  the  existing  rates. 

Act  of  18SG. — Wines,  duties  reduced  one-half. 

^c/!o/"  1842.— Brandy,  $1;  other  spirits,  60  to 
90  cents.  Wines,  6  to  60  cents.  Malt  liquors 
in  bottles,  20  cents;  others,  15  cents. 

Act  0/1861. — Brandy  of  first  prooi,  |1;  other 
spirits,  40  cents  for  first  proof  and  proportion- 
ately larger  rates  for  higher  proofs.  Wines,  40 
per  cent.  Malt  liquors  in  bottles,  25  cents; 
others,  15  cents. 

Act  of  1862. — Brandy  of  first  proof,  25  cents; 
other  spirits,  50  cents;  cordials  and  liqueurs,  25 
cents.    Malt  liquors,  5  cents. 

Act  of  IHdS. — Spirits,  40  cents  in  addition  to 
existing  duties. 

Act  of  1864.— Brandy,  $2.50;  other  spirits, 
$2.  Champagne,  $6  per  dozen  quart  bottles  ; 
other  wines,  20  cents  to  $1,  according  to  value, 
and  25  per  cent,  ad  valorem.  Malt  liquors  in 
bottles,  35  cents;  others,  20  cents. 

Act  of  1865. — Spirits,  50  cents  in  addition  to 
existing  rates. 

Act  of  1870.— Spirits,  $2.  Wines  (not  to  con- 
tain over  25  per  cent,  of  alcohol),  champagne, 
same  as  before  ;  others,  25  cents  to  $1  -+-  25 
per  cent,  according  to  value  ;  bottled  wines  to 
pay  3  cents  per  bottle  additional. 

Act  of  1875. — Still  wines  in  casks,  40  cents;  in 
bottles,  $1.60  per  dozen  quarts. 

Act  of  1883.— Spirits,  $2.  Still  wines,  50 
cents;  champagne,  f  7  per  dozen  quart  bottles. 
Malt  liquors  in  bottles,  35  cents;  others,  20 
cents 

Act  of  1890  {McKmlei,-).—Sec  p.  239. 

THE  GOVEENMENT  AND  THE  "  TRADE," 

The  various  revenue  laws  whose  vital 
provisions  we  have  analyzed  have  estab- 
lished the  closest  relations  between  tlie 
representatives  of  the  Government  and 
the  representatives  of  the  liquor  busi- 
ness. The  extent  to  which  the  Govern- 
ment depends  on  the  traffic  for  its  in- 
come is  shown  by  the  following  state- 
ment of  receipts  during  the  year  ended 
June  30,  1890 1; 

Internal  Revenue  from  liquors $107,695.9(19.83 

all  other  sources      34  910.79.5.98 

Customs  receipts  from  liquors 8,.526.496.16 

all  other  sources    221,142,088.41 

Roceipts  from  public  lands 6,358,272  51 

Miscellaneous  receipts     24,447,419.74 

Total  receipts $403,080,982.63 

from  liquors 116,222.405.99 

Thus  29  per  cent,  of  the  entire  revenue 
in  1890  was  from  the  men  manufactur- 
ing, importing  and  selling  liquors.  It 
has  never  been  the  policy  of  the  Govern- 

'  Figures  of  total  receipts  are  from  tlie  report  of  the 
Scert'tary  of  the  Treasury ;  figures  of  receipts  from 
liquors  are,  respectively,  from  the  report  of  the  Com- 
missioner  of  Internal  Revenue  and  the  report  on  Com- 
merce and  Navigation. 


ment,  and  is  not  now,  to  betray  moral 
compunctions  in  taking  its  share  of  the 
profits  of  the  drink  trade.  In  the  very 
latest  report  of  the  Commissioner  of  In- 
ternal Revenue  that  official  declares  that 
he  is  "  gratified  to  state  "  that  the  Inter- 
nal Revenue  receipts  have  exceeded  his 
estimates. "  The  entire  traffic,  from  the 
national  point  of  view,  has  enjoyed 
steady  growth  and  a  constantly  increas- 
ing power  since  the  Government  came 
into  formal  association  with  it.  (For  de- 
tails, see  pp.  128-31,  372-8.)  Indeed, 
the  connection  may  be  truthfully  de- 
scribed as  a  partnership.  The  Govern- 
ment, through  eminent  officials,  has  been 
at  pains  to  express  warm  friendship  for 
the  interests  of  the  liquor  men,  and  by 
practical  acts  has  manifested  great  favor 
for  them. 

Fostering  the  Brewing  Trade. — The 
annual  reports  of  the  United  States 
Brewers'  Association  constitute  an  instruc- 
tive record.  At  the  first  meetings  of  the 
Association,  held  soon  after  the  Internal 
Revenue  act  of  July  1,  1862,  took  etfect, 
steps  were  taken  to  secure  a  reduction  of 
the  tax  on  beer,  and  this  was  accom- 
plished ;  moreover  the  reports  state  that 
special  efforts  for  favorable  legislation  at 
Washington  were  highly  successful.  In 
1865  a  representative  of  the  Internal 
Revenue  office  (Mr.  Wells)  attended  the 
Brewers'  Convention  (Baltimore,  Oct.  18), 
and  said : 

"It  is  the  desire  of  the  Government  to  be 
thoroughly  informed  of  the  requirements  of  the 
trade,  and  I  will  give  information  on  all  ques- 
tions, in  order  to  bring  about  a  cordial  under- 
standing between  the  Government  and  the  trade. " 

At  the  Convention  of  1871  (Pittsburgh, 
June  7),  another  representative  of  the 
Department,  Mr.  Louis  Schade,  was  pres- 
ent. "  I  have  the  more  readily  accepted," 
said  he,  "  to  comply  with  the  request  of 
the  Commissioner  of  Internal  Revenue, 
inasmuch  as  I  hope  that  by  means  of  this 
mission  I  may  be  of  advantage  to 
you.  .  .  .  My  convictions  and  feelings 
are  with  you,  and  all  I  can  do  for  you 
will  be  done."  The  next  year  Mr.  C.  A. 
Bates  was  sent  to  the  Brewers'  Conven- 
tion (New  York,  June  5  and  6)  to  offi- 
cially speak  for  the  Government.  He 
said : 

"  Let  us  take  no  backward  step.  I  say  us, 
for  I  am  with  you.     The  Commissioner  of   In- 

2  Report  for  1890,  p.  3. 


United  States  Government.] 


G39 


[United  States  Government. 


ternal  Revenue  is  with  you.     The  President  is 
with  you." 

In  1873  (Cleveland,  June  4)  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  Government  in  attend- 
ance were  H.  0.  Rogers  and  Louis  Schade. 
In  1877  (Milwaukee,  June  G)  the  Con- 
vention received  a  letter  from  the  Com- 
missioner of  Internal  Revenue,  Green  B. 
Raum,  who  wrote: 

' '  I  am  glad  to  learn  that  the  conduct  of  this 
Bureau  lias  been  satisfactory  to  such  an  im- 
portant body  of  taxpayers  as  the  brewers  of  the 
United  States,  and  I  trust  that  nothing  will 
occur  to  disturb  the  friendly  relations  now  ex- 
isting between  this  office  and  your  Association." 

Commissioner  Raum  appeared  person- 
ally at  the  Convention  of  1878  (Balti- 
more, June  5),  and  said : 

' '  In  regard  to  the  system  of  Internal  Revenue, 
I  recognize  it  simply  as  a  code  of  laws  for  the 
collection  of  revenues,  not  for  the  regulation  of 
men's  business,  becau.se  I  think  the  less  the  Gov- 
ernment has  to  do  in  putting  its  nose  in  men's 
business  the  better.  .  .  .  I  take  plea.su  re  in  bear- 
ing witness  that  you  have  an  officer  at  Washing- 
ton who  has  at  all  times  aided  me  in  the  enforce- 
ment of  the  law,  and  has  given  advice  in  bring- 
ing about  such  rulings  that  seem  proper  for  the 
enforcement  of  the  law." 

In  1884  the  Commissioner  of  Internal 
Revenue,  Walter  Evans,  responding  to 
the  invitation  to  be  present  at  the  Con- 
vention (Rochester,  May  21  and  23), 
wrote :  "  I  assure  yoti  of  my  best  wishes 
for  the  success  of  your  Association." 
The  Convention  of  1890  (Washington, 
May  21  and  22)  was  graced  with  the 
presence  of  the  Commissioner,  John  W. 
Mason,  who  made  a  very  fulsome  speech, 
saying,  in  part : 

"Our  business  relations  for  the  last  year  have 
been  quite  extensive,  and  I  may  say — speaking 
for  the  officers  of  the  Commission  of  Internal 
Kevenue — that  they  have  been  of  a  pleasant 
character.  In  order  that  they  may  continue  so, 
and  that  the  pleasant  features  of  the  connection 
may  as  far  as  possible  be  increa.sed,  it  is  very 
desirable  that  the  Commissioner  should  know 
you  all  personally  and  that,  personally,  he 
should  know  your  wishes.  .  .  .  Having  paid 
that  amount  of  money  [revenue]  you  are  entitled 
to  expect  that  such  restrictions  only  shall  be  im- 
po.sed  upon  you  as  are  necessary  to  enable  the 
Government  to  secure  the  regular  revenue.  .  .  . 
You  are  all  business  men,  engaged  in  a  lawful 
business  and  entitled  to  pursue  that  bu.sine.ss  un- 
trammeled  by  any  regulation  of  the  office  of  the 
CJommissioner  of  Internal  Revenue,  except  in 
so  far  as  may  be  necessary  for  the  purpose  of 
collecting  the  revenue.  ...  If  there  be  any 
regulations  or  anything  whatever  pertaining  to 
the  office  which  you  may  deem  unreasonable  or 
unnecessary,  I  beg  that  you  will  not  he-sitate  to 
express  your  views." 


Such  expressions  as  these  make  it  clear 
that  the  United  States  Government  has 
been  uniformly  engaged,  since  the  earli- 
est days  of  the  present  Internal  Revenue 
system,  in  fostering  the  brewing  "in- 
dustry." At  many  of  the  National 
Brewers'  Conventions  the  most  violent 
and  scurrilous  attacks  were  made  upon 
the  temperance  advocates,  the  clergy  and 
the  women  of  the  land.  Moreover,  these 
Conventions  frequently  adopted  formal 
resolutions  assailing  the  advocates  of 
temperance  reform,  deliberately  avowing 
selfish  political  designs  and  inciting  the 
liquor  element  to  defeat  all  candidates 
for  office  suspected  of  temperance  sym- 
pathies.' Yet  the  highest  officials  of  the 
Internal  Revenue  Department  have  re- 
peatedly shown  their  approval  of  the 
Brewers'  Association,  its  purposes  and  its 
creed.  And  in  1889  (Dec.  15)  the  De- 
partment of  State  addressed  to  all  our 
Consular  officers  in  Mexico,  Central  and 
South  America  and  the  West  Indies 
a  circular  letter,  at  the  instance  of  '*'  the 
leading  maltsters  and  brewers  of  the 
United  States,"  requesting  stich  infor- 
mation as  would  enable  them  to  "  fully 
understand  the  requirements  necessary 
to  successful  trade  in  each  district."  '^ 

The  Government  and  the  Whiskey 
Men. — In  its  relations  with  the  whiskey 
men  the  Government  has  been  no  less 
friendly  and  considerate.  The  great 
whiskey  frauds  of  1873-5,  by  which  (ac- 
cording to  Daniel  D.  Pratt,  Commis- 
sioner of  Internal  Revenue  ^)  the  Treas- 
ury was  robbed  of  at  least  $4,000,000,were 
made  possible  by  the  complicity  of  high 
officials.*     These  frauds  led   to   a  more 

'  See  '•  Non-Partisanship,  or,  Do  Not  Take  Temperance 
into  Politics,"  by  G.  H.  Carrow  (Philadelpliia),  pp.7,  9, 
16,  20,  41,  55,  61,  67,  94,  113  and  146. 

•^  See  the  Voice,  Dec.  25,  1890,  and  Jan.  8,  1891. 

3  See  the  "  Annual  Cyclop.-edia"  for  1875,  pp.  665-7. 

■•  The  frauds  of  1873-5  were  not  exceptional.  From  the 
beginnino;  of  the  Internal  Revenue  system  it  has  l)epn 
recognized  that  the  distillers  are  thoroughly  unscrui)U- 
lous,  eager  to  rob  the  Government  whenever  opportunity 
offers.  'If  all  the  various  means  resorted  to  by  many 
modern  distillers  for  the  accomplishment  of  tlieir  de- 
signs upon  the  revenue  and  its  officers  could  be  truth- 
fully written."  says  the  Intrrnal  Revenue  report  for 
1867.  p.  20,  "the  very  safety  of  our  Institutions  might 
well  be  questioned."  In  two  fiscal  years  (1876  and  1877) 
the  Government  seized  837.950  callous  of  distilled  spirits 
because  of  violations  of  the  law.  After  the  exposure  of 
the  whiskey  frauds,  and  notwithstanding  tlie  severe 
punishment  administered  to  individuals  concerned,  tne 
lawless  spirit  of  the  distillers  still  gave  the  Government 
infinite  trouble.  The  Internal  Revenue  report  for  18S3 
(p.  17)  shows  that  in  the  five  years  1878-82  4.532  illicit 
stills  were  seized  and  that  in  inakii;g  the  seizures  23  offi- 
cers and  employes  were  killed  and  53  were  wounded. 

And  the  brewers  have  had  tlieir  share  in  the  onspira- 
cies.  Accoiding  to  the  report  oi  the  Convention  of  the 
United  States  Brewers"  Association  for  1805,  Mr.  Wells, 


United  States  Government.] 


640 


[United  States  Government. 


stringent  enforcement  of  the  regulations, 
but  the  Federal  executives  have  been 
tenderly  regardful  of  the  desires  of  the 
whiskey  trade  in  shaping  public  policy. 
The  reckless  overproduction  of  whiskey 
in  certain  years  caused  a  stringency  in 
tlie  market  and  financially  embarrassed 
the  distillers.  Other  manufacturers 
would  have  been  expected  to  adjust  their 
own  trade  affairs  and  to  suffer  the  con- 
sequences of  imprudence.  Not  so  with 
the  whiskey-producers.  They  demanded 
that  the  Government  should  practically 
remit  taxes,  and  present  them  with  hun- 
dreds of  thousands  of  dollars,  by  extend- 
ing that  very  generous  provision  of  the 
law  which  permitted  them  to  keep  their 
whiskey  in  bonded  warehouses  for  three 
years  without  paying  taxes.^  Failing  to 
obtain  legislation  from  Congress,  they 
asked  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  to 
arbitrarily  grant  the  desired  relief.  Sec- 
retary Windom  (1881)  refused,  and  for 
this  resolute  act  he  was  most  bitterly  op- 
posed by  the  whiskey  power.  But  on 
Jan.  G,  1885,  Secretary  Hugh  McCulloch 
made  a  ruling  practically  extending  the 
period  for  seven  months;  and  he  also 
sent  to  Congress  a  bill  providing  sub- 
stantially for  an  indefinite  extension. 
In  doing  this  he  took  occasion  to  say : 

"  The  manufacture  of  whiskey  is  one  of  the 
largest  and  most  important  branches  of  domes- 
tic industry  in  the  United  States,  and  is  at  the 
present  time,  like  otlier  manufacturing  interests, 
greatly  suffering  from  over-production.  A  le- 
gitimate business,  from  which  large  revenues 
are  derived,  it  is  not  only  depressed  by  over- 
production, but  by  being  burdened  by  heavy 
taxes,  the  payment  of  which,  as  is  the  case  with 
no  other  article,  is  required  within  a  fixed 
period  whatever  may  be  the  condition  of  the 
market.  .  .  .  Under  existing  laws  the  manu- 
facturers or  holders  of  whiskey  are  compelled 
to  pay  a  tax  amounting  to  nearly  five  times  its 
cost  on  the  article  before  it  is  withdrawn  from 
the  warehouse  for  consumption,  or  to  export  at 
great  expense,  to  be  held  in  foreign  countries 
until  there  is  a  home  demand  for  it,  or  to  be 
sold  in  such  countries  to  the  prejudice  of  our 
public  revenues." 

The  conscienceless  and  dictatorial 
lobby  by  which  the  distillers,  wholesale 
liquor-dealers  and  importers  are  repre- 
sented at  Washington  is  the  power  that 


officially  representing  the  Internal  Revcnne  office,  \vas 
present  ou  that  oci  asion  and  said:  "  B.y  statistical  re- 
ports it  has  be<,'n  proven  t!iat  6.0iil).0i)0  barrels  of  licer 
are  brewed  anuiuilly,  while  only  2,.")01).0a0  paid  tax." 

'  The  bonded  period,  up  to  March  2S,  1«79,  was  only 
one  year.  But  ou  that  date  Cou.'ress  extended  it  to 
three  years,  at  the  urgent  solicitation  of  the  distillers. 


determines  the  action  of  Congress  on 
measures  affecting  the  "trade."  Bon- 
fort's  Wine  and  Spirit  Citrnlar  (Oct. 
lU,  1890)  relates  that  during  the  debate 
on  the  McKinley  Tariff  bill  Senator 
Plumb  proposed  amendments  largely  in- 
creasing the  duties  on  wines  and  spirits, 
and  that  the  effect  of  their  adoption 
would  have  been  to  decrease  the  con- 
sumption of  these  articles,  increase  the 
amount  of  capital  necessary  to  carry  on 
the  business,  and  cause  a  loss  to  the 
trade  "lightly  estimated  at  $3,000,000 
per  annum."  The  Wine  and  Spirit 
Traders'  Society  rallied  its  forces  and 
brought  "  pressure  "  upon  the  Senators 
and  Kepresentatives  in  the  familiar  and 
brutal  fashion;  and  Congress  obediently 
rejected  the  amendments. 

The  Inquiry  Bill. — Very  instructive  is 
the  continued  refusal  of  Congress  to  per- 
mit any  national  investigation  of  the 
results  of  Prohibitory  and  license  sys- 
tems and  the  general  aspects  and  conse- 
quences of  the  drink  traffic.  Congress 
ordinarily  resjjonds  promptly  and  gra- 
ciously to  appeals  for  its  co-operation 
from  citizens  who  desire  official  informa- 
tion touching  matters  of  interest ;  it  has 
appointed  Commissions  to  inquire  into 
the  grasshopper  plague,  the  diseases  of 
cattle,  etc.  For  nearly  20  years  it  has 
been  petitioned  at  each  session  to  name 
a  strictly  impartial  "  Commission  of  In- 
quiry Concerning  the  Liquor  Traffic." 
The  petitioners  have  been  very  moderate 
in  suggesting  the  powers  of  the  proposed 
Commission  and  other  details,  and  have 
proposed  the  modest  sum  of  $10,000  as  a 
suitable  apjDropriation.'  But  though 
the  bill  has  repeatedly  passed  the  Senate 
it  has  invariably  met  defeat  in  the  House 
of  Representatives.^  For  its  rejection  in 
the  last-mentioned  body  the  Democratic 
party  has  been  responsible  in  most  in- 
stances; and  the  behavior  of  Speaker 
Carlisle,  who  organized  the  Alcoholic 
Liquor  Traffic  Committee  of  the  House 
with  a  view  to  the  suppression  of  this 
and  other  temperance  measures,  has  been 
especially  criticised. 

=  See  the  Voice,  Jan.  9,  1890. 

3  The  Inquiry  bill  was  first  introduced  in  the  Senate 
at  the  requ'^st  of  Mr.  A.  M.  Powell  by  Senator  Pom- 
eroy  of  Kansas,  Feb.  7.  l87-i  The  next  year  it  was  in- 
troduced in  belialf  of  the  National  Temperance  Societ}', 
and  that  organization  has  had  it  in  cliarce  ever  since.  It 
was  passed  by  the  Senate  of  the  43d  Congress  and  of 
each  succeeding  Congress  except  the4titU. 


United  States  Government.]        641        [United  States  Government. 


OTHER     LEGISLATIVE     AND    ADMINISTRA- 
TIVE  DEVELOPMENTS. 

The  other  important  practical  requests 
of  the  Prohibitionists  for  national  action 
against  the    liquor   traffic  have,  almost 
without  exception,  been  denied  both  by 
the  legislative  and    the    administrative 
departments  of  the  Government.      Na- 
tional  legislation    for    the    District    of 
(Jolumbiaand  for  those  Territories  which 
have  a  predominating  white  population 
(except  Oklahoma')  has   never  taken  a 
Prohibitory  tendency.     In  all  the  Terri- 
tories in  question  the  business  of  manu- 
facturing and  selling  liquors  would  be 
absolutely  unrestricted  but  for  the  j^ro- 
visions  independently  adopted  by  their 
local   legislative  bodies.     The  licensing 
of  saloons  in  them  has  been  regarded 
with  complete  indifference  by  the  Fed- 
eral authorities.     The  first  law  enacted 
(in  1787)  by  the  Governor  and  Judges  of 
the    great    Northwest    Territory  (from 
which  five  powerful  States  have  grown) 
was  a  liquor  license  law.     In  1889,  when 
North  and  South  Dakota  were  admitted 
as  States,  the  most  remarkable  features 
of    their     Constitutions    were    articles 
(adopted  by  majority  votes  of  the  ]3eople) 
prohibiting  the  manufacture  and  sale  of 
liquor  for  beverage   purposes;  but  the 
President,  in  his  formal  message  to  Con- 
gress  alluding  to  the  entrance   of    the 
new  States,  made  no  mention  of  the  Pro- 
hibitory  articles.     Bills   providing    for 
Local  Option  in  the  Territories  have  been 
introduced  in  Congress  but  defeated  in 
all  cases. 

In  the  Distinct  of  Columbia,  the  seat 
of  the  Government,  which  is  under  the 
exclusive  jurisdiction  of  Congress,  the 
liquor  laws  are  feebler  than  in  most 
American  cities.  They  are  administered 
by  a  Board  of  District  Commissioners, 
appointed  by  the  President  and  confirmed 
by  the  Senate.  The  maximum  annual 
license  fee  is  only  about  $100.  The  con- 
sent of  a  majority  of  the  property-owners 
and  householders  of  both  sides  of  the 
block  in  which  the  saloon  is  to  be  located 
must   be    obtained    before    license    can 

1  Oklahoma  lies  entirely  within  the  Indian  Territory. 
The  Government  prohibited  liquor  within  the  "  Indian 
country,"  and  when  Oklahoma  was  erected  tliat  prohibi- 
tion naturally  applied  to  it,  since  the  new  region  could 
not  be  reached  without  crossing  the  "  Indian  country." 
But  the  Commissioner  of  Internal  Revenue  (1889)  mado 
an  effort  to  suspend  the  law.  for  the  especial  benefit  of 
the  men  who  desired  to  sell  liquor  in  Oklahoma.  His 
course  was  overruled  by  the  Attorney-General.  (See  the 
Voice,  April  25,  1889.) 


issue.  No  license  can  be  granted  for  a 
place  within  400  feet  of  a  public  school ; 
or  to  any  person  convicted  of  selling 
liquor  to  an  intoxicated  person,  confirmed 
drunkard,  soldier  or  volunteer,^  or  minor, 
or  on  Sunday,  or  between  midnight  and 
4  A.M.;  or  to  anyone  whose  premises 
have  been  used  for  gambling  or  prosti- 
tution ;  or  to  any  woman ;  or  to  a  keeper 
of  a  grocery  or  provision  store ;  or  for  any 
neighborhood  occupied  largely  by  priv- 
ate residences ;  or  "  where  there  are,  in 
the  opinion  of  the  Commissioners,  more 
such  places  than  the  accommodation  of 
the  public  warrants."  These  and  some 
other  restrictions  are  Avorth  little.  The 
annual  cost  of  the  police  force  in  Wash- 
ington is  about  1600,000.  In  1889  there 
were  21,150  arrests  for  all  offenses,  of 
which  7,642  were  for  intoxication,  disor- 
derly conduct  ajid  habitual  drunkenness.^ 
In  the  last  10  years  the  number  of  liquor 
licenses  (retail  and  wholesale)  granted  in 
Washington  has  ranged  from  900  to  1,400. 
Attempts  have  been  made  in  Congress  to 
pass  stricter  liquor  laws  for  the  District 
of  Columbia,  and  to  ^jermit  the  peoj)le  of 
the  District  to  vote  on  the  question  of 
Prohibition,  but  all  have  been  unsuc- 
cessful. 

In  dealing,  however,  with  certain 
phases  of  the  drink  problem,  the  Gov- 
ernment has  not  infrequently  exhibited 
i:)rogressiveness  and  has  given  the  strong- 
est indorsement  to  underlying  principles 
of  the  temperance  reformation.  We  briefly 
notice  below  the  more  important  of  these 
encouraging  performances. 

Indians  (see  also  pj).  245-6,  277  and 
295). — An  act  of  1802  authorized  the 
President  to  take  such  steps  as  might  to 
him  seem  expedient  to  restrain  or  pre- 
vent the  distribution  or  vending  of  spirits 
among  the  Indian  tribes.  In  1815  it  was 
enacted  that  anyone  establishing  a  still 
in  the  Indian  country  should  be  fined 
$500  and  forfeit  the  still  (half  to  the  in- 
former). In  1822  the  President  was  em- 
powered to  direct  Indian  Agents,  Govern- 
ors of  Territories  and  military  officers, 
to  search  the  stores  of  Indian  traders  for 
spirits,  and,  if  any  were  found,  to  con- 
fiscate them  and    revoke    the    trader's 

2  The  sale  to  soldiers  and  volunteers  in  the  District  of 
Columbia  was  prohibited  by  act  of  Congress,  July  14, 
1862. 

'  For  a  diagram  showing  the  saloons  of  Wasliington 
City,  see  the  Voice,  July  24, 1890. 


United  States  Government.] 


643 


[United  States  Government. 


license.  In  1834  the  selling  or  disposing 
of  spiritnous  liqvior  or  wine  to  Indians 
in  the  Indian  country  was  punished  by- 
fine  of  S500;  introducing  spirits  or  wine 
into  the  Indian  country,  by  fine  of  $300 ; 
setting  up  a  still,  $1,000 ;  and  any  person 
in  the  employ  of  the  United  States,  or 
any  Indian,  was  authorized  to  destroy 
liquors  found,  except  military  supplies. 
In  1862  the  penalty  for  selling,  bartering, 
giving  or  introducing  was  decreed  to  be 
a  fine  of  not  more  than  $300  and  im- 
prisonment not  longer  than  two  years. 

Scientific  Temimrance  Instriiction. — 
An  act  providing  for  instruction  in  the 
schools  of  the  District  of  Columbia  and 
Territories,  the  Military  and  Naval 
Academies,  and  all  other  schools  under 
Government  control,  concerning  the 
nature  and  effects  of  alcoholic  liquors, 
was  passed  by  Congress  in  1886  and 
signed  by  the  President. 

.  Army  and  N?ivy. — The  regulations 
concerning  the  sale  and  use  of  intoxi- 
cants in  the  army  and  navy  have  under- 
gone a  marked  change. 

An  act  of  the  Continental  Congress, 
Nov.  4,  1775,  directed  that  there  should 
be  issued  daily  to  each  soldier  a  pint  of 
milk  and  a  quart  of  spruce  beer  or  cider, 
but  no  spirit  ration  was  prescribed. 
April  30,  1790,  it  was  enacted  that  every 
man  should  have  half  a  gill  of  rum, 
brandy  or  whiskey  daily.  In  1794  the 
President  was  authorized  to  increase  the 
quantity  to  a  gill  for  troops  on  the  fron- 
tiers. In  1795  a  uniform  ration  of  half 
a  gill  was  ordered.  In  1799  command- 
ing officers  were  given  discretionary 
powers,  the  ration  to  be,  as  before,  half  a 
gill.  In  1802  this  was  increased  to  a  gill. 
In  1804  it  was  provided  that  an  equiva- 
lent of  malt  liquors  or  wine  might  be 
substituted  for  spirits  at  such  seasons  of 
the  year  as,  in  the  opinion  of  the  Presi- 
dent, it  might  be  desirable  to  make  the 
change,  in  order  to  promote  the  health 
of  the  soldiers.  In  1812  a  gill  of  rum, 
whiskey  or  brandy  was  made  a  part  of 
the  regular  daily  ration.  In  1818  power 
was  given  the  President  to  make  such 
changes  in  the  component  parts  of  the 
ration  ^  as  he  should  think  for  the  best, 


'  In  this  year  John  C.  Calhoun,  Secretary  of  War,  in  a 
report  to  Congress  (Dec.  15,  1818),  recommended  that  the 
spirit  ration  in  the  army,  as  a  regular  issue,  be  dispensed 
■with,  declaring  tliat  it  was  "destructive  alike  to  the 
bealtb  and  moral  and  physical  energy  ot  the  soldier." 


with  due  regard  for  health,  comfort  and 
economy.  In  1832  soldiers  were  given 
the  right  to  draw,  instead  of  the  spirit  ra- 
tion, coffee  and  sugar;  and  in  1838,  coffee 
and  sugar,  or  the  money  equivalent.  An 
act  of  1861  allowed  a  gill  of  whiskey 
daily  to  each  man  in  cases  of  excessive 
fatigue  and  exposure,  but  in  1865  the  ra- 
tion was  discontinued  and  it  was  ordered 
that  the  supply  on  hand  should  be  sold. 
In  1881  (Feb.  22)  President  Hayes  issued 
an  order  prohibiting  "the  sale  of  intoxi- 
cating liquors  at  military  posts  and 
stations."  '^  This  order  was  for  the  gov- 
ernment of  post-traders,  or  private  ven- 
dors; and  it  is  still  in  force,  strengthened 
by  the  added  provision  (Sept.  27,  1889) 
that  post-traders  may  sell  beer  and  wine 
only  "  in  unbroken  packages  to  officers 
and  to  canteens."  In  1889  (Feb.  1),  by 
direction  of  the  Secretary  of  War,  the 
sale  and  use  of  ardent  spirits  in  canteens 
at  military  posts  where  there  were  no 
post-traders  were  strictly  prohibited;  but 
authority  was  given  to  permit  the  sale  of 
wines  and  light  beer  by  the  drink,  on 
week  days  only,  in  a  room  used  for  no 
other  j)urpose,  provided  the  commanding 
officer  were  satisfied  that  this  permission 
would  tend  to  prevent  the  men  from  re- 
sorting to  strong  intoxicants  in  places 
outside  army  lines,  and  would  promote 
temperance  and  discipline  among  them ; 
but  it  was  ordered  that  "treating  should 
be  discouraged  under  all  circumstances;" 
and  in  States  or  communities  Avhere  local 
laws  prohibited  the  liquor  traffic,  civil- 
ians living  under  such  laws  were  not  to 
be  allowed  to  visit  the  canteens  for  the  pur- 
pose of  obtaining  beer  or  Avine.  By  an 
order  issued  May  1,  1890,  the  Secretary 
of  War  directed  that  the  foregoing  provi- 
sions as  to  canteens  should  be  retained, 
except  that  no  ardent  spirits  or  wine 
should  be  sold  in  canteens,  sales  of 
"  light  beer  "  only  being  tolerated. 

In  the  navy  ^  the  act  of  1794  provided 
that  a  half-pint  of  spirits  or  a  quart  of 
beer  should  be  a  constituent  of  a  daily  ra- 
tion. The  act  of  1801  did  not  authorize 
the  alternative  beer  ration.  In  1842  the 
ration  was  to  be  a  gill  of  spirits,  but  per- 

'  Construed  to  apply  only  to  spirituous  liquors. 

3  "  Grog  ration  "  was  the  name  by  which  the  spirit  ra- 
tion in  the  navy  was  called.  The  word  "  grog  "  (mean- 
ing spirits  mixed  with  water)  was  coined  by  the  sailors 
under  the  British  Admiral  Vernon  in  the  18th  Century. 
The  Admiral  wore  a  grogram  cloak.  He  required  the 
sailors  to  dilute  their  rum,  and  the  nickname,  "  Old 
Grog"  was  transferred  to  the  weakened  beverage. 


United  States  Government.] 


643 


[United  States  Government. 


sons  under  21  were  not  permitted  to 
draw  the  spirit  ration ;  and  half  a  pint  of 
wine  might  be  given  instead  by  way  of 
variety ;  and  butter,  cheese,  raisins,  dried 
fruit,  pickles  or  molasses  might  be  sub- 
stituted; and  sailors  might  take  the 
value  in  money.  In  1861  the  ration  ,vas 
made  a  gill  of  spirits,  with  the  right  to 
draw  half  a  pint  of  wine,  or  provisions, 
or  money  instead.  In  1862  (Sept.  1)  an 
act  was  passed  declaring  that  the  spirit 
ration  in  the  navy  should  cease  forever, 
and  that  no  spirits  should  be  admitted 
on  board  vessels  of  war  except  as  medi- 
cal stores;  and  in  lieu  of  the  ration  five 
cents  per  day  was  added  to  the  pay  of 
each  sailor.  This  is  still  the  law.  Post- 
traders  at  navy-yards  are  not  permitted 
to  sell  or  keep  spirits. 

Thus  the  Government,  after  many  ex- 
periments and  solely  to  improve  the 
physical  welfare  of  the  nation's  defend- 
ers, has  prohibited  spirituous  liquors 
both  in  the  army  and  the  navy.  Even 
wine  is  now  forlaidden  in  the  canteens, 
and  post-traders  are  ordered  not  to  sell 
either  beer  or  wine  to  private  soldiers. 
There  is  a  manifest  tendency  towards  the 
prohibition  of  beer  in  the  canteens ;  any 
commanding  officer  may  prohibit  it  if 
he  desires ;  it  is  under  no  circumstances 
to  be  sold  on  Sundays;  it  is  not,  as  in 
the  old  days,  given  to  the  soldier  as  a 
part  of  his  daily  allowance,  but  must  be 
bought  by  him  if  he  insists  on  indulg- 
ing in  it;  and  the  restricted  sale  is  tol- 
erated only  on  the  supposition  that  if 
the  soldiers  cannot  get  beer  within  the 
lines  they  will  drink  spirits  outside. 

The  African  Rum  Trade,  etc. — While 
the  Government  prohibits,  under  severe 
penalties,  the  sale  of  liquor  to  the  abori- 
gines of  this  country  and  Alaska,  it  has 
not  made  a  consistent  record  in  its  nego- 
tiations with  other  powers  touching  the 
international  liquor  traffic  with  native 
races.  Its  general  disposition  at  present 
is  undeniably  in  favor  of  joining  with 
other  nations  to  prohibit  that  traffic 
when  occasion  is  presented.  But  its 
past  action  has  been  marred  by  the  de- 
liberate refusal  of  Secretary  of  State 
Bayard,  in  the  Cleveland  Administration, 
to  co-operate  with  England  and  other 
countries  in  a  Prohibitory  arrangement 
respecting  alcoholic  liquors,  arms,  am- 
munition and  dynamite  for  the  Pacific 
Islands.     Keplying    to   proposals   from 


the  British  Government,  April  11,  1885, 
Secretary  Bayard  wrote: 

' '  While  recognizing  and  highly  approving 
the  moral  force  and  general  propriety  of  the 
proposed  regulations  and  the  responsibility  of 
conducting  such  traffic  under  proper  and  care- 
ful restrictions,  the  Government  of  the  United 
States  does  not  feel  entirely  prepared  to  join  in 
the  international  understanding  proposed,  and 
will,  therefore,  for  the  present,  restrain  its  ac- 
tion to  the  employment,  in  the  direction  out- 
lined by  the  suggested  arrangement,  of  a  sound 
discretion  in  permitting  traffic  between  its  own 
citizens  in  the  articles  referred  to  and  the  na- 
tives of  the  Western  Pacific  islands."  ' 

The  formal  effort  of  the  State  Depart- 
ment in  the  present  (Harrison)  Adminis- 
tration to  extend  the  American  market 
for  beer  in  Mexico,  Central  and  South 
America — in  countries  having  a  very 
large  uncivilized  population — is  another 
instance  of  hostility  to  philanthropic 
and  Christian  sentiment.    (See  p.  639.) 

Individual  citizens  of  the  United 
States — heartless  men  who  care  not  what 
consequences  may  come  from  their  acts 
if  the  results  are  pecuniarily  profitable — 
have  shipped  and  are  shipping  much  of 
the  atrocious  liquor  that  is  so  destruc- 
tive to  the  savages  of  Africa.  But  the 
representatives  of  the  Government,  both 
in  the  Berlin  Conference  of  1884  and  the 
Brussels  Conference  of  1890,  warmly 
supported  the  Prohibitory  measures  that 
were  proposed.  Alluding  to  the  legisla- 
tion of  the  Brussels  Conference,  William 
F.  Wharton,  Assistant  Secretary  of  State, 
in  a  letter  to  the  editor  of  this  work, 
Dec.  15,  1890,  says:  "The  attitude  of 
the  American  Government  has  been  one 
of  pronounced  hostility  to  the  liquor 
traffic,  which  is  believed  to  be  the  most 
powerful  factor  in  making  African  slav- 
ery possible  because  furnishing  the 
means  of  barter  and  of  brutalizing  the 
natives  so  that  their  enslavement  becomes 
the  easier.  The  repressive  provisions 
adopted  fall  far  short  of  those  proposed 
by  the  delegates  of  the  United  States.'* 
And  a  stringent  Prohibitory  act  for  the 
Samoan  Islands  has  been  adopted  by  the 
joint  consent  of  the  United  States,  Great 
Britain  and  Germany.  (See  footnote, 
pp.  497-8.) 


'  The  London  Times,  commenting  on  the  failure  of 
the  undertaking,  said: 

"  France  gave  her  adherence  almost  immediately,  ott 
condition  of  the  consent  of  the  other  Powers.  At  Berlin 
the  proposal  seems  to  have  been  pigeon-holed;  at  all 
events  no  answer  was  received.  .  .  .  The  United 
States  x&Vi%%,  jomlly  with  Germany .  hear  the  responsibil- 
ity of  allowing  this  disgraceful  traffic  to  continue." 


United  States  Government.] 


644 


[United  States  Government. 


Miscellaneous. — The  ultimate  national 
aim  of  the  temperance  people  is  to  secure 
a  Prohibitory  Amendment  to  the  Federal 
Constitution.  The  first  preparatory  step 
was  taken  in  1876,  when  a  joint  resolu- 
tion providing  for  the  submission  of  such 
an  Amendment  to  the  States  was  intro- 
duced in  Congress.  The  demand  for 
submission  has  been  urged  in  recent 
years  with  considerable  earnestness  in 
both  Houses.  The  Senate  Committee, 
ill  highly  impressive  language,  has  re- 
ported it  favorably,  and  even  the  House 
Committee  rendered  a  favorable  report 
early  in  1891.  These  concessions,  though 
of  little  or  no  practical  value,  indicate  a 
growing  recognition  of  the  issue  in  both 
branches  of  Congress.    (See  pp.  439-42.) 

The  Government's  tacit  admission  of 
the  soundness  of  fundamental  anti- 
liquor  principles  is  further  indicated  by 
the  rules  of  Congress  prohibiting  the  sale 
of  intoxicants  in  the  restaurants  of  the 
Senate  and  House,  and  throughout  the 
Capitol  building.  Similar  rules  are  in 
force  for  the  various  Department  edifices 
and  for  the  Government  buildings  in  all 
parts  of  the  country. 

The  highest  officers  of  the  United 
States  have  frequently  borne  witness  to 
the  evils  of  the  dririk  habit  and  traffic. 
The  declaration  signed  by  12  Presidents 
(see  p.  147)  is  but  a  slight  indication  of 
the  views  which  the  most  eminent  of  men 
unequivocally  express  when  the  occasion 
is  one  of  moral  reflection  and  not  of 
political  expediency.  Numbered  among 
the  Presidents  who  (either  in  private  or 
in  public  life)  have  emphatically  given 
encouragement  to  the  radical  creed,  or 
denounced  the  saloon  in  memorable 
words,  are  Lincoln  (pp.  367-71), 
Hayes  and  Benjamin  Harrison;'  and 
among  the  Vice-Presidents,  Hamlin, 
Colfax  and  Wilson  (p.  650).  The  most 
intense  of  Prohibitionists  would  find 
it  difficult  to  arraign  the  liquor 
traffic  in  more  solemn  or  bitter  terms 
than  those  employed  by  the  late  Secre- 
tary of  the  Treasury,  Hon.  William 
Windom.  ^     Not  all  of  these  men  have 


1  lu  bis  speech  at  Danville,  Ind..  in  1886,  noticed  on 
p.  59:?.  President  (then  Senator)  Harrison,  while  opposing 
State  Prohibition  declared  with  considerable  vigor  against 
the  interference  of  the  liquor-sellers  in  politics. 

2  For  speeches  delivered  by  Mr.  Windom  while  in 
private  life,  sec  the  Voice,  Sept.  SO.  18^6,  and  the  New 
York  Independent,  July  7, 1887.  See  also  the  Voice, 
March  14, 1889. 


been  entirely  committed  to  the  Prohi- 
bition policy,  and  their  official  acts, 
guided  by  untoward  conditions,  have  not 
been  for  aggression  against  the  traffic  as  a 
whole;  but  the  sentiments  that  they  and 
scores  of  other  leading  statesmen  have  so 
weightily  expressed  show  that  the  tem- 
perance agitation,  judged  strictly  by  the 
merits  of  its  underlying  principles  and 
essential  purposes,  is  cordially  approved 
by  the  most  responsible  and  most  con- 
servative men  of  affairs.  When  a  Presi- 
dent of  the  United  States  not  only  ban- 
ishes intoxicants  from  his  private  table 
but  refrains  from  serving  them  at  State 
dinners  and  receptions  (see  pp.  203-4); 
when  the  wife  ^  of  another  President, 
noted  for  his  antagonism  to  Prohibition, 
resolutely  rejects  all  alcoholic  beverages 
on  public  occasions  ;  when  the  families 
of  the  most  prominent  officials  at  Wash- 
ington set  the  fashion  of  refusing  wine 
to  guests  on  New  Year  day,  it  cannot  be 
doubted  that  the  reform  is  steadily 
winning  its  way  in  the  highest  places. 
On  the  other  hand  there  are  many  evi- 
dences that  j)ro-liquor  opinion  and  easy 
social  practices  still  have  a  powerful  hold 
upon  numerous  persons  influential  in 
public  life.  The  procurement  of  a  bar- 
room license  for  a  hotel  owned  by  the 
present  Vice-President,  Levi  P.  Morton, 
was  a  painful  surprise  to  the  country.* 
The  disgraceful  orgies  at  many  balls  and 
banquets  given  under  public  auspices  or 
to  commemorate  important  events,^  and 
the  expenditure  of  large  sums  of  money 
for  liquors  at  celebrations  and  even  at 
public  funerals,"  are  examples  of  the  con- 
tinued and  widespread  prevalence  of  a 
callous  dis2:)osition. 

THE   SUPREME   COURT— THE  GOVERNMEKT 
AND  THE   STATES. 

Legislative  and  administrative  action, 
and  individual  performances  and  opin- 
ion, both  friendly  and  hostile,  are  deter- 
mined to  a  great  extent  by  political  cir- 
cumstances, by  prejudice  and  by  influ- 
ence. However  disinterested  these  are 
in  motive  or  positive  in  results,  their 
tendency,  at  any  given  time,  cannot  be 

'  Mrs.  Cleveland. 

••  See  the  Voice,  Nov.  14  and  Dec.  12,  1889,  and  Jan.  22, 
1891. 

^  Notably  the  ball  in  New  York  City  at  the  Centennial 
of  Washington's  inauguration.  (See  the  Voice,  May  9. 
1889.) 

«  Particularly  the  Yorktown  celebration  and  the  Gar- 
field funeral. 


United  States  Government.]         645         [United  States  Government. 


regarded  by  impartial  students  as  deci- 
sive or  even  as  necessarily  just.  The 
question  whether  Prohibition  is  right- 
eous and  sound,  and  may  properly  be  in- 
augurated by  a  great  Government,  will 
be  most  satisfactorially  answered  if  con- 
sidered by  a  tribunal  removed  from  all 
the  associations  that  sway  parties, 
Legislatures  and  individuals,  and  invest- 
ed with  the  solemn  obligation  to  discrim- 
inate between  conflicting  views.  Such  a 
tribunal  is  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
United  States,  recognized  throughout 
the  world  as  one  of  the  noblest  judi- 
cial bodies  ever  created.  Though 
many  have  suspected  that  the  Supreme 
Court's  decision  in  one  memorable 
case  was  the  culmination  of  a  process 
of  selection  carefully  exercised  by  the 
pro-slavery  Presidents  in  appointing 
the  Judges,  no  taint  of  corruption 
has  ever  been  imputed  to  this  bench.  At 
the  present  day  its  opinion  on  any  vexed 
question  is  accepted  as  the  calmest  opin- 
ion that  can  be  commanded;  and  while 
some  may  believe  that  the  conditions  of 
law  or  custom  which  shape  the  opinion 
ought  to  be  changed,  few  venture  to  se- 
riously criticise  the  interpretation  unless 
there  is  serious  difference  of  opinion  in 
the  Court  itself.  Chosen  from  among 
the  most  mature  and  conservative  men 
of  the  country,  it  cannot  be  supposed 
that  the  Judges  have  any  partisan  pre- 
disposition to  enthusiastic  ideas  or  to  re- 
form movements  as  such. 

The  decisions  of  the  Supreme  Court 
on  the  validity  of  Prohibitory  laws,  cov- 
ering a  period  of  nearly  45  years,  uni- 
formly affirm  not  only  the  soundness  but 
also  the  righteousness  of  all  the  elementary 
principles  and  provisions  involved.  In 
1847,  under  Chief-Justice  Taney,  it  was 
unanimously  held,  in  the  "  License  Ca- 
ses," that  certain  New  England  statutes 
were  not  in  conflict  with  the  Constitu- 
tion of  the  United  States.  The  follow- 
ing are  extracts  from  the  written  opin- 
ions of  individual  Justices  in  these  cases : 

Chief- JuMice  Taney: — "  If  any  State  deems  the 
retail  and  internal  traffic  in  ardent  spirits  inju- 
rious to  its  citizens  and  calculated  to  produce 
Idleness,  vice  or  debauchery,  I  see  nothing  in 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  to  prevent 
it  from  regulating  and  restraining  the  traffic,  or 
from  prohibiting  it  altogether,  if  it  thinks  pro- 
per." 

Justice  McLean: — "The  acknowledged  po- 
lice power  of  a  State  extends  often  to  the  de- 
struction of  property.      A    nuisance   may  be 


abated.     Everything  prejudicial  to  the  health 
or  morals  of  a  city  may  be  removed." 

Justice  Grier  : — "It  is  not  necessary,  for  the 
sake  of  justifying  the  State  legislation  now  un- 
der consideration,  to  array  the  appalling  statis- 
tics of  misery,  pauperism  and  crime  which  have 
their  origin  in  the  use  or  abuse  of  ardent  spirits. 
The  police  power,  which  is  exclusively  in  the 
States,  is  alone  competent  to  the  correction  of 
these  great  evils,  and  all  measures  of  restraint 
or  prohibition  necessary  to  effect  the  purpose 
are  within  the  scope  of  that  authority.  .  .  . 
If  a  loss  of  revenue  should  accrue  to  the  United 
States  from  a  diminished  consumption  of  ardent 
spirits,  she  will  be  the  gainer  a  thousand-fold 
in  the  health,  wealth  and  happiness  of  the  peo- 
ple." 

As  the  provisions  for  the  enforcement 
of  State  Prohibition  became  more  radi- 
.cal,  the  Court  was  asked  to  determine 
the  limitations  of  the  powers  that  the 
States  possessed.  The  broad  ground  was 
taken  by  the  liquor  men  that  they,  as 
tradespeople,  were  unwarrantably  inter- 
fered with  by  enactments  directing  the 
confiscation  of  their  property  without 
compensation,  and  making  them  liable  to 
criminal  penalties ;  for  they  argued  that 
they  were  entitled  to  the  protection  of 
the  Federal  authorities  under  the  terms 
of  the  14th  Amendment,  which  declares 
that  no  State  shall  "deprive  any 
person  of  life,  liberty  or  property  with- 
out due  process  of  law."  Indications  of 
the  final  attitude  of  the  Court  were 
afforded  when,  in  the  case  of  Bartemeyer 
V.  Iowa,  it  said  that  "  so  far  as  such  a 
right  [to  sell  intoxicating  liquor]  ex- 
ists, it  is  not  one  of  the  rights  growing 
out  of  citizenship  of  the  United  States ;  " 
and  when  it  made  the  no  less  significant 
assertion,  in  the  case  of  Stone  v.  Missis- 
sippi, that  "  No  Legislature  can  bargain 
away  the  public  health  or  the  public 
morals.  The  people  themselves  cannot 
do  it,  much  less  their  servants.  Govern- 
ment is  organized  with  a  view  to  their 
preservation  and  cannot  divest  itself  of 
the  power  to  provide  for  them." 

The  unqualified  right  of  a  State  to 
prohibit  the  liquor  business  without  com- 
pensation, to  summarily  punish  violators 
without  jury  trials,  and  even  to  prevent 
the  manufacture  of  liquor  for  one's  own 
use,  was  sustained  (only  one  of  the  eight 
Justices  dissenting)  in  the  famous  "  Kan- 
sas Cases  "  of  1887.  (See  pp.  92-4, 249-51.) 
The  privileges  of  the  States  were  enlarged 
by  the  decision,  in  Kidd  v.  Pearson,  that 
the  manufacture  of  liquor,  though  in- 
tended exclusively   for  sale  in  another 


United  States  Government.] 


646 


[Vinous  Liquors. 


State,  might  be  suppressed.  Finally,  in 
the  Christiansen  case  (1890),  the  general 
principle  that  liquor-dealers  could  have 
no  redress,  on  grounds  of  right,  in  conse- 
quence of  the  prohibition  of  their  busi- 
ness or  refusal  of  licenses,  was  elaborately 
restated  in  exceedingly  strong  language, 
all  the  nine  Justices  assenting.  (See 
pp.  472-3.) 

But  the  authority  assumed  by  the  Pro- 
hibition States  to  forbid  the  importation 
into  their  territory  of  liquor  from  other 
States  and  from  foreign  countries,  and 
the  sale  of  such  liquor  in  the  original 
packages,  has  not  been  sustained  by  the 
Supreme  Court.  It  was  held  in  Bowman 
V.  Railway  Company  (1888)  that  Iowa 
could  not  exclude  liquor  shipped  from 
Illinois,  and  in  Leisy  v.  Hardin  (1890) 
that  even  after  the  delivery  of  Illinois 
liquor  at  its  Iowa  destination  the  local 
authorities  could  not  disturb  persons  dis- 
posing of  it  in  the  unbroken  original 
parcels.  These  decisions  were  based  on 
the  constitutional  ground  that  Congress 
alone  has  power  to  regulate  commerce 
between  the  States  and  with  other  coun- 
tries, although  it  was  intimated  that 
Congress  might  by  statute  permit  sepa- 
rate States  to  keep  out  such  articles  of 
commerce  as  are  declared  contraband  by 
their  laws.  Yet  there  was  a  wide 
divergence  of  view  in  the  Supreme  Court. 
In  the  Bowman  case  three  of  the  nine 
Justices  dissented  (Chief-Justice  Waite 
and  Justices  Harlan  and  Gray),  and  one 
(Lamar)  took  no  part.  In  the  Leisy 
case  Justice  Gray  delivered  an  extended 
dissenting  opinion  (joined  in  by  Justices 
Harlan  and  Brewer),  in  which  he  main- 
tained that  the  law  as  already  laid  down 
by  the  Court  (notably  in  the  "  License 
Cases")  gave  the  States  undoubted 
power  to  suppress  the  "original  pack- 
age "  traffic.  The  action  of  the  majority 
excited  warm  discussion  throughout  the 
country,  and  many  eminent  lawyers  ex- 
pressed the  belief  not  only  that  the  Court 
had  erred  but  that  it  would  reverse  its  de- 
cision when  future  opportunity  should 
enable  it  to  review  its  conclusions.  The 
immediate  effect  was  great  confusion  in 
the  Prohibition  States;  numerous  original 
package  houses  (or  "Supreme  Court 
saloons,"  as  they  were  known  in  some 
places)  were  opened,  and  the  laws  were 
set  at  naught.  In  August,  1890,  Con- 
gress, unable  to  resist  the  demand  for 


justice  to  the  States,  passed  the  Wilson 
bill,  removing  from  the  States  the  dis- 
abilities imposed  by  the  Leisy  decision. 

[The  reader  who  desires  to  know  the  records 
made  by  the  Republican  and  Democratic  par- 
ties, respectively,  in  legislating  or  failing  to  leg- 
islate upon  the  national  aspects  of  the  liquor 
issue,  and  in  administering  the  executive 
departments  of  the  Government,  will  be  able, 
knowing  the  years  in  which  each  party  has  been 
in  power,  to  ascertain  the  chief  facts  from  the 
dates  and  other  particulars  given  in  this  article 
wherever  important  acts  are  noticed.] 

Universalists. — The  General  Con- 
vention of  the  Universalists,  held  in 
Lynn,  Mass.,  October,  1889,  and  repre- 
senting nearly  1,000  parishes,  adopted 
the  following: 

"Resolved,  That  the  Universalists  of 
America,  in  Convention  assembled,  reaffirm 
their  conviction  that  total  abstinence  for  the  in- 
dividual and  Prohibition  of  the  traffic  in  in- 
toxicants by  the  States,  are  the  only  wise 
methods  of  dealing  with  the  drink  problem. 
We  call  upon  all  men  to  beware  of  the  delusion 
of  fancied  safety  in  moderate  drinking  ;  we  call 
upon  the  Christian  Church  in  all  its  branches 
to  be  faithful  in  dealing  with  this  unmitigated 
evil ;  we  call  upon  all  American  citizens  to  de- 
mand of  the  political  party  with  which  they  may 
be  in  sympathy,  fidelity  to  the  highest  interests 
of  the  State  and  Nation  through  sincere  and 
untiring  efforts  for  outlawing  the  traffic  in  in- 
toxicating beverages." 

Utah. — See  Index. 

Vermont. — See  Index. 

Vinous  Fermentation. — See  Fer- 
mentation. 

Vinous  Liquors  are  those  alcoholic 
drinks  resulting  from  the  vinous  fer- 
mentation (see  pp.  174-5)  of  vegetable  sac- 
chariferous  juices  other  than  grain,  grain 
ferments  being  known  by  the  distinctive 
name  of  malt  liquors  (see  pp.  412-14). 
Specifically,  vinous  liquors  are  wines 
from  grapes  ;  but  kindred  articles,  pre- 
pared from  apples,  currants,  gooseber- 
ries, the  saps  of  trees,  etc.,  may  conveni- 
ently be  classified  with  them.  The  art 
of  obtaining  such  beverages  has  been 
practiced  from  the  dawn  of  history. 

WINES  FROM  GRAPES. 

Although  the  grape-vine  (genus  name,  mtis) 
has  more  than  300  known  species,  only  five  or 
six  species  are  of  much  commercial  import- 
ance. These,  however,  are  subdivided  into  nu- 
merous varieties.  In  the  natural  process  of 
manufacture  the  grapes  are  crushed  and  pressed, 
and  the  juice  (called  must)  is  kept  in  tubs  or 
vats  until  fermentation  is  completed,  when  the 
product  is  drawn  off  into  barrels.  Fermenta- 
tion is  commonly  hastened  by  the  addition  of 


Vinous  Liquors.] 


647 


[Vinous  Liquors. 


beer-yeast.  The  quality  of  the  wine  is  affected 
by  the  temperature  at  which  fermentation  takes 
place  ;  when  at  a  high  temperature  the  product 
will  be  richer  in  alcohol  but  poorer  in  bouquet, 
and  vice  versa.  After  the  storage  of  the  wine 
in  barrels  a  second  and  slow  fermentation  be- 
gins, continuing  sometimes  for  several  months, 
and  when  this  is  finished  it  is  racked  off  into 
fresh  casks.  Isinglass  and  other  gelatinous  sub- 
stances are  introduced  to  act  on  the  tannin 
and  clarify  the  liquor  ;  this  process  is  called 
fining.  Various  methods  of  improving  (to  in- 
crease the  quantity  or  alter  the  quality)  are  in 
vogue — especially  chaptalization  (much  em- 
ployed in  the  manufacture  of  Burgundy),  by 
which  an  excess  of  acidity  is  neutralized  by  ad- 
ding marble  dust,  and  the  quantity  and  alco- 
holic strength  are  increased  by  means  of  cane 
or  starch  sugar ;  gallization,  a  method  of  in- 
creasing the  quantity  by  the  infusion  of  sugar, 
acid  and  water,  and  petiolization  or  referment- 
ing  of  the  marc  or  refuse  of  grape-skins,  seeds, 
etc.,  with  a  solution  of  sugar  and  water.  The 
chemical  constituents  of  36  specimens  of  domestic 
wines  analyzed  by  the  United  States  Agricul- 
tural Department,  are  averaged  in  the  follow- 
ing table : 


Constituents. 

Average  Per  Cent,  of 
Constituents. 

16  Sam- 
ples Red 
Wines. 

9  Samples 
White 
Wines. 

11  Sam- 

plesSweet 

Wines. 

Specific  gravity 

.9946 

9.66 
11.95 

1.94 
.611 
.397 
.168 
.068 

.164 
.490 
.290 

.9912 

10.44 

12.94 
1..35 
.665 
.49 
.131 
.153 

.250 
.528 
.220 

1.0261 

14.50 

17.85 

11.21 
.511 
.37 
.101 
.067 

8.48 
.260 
.351 

Alcohol  (by  weight),  % 
"      (  "  volume)  " 
Extract 

Tot.  acids,  as  tartaric. . . 
Fixed  acids,  as  tartaric 
Volatile    "       "  acetic. 

Bitartrate  of  potash 

Reducing  sugars  as  dex- 
trose   

Ash 

/  The  alcoholic  strength  of  wines  is  seldom  the 
/result  of  natural  fermentation.     It  is  imparted 
uhy  fortification,  or  the  addition  of  distilled  spir- 
f  its.     Fortifying  is  now  carried  on  in  all  coun- 
I  tries  without  disguise.     It  is  done  on  so  exten- 
\  sive  a  scale  by  the  California  wine-makers  that 
I  for  their  benefit  a  special  act  has  been  passed  by 
I  Congress  permitting  them  to  use  grape-spirits  in 
their  bu.siness  without  paying  the  Internal  Rev- 
enue tax  on  the  quantities  so  used.  (See  p.  637.) 
The  universal  practice    of  adulterating  wines 
with  cheap  and  dangerous  sub.stances  is  discuss- 
ed on  pp.  7-9.    "  Wine,  so-called,"  says  George 
Walker,  former  Consul-General  of  the  United 
States  to  France,  ' '  is  also  entirely  made  of  other 
substances  than  the   grape,    and  therefore  an 
article  is  often  sold  in  the  markets  which  does 

not  contain  any  true  wine In  order  to 

correct  the  acidity  of  wine  some  unscrupulous 
dealers  make  use  of  litharge.  The  result  is,  the 
persons  who  use  their  wines  are  often  subject  to 
gripes  or  colic,  such  as  afflict  painters."'  State- 
ments like  these,  sustained  by  abundant  shock- 
ing details,  are  made  by  candid  and  competent 
observers  without  number.  The  stupendous 
frauds  perpetrated  by  the  French  vintners  are 

1  Consular  reports,  vol.  6,  p.  562. 


Indicated  by  the  fact  that  in  1887,  as  compared 
with  1875,  the  quantity  of  cheap  Spanish  and 
other  wines  imported  into  France  and  used  for 
"  doctoring  "  purposes  had  increased  64  times. 
(See  p.  479. )  Plastering  is  one  of  the  peculiar 
and  most  reprehensible  of  French  methods  of 
adulteration  ;  it  is  done  by  adding  considerable 
quantities  of  lime,  gypsum  or  alum,  to  height- 
en the  color  of  the  wine  and  to  clarify  it  by  re- 
ducing the  lees  or  dregs.  "  The  ability  to  'doc- 
tor '  and  falsify  wines, "  says  the  United  States 
Agricultural  report  for  1880 (pp.  170-3),  "is not 
lacking  in  this  country,  .  .  .  and  these  prac- 
tices are  in  reality  abetted  by  the  lack  of  knowl- 
edge and  the  depraved  taste  of  the  public  which 
demands  strongly  alcoholic  or  very  sweet  wines. 
.  .  .  The  so-called  American  ports  and  sher- 
ries are  not  to  be  commended,  for  many  of  them 
seem  to  have  been  made  by  bunglers  whose  sole 
object  seems  to  have  been  to  use  the  cheapest 
sugar  or  molasses  and  the  poorest  and  cheapest 
form  of  alcohol,  brandy  or  whiskey.  ...  So 
soon  as  the  professional  improver  is  allowed  to 
use  liis  peculiar  methods  and  formulas  there  is 
no  longer  any  safety." 

The  percentages  of  alcohol  in  wines  vary 
widely.  The  following  table,  including  some 
of  the  best-known  European  wines,  compiled  iu 
part  from  Girardin's  ' '  Chimie  appliquee  aux 
Arts  industriels"  (5th  ed.),  and  in  part  from 
Konig's  "  Nahrungs- und  Genussmittel"  (1880), 
is  taken  from  the  United  States  Dispensatory 
for  1887  : 


Percentages 

Per- 

OF Alcohol. 

WlNE3. 

cent- 

By  Vol- 
ume. 

By 

Weight. 

aces  OF 
Sugar. 

Lisa  (G.) 

23  47 

Madeira,  1870  (K  ) 

19.11 

15  54 

■  . 

1868  (K  ) 

18  81 

15  34 

Sherry,  1870  (K.) 

22.90 

18.66 

... 

"     Amontillado,  1870  (K.^ 

20.06 

16.34 

Port,  white  1860  (K.) 

20  03 

16  28 

"     red,  1863  (K.) 

19.46 

15.82 

"     red.  1865  (K.) 

21.91 

17.93 

Marsala  ( Ingham)  (K.) 

20.44 

16.73 



"    (Woodhduse)  (K.) 

19.09 

15.52 

Malaga,  18T2  (K.) 

16.14 

13.23 

16  57 

Muscat  wine,  1872  (K.) 

12.35 

10.02 

15.52 

Tokay,  1868  (K.) 

12.13 

9.80 

22  11 

"    (Aushruch).  18fi6(K.).... 

12.74 

10.29 

14.99 

Ruster  <Ausbruch),  1872  (K.). . 

11.08 

8.90 

21.74 

Samos  wine,  1S72  (K.) 

13.55 

10.97 

11.82 

Champagne  (Carte 

Blanche)  (K  )  

11  75 

9  51 

11  53 

Champagne  (not  efl'erves- 

cing)  (G.) 

12.fi9 

Hock  (eflervescing)  (K.) 

12.14 

9.80 

8.49 

Sheriy  (Lachrymie  Cllrjsti)(G.) 

17.00 

Moselle  wine  (K.) 

12.06 
9.55 

.... 

Rhine  wine  (He^sei,  red  (K.). 

white  (K.) 

11.07 



•  •  •  • 

German  wine  (Riesling)  (K.). 

11.30 

"      (Traminer)  (K.) 

11.80 

.... 

.... 

"      (GutedelxK.).. 

10. .30 

.... 

*  .  .  ■ 

Claret  (Saint-Esti'-phe)  (G.)... 

9.70 

.... 

(Ch:iteau-Latour)  (G.). 

9.30 

.  .  •  k 

(Chateau-Laflte)  (G.).. 

8.77 

.  •  •  • 

"       (Ch:iteau-Margaux)(Q.) 

8.07 



Chablis,  white  (G.) 

t.m 

.... 

The  kinds  of  wine  are  innumerable,  special 
characteristics  of  composition,  color,  flavor, 
quality,  etc.,  depending  on  differences  in  the 
varieties  of  the  grape  and  differences  of  soil, 
climate,  modes  of  cultivation,  methods  of  prep- 
aration, etc.  Among  the  leading  classes  are  red. 


Vinous  Liquors.] 


648 


[Vinous  Liquors. 


white,  spirituous,  light,   sparkling,    still,  dry, 
sweet,  rough  and  acidulous  wines. 

Red  wines  are  derived  from  dark-colored  grapes  fer- 
mented with  the  "  marc,"  i.e.,  sltiiiB  and  seeds. 

White  wines  are  made  either  from  white  grapes 
with  or  without  the  skins,  or  from  the  juice  of  dark 
grapes.  Tlie  dark  skins  contain  coloring  matter,  which, 
however,  is  not  soluble  in  water,  and  hence  the  uufer- 
mented  juice  is  not  charged  with  it;  Irat  when  fermenta- 
tion occurs,  the  coloring  particles  are  broken  up  by  the 
alcohol  and  distributed  throughout  the  liquid,  giving  the 
dark  hue. 

A  spirituous  or  generous  wine  is  the  product  of  a 
grape-juice  containing  a  large  proportion  of  sugar-princi- 
ple, subjected  to  sufhcient  fermentation  to  convert  it  into 
an  alcoliol,  producing  a  wine  with  a  considerable  percent- 
age of  spirit.  To  secure  a  spirituous  wine  by  natural 
processes  a  very  sweet  grape  is  required,  but  it  is  often 
artificially  obtained  by  adding  to  the  sugar  the  fer- 
ment of  an  ordinary  must. 

A  lightwine  is  one  relatively  weak  in  alcohol,  produced 
from  a  must  having  little  sugar. 

Sparkling  or  effervescing  wines  are  those  impregnated 
with  carbonic  acid  gas.  Champagnes  are  the  principal 
beverages  of  this  class.  They  are  made  by  bottling  the 
liquor  before  the  second  fermentation  has  been  com- 
pleted. The  bottles,  being  carefully  sealed,  retain  the 
gas  that  is  generated. 

Still  wines  include  all  the  wines  that  do  not  effervesce,— 
i.e.,  all  wines  in  which  the  fermentation  has  been  finished 
before  they  are  sealed  or  consumed. 

Dry  wines  are  sound  and  strong-bodied,  without 
marked  sweetness  or  excessive  acidity. 

Sweet  wines  are  such  as  are  produced  from  juice  con- 
taining a  great  deal  of  sugar  with  too  little  ferment 
present  to  convert  all  the  sugar  into  alcohol.  Wines  of 
this  kind  must  be  fortified  with  spirits,  for  there  is 
danger  that  the  sugar,  especially  upon  exposure,  will 
undergo  acetous  fermentation. 

Rough  or  astrttigent  wines  are  those  having  a  strong 
flavor  of  tannic  acid  derived  from  the  "  marc "  (skins, 
Btems  and  seeds)  of  the  grape. 

Acidulous  wines  are  characterized  by  the  presence  of 
carbonic  acid  or  an  uuusuiJ  quantity  of  tartar. 

The  United  States  Pharmacopoeia  (1880)  rec- 
ognizes three  varieties  of  medicinal  wines — red 
wine,  white  wine  and  stronger  white  wine.  Be- 
sides these,  it  names  certain  medicated  wines 
prepared  by  mixing  medicinal  agents  with  white 
wine.  These  are  :  wine  of  aloes,  wine  of  anti- 
mony, aromatic  tcine,  icine  of  colchieum  root, 
wine  of  colchieum  seed,  wine  of  ergot,  bitter  wine 
of  iron,  wine  of  ipecac,  wine  of  opium  and  tcine 
of  rhubarb.  As  indicated  by  the  names  (except 
in  the  case  of  aromatic  wine),  these  medicated 
articles  have  for  their  chief  ingredients  white 
wine  and  the  drugs  mentioned.  The  so-called 
aromatic  wine  of  the  Pharmacopoeia  contains 
equal  parts  of  lavender,  origanum,  peppermint, 
rosemary  and  sage,  dissolved  in  a  sufficient 
quantity  of  white  wine  to  make  100  parts.  The 
United  States  Dispensatory  (1887,  p.  1,530), 
voicing  the  best  conclusions  of  science  in  regard 
to  the  habitual  beverage  iisc  of  wine,  says: 

"It  [wine],  in  a  slate  of  health,  is  at  least  useless,  if  not 
absolutely  pernicious  The  degree  of  mischief  which  it 
produces  depends  on  the  character  of  the  wine.  Thus, 
the  lighter  wines  of  France  are  comparatively  harmless, 
while  the  habitual  use  of  the  stronger  wines,  such  as 
sherry,  port,  madeira,  etc.,  even  though  taken  in  modera- 
tion, is  always  injurious,  as  having  a  tendency  to  induce 
gout,  apo])lexy  and  other  diseases  dependent  on  pleth- 
ora and  over-stimulation.  All  wines,  however,  when 
used  habitually  in  excess,  are  productive  of  bad  conse- 
quences. They  weaken  the  stomach,  produce  disease  of 
the  liver  and  give  rise  to  gout,  dropsy,  apoplexy,  tremors 
and  not  imfrequently  mania." 

Without  undertaking  to  present  a  complete 
list — which  would  be  well-nigh  an  impossible 
task,  so  manjr  are  the  names  and  so  dithcult  is 
it  to  get  complete  information  for  all  countries, 
— we  notice  below  some  of  the  most  important 
wines  of  this  day  : 


Algerian  wines  have  acquired  prominence  since  the 
phylloxera  began  its  devastations  in  Europe.  They  are 
full-bodied  and  tolerably  strong  in  alcohol. 

iJo;6?«awa;  wines,  taking  their  name  from  the  French 
city  of  Bordeaux,  are  produced  in  the  Mddoc  district  and 
are  otherwise  called  medoc  and  clarets. 

Biiruundy  wines,  the  richly-flavored  products  of  the 
Province  of  Burgundy,  are,  after  the  mt^doc,  the  best- 
known  red  wines  of  France;  they  include  several  vari- 
eties of  white  wines. 

•  '  California  wines  embrace  many  kinds,  resembling  the 
European  products  but  coarser  in  quality.  Some  go  by 
the  old  names— hock,  muscatel,  claret,  sherry,  port,  bur- 

gundy,  moselle,  sauterne,  tokay,  malaga.  froutignan.  etc. 
thers  are  mission  wines,  riesling,  riesling  hock,  zin- 
fandel,  angelica,  beaune,  berger,  charbona.  lenoire.  guUdel, 
St.  AJacaiie  and  Sonoma.  The  vine  was  first  cultivated  in 
California  in  1769  by  Catholic  priests  from  Mexico. 

Other  American  Wines.— Among  the  most  important 
&Te  the  catawbas  (still,  sparkling  and  sweet),  delaware, 
concord,  ives  seedling,  Virginia  t-eedling  and  scnppernong. 
Some  so-called  champagnes  are  made.  A  great  many 
more  might  be  named,  but  they  are  mostly  unknown  be- 
yond the  localities  where  they  are  produced.  There  are 
wine-growine  districts  along  the  shores  of  Lake  Erie  in 
Ohio,  around  Lake  Keuka  and  in  other  parts  of  New 
York,  in  Missouri,  in  Texas,  in  Virginia  and  in  several 
other  States.  But  their  interests  are  insignificant  com- 
pared with  those  of  California. 

r/apewiueis  a  general  name  for  the  wines  of  South 
Africa. 

Carlowitz  (Ilnngariau)  resembles  port,  but  is  more  as- 
tringent and  is  without  the  fruity  flavor. 

Cede  wines  are  inferior  grades  of  sherries,  or  are  simi- 
lar wines  made  in  parts  of  Spain  outside  the  sherry  dis- 
trict. 

Chablis  is  a  white  French  wine  of  fair  quality,  named 
for  the  Commune  of  Cliablis,  where  it  is  grown. 

Champagne,  the  chief  of  the  efl'prvescing  wines,  was 
originally  made  in  the  Province  of  t^hampagne,  France. 
Several  varieties,  both  still  and  sparkling,  are  properly 
classed  under  this  name,  but  in  the  United  States  the 
word  champagne  is  applied  exclusively  to  the  eServescent 
article.  Sparkling  champagnes  are  produced  from  both 
white  and  red  grapes,  carefully  pressed,  and  are  of  an 
amber  color  which  becomes  darker  when  a  large  propor- 
tion of  red  grapes  is  used.  The  Departments  "of  Marne 
and  Haute-Marne,  in  France,  are  the  principal  sources. 

Claret  (old  English,  from  the  Latin  darns,  clear)  is 
the  name  first  given  in  England  to  the  red  wines  of  the 
Mt^doc  district  of  France,  and  later  applied  to  all  the  red 
Bordeaux  wines  and  to  similar  ones  produced  in  the 
United  States.  Claret  is  of  a  deep  purple  color.  Good 
claret  has  a  delicate  flavor,  somewhat  acid  and  astringent. 

Constantia  Is  a  superior  Cape  wine, 

Dalmatian  wines,  products  of  Dalmatia.  a  Province  of 
Austria-HunMry,  are  red  for  the  most  part,  having  a 
fullcolor  and  much  alcohol,  and  resembling  the  wines  of 
Burgundy.  The  leading  varieties  are  mow<do  roso,  vino 
tattaro,  2}rosec(  0  vngora,  inaraschino  and  malras/a. 

Frontignan  or  frontignac  is  a.  sweet  muscadine  wine, 
made  from  frontignan  grapes  in  the  vii  iiiity  of  the  small 
town  of  Frontignan  in  southern  France. 

Hermitage  (French,  vin  de  Ihermitage)  is  a  celebrated 
French  wine,  both  white  and  red,  of  the  Department  of 
the  Drome. 

Hock  or  hochheimer  (from  Hochheim.  Germany)  is  a 
Rhenish  wine,  light  and  yellowish.  Some  kinds  are 
sparklirL'.  others  are  still. 

Lachrymee  Christi  (Latin,  tears  of  Christ)  when  genu- 
ine, is  regarded  as  one  of  the  most  superior  wines  of 
Italy.  It  is  made  in  comparatively  small  qurmtities  in 
the  vicinity  of  Naples. 

Lisbon,  one  of  the  chief  Portuguese  wines,  is  sweet 
and  of  a  li^ht  color. 

MAcon  (French),  made  near  the  town  of  that  name,  re- 
sembles burgundy,  though  lighter  in  color  and  body  and 
of  infiTior  quality. 

Madeira,  the  strongest  of  the  white  wines,  is  a  famous 
product  of  the  Madeira  Islands.  It  has  had  a  high  repu- 
tation since  the  middle  of  the  18th  Century,  but  very 
little  now  sold  as  madeira  is  genuine.  The  choicest  kinds 
are  miilmsey.  formerly  made  by  the  Jesuits  in  the  vine- 
yards at  Cama  de  Lobos  fiom  grapes  that  ripen  a  month 
later  than  most  others,  sercial,  a  full-bodied  and  very 
fine  wine,  from  the  riesling  grape,  and  bual,  another  rich 
variety.     Tinta  is  a  red  madeira. 

Malaga,  a  sweet  wine  obtained  principally  from  the 
Muscat  grapes  in  the  Province  of  Malaga,  Spain. 

Malmsey,  from  Crete,  Spain,  the  Madeira  and  Canary 
Islands,  is  a  sweet  wine  of  high  grade.  Like  most  of  the 
other  famous  beverages  it  is  now  made  on  a  very  limited 
scale. 


Vinous  Liquors.] 


649 


[Wayland,  Francis. 


Marsala,  the  principal  wine  of  Sicily,  from  the  town  of 
Marsala.  It  is  like  maderia  in  bouquet  and  greatly  im- 
proves with  ajje. 

Medoc  is  a  name  of  extensive  application,  covering  the 
numerous  wines  of  the  Medoc  district,  the  chief  center 
of  the  French  wine  induHtry;  most  frequently  given  to 
the  red  clarets.  There  are,  tiowever.  various  white 
mfedocs,  including  tlie  seinillon,  saucig/ion  and  mus- 
cat rile. 

Moselle,  from  the  banics  of  the  river  Moselle  (Germany), 
is  one  of  the  most  prominent  of  the  lighter  wiues.  Most 
moselles  are  white. 

Muscatels  include  several  lucious  sweet  wines  of  Italy, 
Spain  and  France. 

Fori  or  oporto,  for  a  century  and  a  half  the  most  valued 
of  Portuguese  wines,  has  a  deep  purple  color,  is  moder- 
ately sweet  and  somewhat  astringent,  and  is  one  of  the 
strongest  of  vinous  liquors.  The  only  ucnuine  port 
comes  from  a  small  district  itho  Alto  Douro)  in  Portugal, 
which  the  phylloxera  has  ravaged  in  recent  years.  (See 
pp.  493-4.)  Yet  enormous  quantities  of  so-called  port 
are  consumed.    English  port  is  a  spurious  article. 

Ehenish  or  Rhine  wiues,  strictly  speaking,  are  those 
made  along  the  Rhine  river,  l)ut  the  name  is  a  compre- 
hensive one  tor  most  German  wines,  including  hock  and 
moselle.  The  finest  come  from  the  right  banks  of  the 
river.  Amon^  favorite  kinds  from  the  left  bank  are 
liebfravmilch,  iiierstein.  schniiac/iberr/  ami  forst. 

RoKSsillon.  a  dark,  fnll-bodied  wine,  from  the  old 
Province  of  Roussillon  iu  southern  Fiance,  is  of  high 
quality  and  is  much  used  for  blending  with  light  thin 
wines. 

iSack  (from  the  French  sec,  meaning  dry)  was  an  old 
Dame  for  dry  wines  of  Spain.  It  is  now  given  to  a 
species  of  sweet  wine. 

Saumur,  a  white  sparkling  wine  produced  near  the 
town  of  Saumur,  France.  It  is  considered  a  good  sub- 
stitute for  champagne. 

Saiternss,  from  white  grapes  grown  in  the  district  of 
Sauterue,  France,  embrace  some  of  the  roost  popular 
white  wines. 

Sec  (French  for  dry)  is  an  affix  to  nnmes  of  wines,  indi- 
cating that  they  are  -'dry,"  as  "  champagne  sec." 

5Ae/7'.i/ (from  Xeres— or  Jerez— de  la  Frontera,  a  town 
of  Spain)  ranks  among  the  favorites  of  connoiseurs.  It 
is  of  deep  amber  color  aud  very  strong  in  alcohol.  There 
are  two  general  classes  of  sherries — amontillado  and 
mamanilla.  Nearly  all  so-called  sherries  are  base  coun- 
terfeits. 

Spanish  red  or  terragona.  comes  from  Catalonia  in 
Spain,  the  finest  kinds  being  rich  and  full-bodied.  The 
supply  is  very  small 

Tenenjfe.  from  the  Canary  island  of  Teneriffe,  re- 
sembles madeira,  is  white  in  color  and  is  about  as  strong 
in  alcohol  as  sherry. 

Tent  or  tinta,  a  deep  red  wine,  is  a  prominent  Spanish 
variety. 

Tokay,  from  the  district  surrounding  the  town  of  Tokay 
in  Hungary,  is  one  of  the  best-known  of  Hungarian 
wines,  sweet  aud  rich. 

FERMENTS  PROM  OTHER  FRUITS,  ETC. 

Of  the  fermented  liquors  deriverl  from  other 
fruits  than  grapes,  the  most  important  is  cider, 
manufactured  from  apples  in  enormotis  quanti- 
ties in  the  United  States  and  other  countries. 
Little  attention  is  given  to  the  development  of 
scientific  processes,  although  several  large  firms 
produce  the  beverage  on  a  great  scale  and  by 
systematic  methods.  Sweet  cider  is  the  newly- 
expressed  aud  unfermeuted  juice;  hard  cider  is 
the  intoxicating  product  which  results  from  ex- 
posure to  the  air.  If  the  exposure  is  continued 
the  cider  turns  to  mnegar.  There  is  no  means 
of  ascertaining  the  aggregate  quantity  made  in 
the  United  States.  Thoroughly  fermented  cider 
has  about  8  per  cent,  of  alcohol.  Perry  is  the 
fermented  juice  of  the  pear,  popular  in  England 
and  some  other  countries,  but  not  so  much  so  in 
the  United  States;  its  alcoholic  percentage  rang- 
es from  7  to  9.  Other  ferments,  called  wines, 
are  made  from  various  small  fruits  and  berries, 
such  as  currants,  gooseberries,  blackberries,  rasp- 
berries, whortleberries,  elderberries,  mulberries, 
cherries,  strawberries,  plums,  red  bilberries,  and 


the  like.  Oranges  are  sometimes  used  for  the 
production  of  orange  wine.  The  saps  of  trees 
are  converted  into  fermented  drinks,  especially 
noteworthy  being  the  pulque  oi  Mexico  (see  pp. 
428-9)  and  the  palm  wine  (called  in  India  tod- 
dee  or  toddy)  of  Africa,  India  and  other  warm 
regions.  There  is  scarcely  a  fruit  of  the  forest, 
field,  orchard  or  garden  that  cannot  readily  be 
made  lo  provide  a  fermented  drink.  The  utili- 
zation of  many  of  them,  however,  is  impracti- 
cable or  not  regarded  as  worth  the  pains,  be- 
cause the  ordinary  beverages  are  abundant  and 
cheap,  and  satisfy  all  the  tastes  of  the  drinker. 


Virginia. — See  Index. 
Washington  (State  of  ).- 


-See  In- 


dex, 

Washingtonian     Movement.  — 

This  celelirated  moral  suasion  crusade 
had  its  origin  in  the  reformation  of  a 
Baltimore  drinking  club  of  six  men — 
W.  K.  Mitchell,  a  tailor ;  J.  F.  Hoss,  a 
carpenter;  David  Anderson  and  George 
Steers,  blacksmiths  ;  James  McCurley,  a 
coachmaker,  and  ^ViT-hibald  Campbell,  a 
silversmith.  They  were  induced  to 
change  their  habits  by  the  address  of  a 
temperance  lecturer,  and  signed  the  fol- 
lowing pledge  (April  6,  1840) : 

' '  We,  wlwse  names  are  annexed,  desirous  of 
forming  a  Society  for  our  mutual  benefit,  and 
to  guard  against  a  practice — a  pernicious  prac- 
tice— which  is  injurious  to  our  health,  standing 
and  families,  do  pledge  ourselves,  as  gentlemen, 
that  we  will  not  drink  any  spirits  or  malt 
liquors,  wine  or  cider." 

They  took  the  name  of  "  The  "Washing- 
ton Temperance  Society/'  and  were  fam- 
iliarly known  as  "Washingtonians."  By 
the  end  of  1840  this  Baltimore  organiza- 
tion had  700  members,  and  under  the 
leadership  of  John  H,  W.  Hawkins,  the 
most  prominent  Washingtonian  agitator, 
the  crusade  spread  to  other  cities  and 
States.  (For  particulars,  see  p.  203.) 
Its  force  was  spent  by  1843,  but  the  en- 
ergy developed  by  it  was  of  great  and 
lasting  beneht  to  the  general  temperance 
cause.  Like  all  similar  undertakings 
the  Washingtonian  movement  demon- 
strated that  mere  moral  suasion  methods 
cannot  overcome  the  organized  liquor 
traffic. 

Wayland,  Francis. — Born  in  New 
York  City,  March  11, 1796;  died  iu  Prov- 
idence, R.  I.,  Sept.  26,  1865.  He  gradu- 
ated at  Union  College  in  1813,  and  began 
the  practice  of  medicine  in  Troy,  N.  Y. 
But  he  soon  left  this  profession  for  the 
Baptist  ministry.  He  served  as  tutor 
in  Union  College  from  1817  to  1821,  and 


Wesleyan  Methodist  Church.]      650 


[W.  C.  T.  Union. 


as  pastor  of  a  Baptist  church  in  Boston 
for  the  next  five  years.  In  1827  he  was 
elected  President  of  Brown  University, 
and  he  filled  that  position  for  28  years. 
He  was  a  clear  and  an  able  writer  on 
philosophic  and  kindred  questions.  As 
early  as  1833,  before  the  Father  Mathew 
and  Washingtonian  movements,  and 
nearly  20  years  before  the  Maine  law 
was  enacted,  he  wrote  :  "I  think  the 
prohibition  of  the  traffic  in  ardent  spir- 
its a  fit  subject  for  legislative  enactment, 
and  I  believe  the  most  happy  results 
would  flow  from  such  prohibition." 
The  other  references  to  the  temperance 
question  in  his  writings  are  strong  and 
radical. 

Wesleyan  Methodist  Church. — 

The  utterances  of  this  church  on  the 
drink  issue  are  in  all  respects  extremely 
radical.  The  following  is  from  the  de- 
clarations of  the  General  Conference 
(representing  22  Annual  Conferences), 
held  at  La  Otto,  Ind.,  in  October,  1887: 

"That  we  hold  that  law  must  be  an  adjunct 
of  moral  means  in  order  to  suppress  the  traffic 
side  of  this  evil.  The  appetite  may  be  reached 
through  the  church  and  home,  but  the  public 
traffic  must  be  struck  through  the  law,  and  back 
of  the  law  should  be  a  political  organization  in 
sympathy  with  it,  and  pledged  to  its  enforce- 
ment, in  order  to  its  efficiency." 

Wesley,  John. — Born  in  Epworth, 
Eng.,  June  28,  1703;  died  in  London, 
March  2,  1791.  He  was  the  founder  of 
the  Methodist  societies,  a  voluminous 
writer,  an  extensive  traveller,  an  eloquent 
preacher  and  a  remarkable  organizer 
and  disciplinarian.  He  was  a  total 
abstainer  from  the  beverage  use  of  all 
intoxicants.  Like  other  early  temperance 
reformers,  he  was  especially  severe  in 
condemning  distilled  spirits.  In  1743 
he  prepared  the  famous  rule  of  the  so- 
cieties against  "drunkenness,  buying 
or  selling  distilled  liquors,  or  drinking 
them,  except  in  cases  of  extreme  neces- 
sity." (See  p.  425.)  In  1744,  speaking  of 
wine-drinking,  he  said: 

"You  see  the  wine  when  it  sparkles  in  the 
cup,  and  are  going  to  drink  it.  I  say,  there  is 
poison  in  it,  and  therefore  beg  you  to  throw  it 
away.  If  you  add,  '  It  is  not  poison  to  me, 
though  it  may  be  to  others; '  then  I  say,  '  throw 
it  away  for  thy  brother's  sake,  lest  thou  embold- 
en him  to  drink  also.  Why  should  thy  strength 
occasion  thy  weak  brother  to  perish,  for  whom 
Christ  died?'" 


In  1760  he  arraigned  liquor-sellers  in 
these  words : 

"  All  who  sell  liquors  in  the  common  way, 
to  any  that  will  buy,  are  poisoners-general. 
They  murder  His  Majesty's  subjects  by  whole- 
sale ;  neither  does  their  eye  pity  or  spare.  They 
drive  them  to  hell  like  sheep.  And  what  is 
their  gain  ?  Is  it  not  the  blood  of  these  men? 
Who,  then,  would  envy  their  large  estates  and 
sumptuous  palaces  ?  A  curse  is  in  the  midst  of 
them.  The  curse  of  God  is  in  their  gardens, 
their  groves — a  fire  that  burns  to  the  nether- 
most hell.  Blood,  blood  is  there!  The  foun- 
dation, the  floors,  walls,  the  roof,  are  stained 
with  blood  ! " 

West  Virginia, — See  Index. 

Whiskey, — See  Spieituous  Liquors. 

Wilson,  Henry. — Born  in  Farming- 
ton,  N.  H.,  Feb.  16,  1812;  died  in  Wash- 
ington, D.  C,  Nov.  22,  1875.  In  his 
eleventh  year  he  was  apprenticed  to  a 
farmer.  He  learned  the  shoemaker's 
trade,  and  it  was  his  means  of  livelihood 
for  a  number  of  years.  He  became  ac- 
tive in  politics  about  1840,  served  in 
both  branches  of  the  Massachusetts 
Legislature,  was  President  of  the  State 
Senate  in  1851  and  1852,  was  a  member 
of  the  United  States  Senate  from  1855 
to  1873,  and  was  elected  Vice-President 
in  1872.  He  was  one  of  the  leaders  of 
Anti-Slavery  sentiment,  united  with  the 
Free-Soilers  in  1848  because  the  Whigs 
refused  to  take  a  friendly  attitude,  de- 
nounced the  Fugitive  Slave  law,  and 
rendered  exceedingly  valuable  services 
as  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Mili- 
tary Affairs  in  the  Senate  during  the 
Civil  War.  He  was  a  total  abstainer  and 
a  pronounced  opponent  of  the  drink 
traffic.  In  1867  he  was  instrumental  in 
reviving  the  Congressional  Temperance 
Society.  His  social  and  public  influence, 
throughout  his  career  at  Washington, 
was  uniformly  given  for  the  discourage- 
ment of  drinking  customs.  "  All  other 
issues  before  the  American  people,"  said 
he,  "dwindle  into  insignificance  com- 
pared to  the  issue  involved  in  the  tem- 
perance question." 

Wine. — See  Vinous  Liquors. 

Wisconsin. — See  Index. 

Woman's  Christian  Temperance 
Union. ^ — The  largest  and  most  active 
of  the  non-secret  temperance  organiza- 

>  The  editor  is  indebted  to  Miss  Frances  E.  Willard, 
Mrs.  Mary  T.  Lathrap,  Mrs.  Mary  Clement  Lenvitt,  Mrs. 
Frances  J.  Barnes,  Alice  M.  Guernsey,  Mrs.  Caroline  A. 
Leecb  and  Miss  Lucia  F.  £.  Kimball. 


W.  C.  T.  Union.] 


651 


[W.  C.  T.  Union. 


tions  of  the  United  States.  It  sprang 
from  the  Ohio  Womau's  Crusade  of  1873. 
At  Chautauqua,  in  August,  1874,  Mrs. 
Mattie  McClellau  Brown,  Mrs.  Jennie  F. 
Willing,  Mrs.  Emily  H.  Miller  and  a  few- 
other  women  held  a  meeting  and  decided 
to  call  a  National  Convention.  This 
body  met  at  Cleveland,  Nov.  17,  1874, 
and  the  W.  C.  T.  U.  was  there  organized. 
It  now  has  branches  in  every  State  and 
Territory,  including  Alaska,  and  the  total 
number  of  paying  members  (not  count- 
ing juveniles)  is  about  150,000.  (For 
facts  about  the  juvenile  department,  see 
Loyal  Temperance  Legion.)  The  to- 
tal receipts  of  the  National  Union  for 
the  year  1890  were  about  130,000.  The 
object,  as  expressed  in  the  original  pre- 
amble to  the  plan  of  work  (which,  so  far 
as  the  expression  of  purpose  is  concerned, 
remains  unchanged),  is  to  unite  the 
efforts  of  Christian  women  for  the  ex- 
tinction of  intemperance;  and  this  object 
was  more  explicitly  defined  by  the  second 
National  Convention  (Cincinnati,  1875), 
as  follows : 

"  Resolved,  That  whereas,  the  object  of  just 
government  is  to  conserve  the  best  interests  of 
the  governed ;  and  whereas,  the  liquor  traffic  is 
not  only  a  crime  against  God  but  subversive  of 
every  interest  of  society;  therefore,  in  behalf  of 
humanity,  we  call  for  such  legislation  as  shall 
secure  this  end ;  and  while  we  will  continue  to 
employ  all  moral  agencies  as  indispensable,  we 
hold  Prohibition  to  be  essential  to  the  full  tri- 
umph of  this  reform." 

The  following  is  the  pledge  of  the 
Union,  adopted  by  the  Convention  held 
at  Chicago  in  1877 : 

"I  hereby  solemnly  promise,  God  helping 
me,  to  abstain  from  all  distilled,  fermented  and 
malt  liquors,  including  wine,  beer  and  cider, 
and  to  employ  all  proper  means  to  discourage 
the  use  of  and  traffic  in  the  same." 

Each  member  wears  as  a  badge  a  bit 
of  white  ribbon.  The  motto  is,  "For 
God,  and  Home,  and  Native  Land." 

In  1880  the  old  plan  of  Committees 
was  replaced  by  a  plan  of  Departments, 
and  the  remarkable  success  of  the  Union  ~' 
in  so  many  phases  of  effort  is  due  in  no 
small  measure  to  the  work  of  the  Depart- 
ments, each  of  which  is  in  charge  of  a 
responsible  and  energetic  woman,  with 
an  assistant  or  assistants.  In  the  report 
for  1889  this  classification  of  Depart- 
ments is  found : 

Organization. — National  Organizers,  Y  Or- 
ganizers, American  Organizers  for  "World's 
W.  C,  T.  U.,  Work   among  Foreign- speaking 


People,  Work  among  Colored  People,  Young 
Women's  Work,  and  Juvenile  Work. 

Preventive. — Health  and  Heredity. 

Educational.— ^cieniif^c  Temperance  Instruc- 
tion, Sunday-school  Work,  Temperance  Litera- 
ature.  The  Press,  Relation  of  Temperance  to 
Labor  and  Capital,  School  of  Methods,  Present- 
ing Our  Cause  to  Influential  Bodies,  and  Nar- 
cotics. 

Evangelistic. — Bible  Study  (including  Un- 
fermented  Sacramental  Wine  and  Securing  a 
Day  of  Prayer  in  the  Week  of  Prayer),  Work 
in  Prisons,  Jails,  Police  Stations,  Almshouses 
and  Asylums,  Work  among  Railroad  Employes, 
Work  among  Soldiers  and  Sailors,  Work  among 
Lumbermen,  Promotion  of  Social  Purity,  and 
Sabbath  Observance. 

Social. — Parlor  Meetings,  Flower  Mission,  and 
State  and  County  Fairs. 

Legal. — Legislation  and  Petitions,  Franchise, 
and  Peace  and  International  Arbitration. 

These  Departments  do  not  include 
various  standing  committees.  The  Union 
also  conducts  in  Chicago  a  National 
Temperance  Hospital  and  Training 
School  for  Nurses,  a  Woman's_  Lecture 
Bureau,  a  Womau's  Temperance  PublP^ 
cation  Association,  and  other  enterprises. 
The  headquarters  of  the  organization  are 
in  Chicago,  where  the  Union  Signal 
(weekly),  one  of  the  most  prominent  and 
widely-circulated  of  temperance  news- 
papers, is  published.  Other  periodicals, 
and  many  tracts  and  works,  are  issued. 
The  chief  officers  are  (1891):  President,^. 
Miss  Frances  E.  Willard ;  Corresponding  i 
Secretary,  Mrs.  Caroline  B.  Buell;  Ke- 
cording  Secretary,  Mrs.  Mary  A.  AVood- 
bridge;  Treasurer,  Miss  Esther  Fugh. 

The  example  of  the  women  of  the 
United  States  gave  rise  to  the  National  W. 
C.  T.  U.  of  Canada,  also  an  influential 
organization.  The  World's  W.  C.  T.  U. 
was  conceived  in  1883,  and  now  has 
branches  and  societies  in  numerous 
countries.  It  owes  its  development  espec- 
ially to  the  labors  of  Mrs.  Mary  Clement 
Leavitt,  who  began  a  tour  of  the  world 
in  1883,  starting  from  San  Francisco  and 
visiting,  successively,  the  Hawaiian 
Islands,  Australasia,  and  many  nations  of 
Asia,  Africa  and  Europe.  Mrs.  Leavitt 
has  not  yet  completed  her  mission.^  The 
first  President  of  the  World's  Union  was 
the  late  Margaret  Bright  Lucas,  of  Eng- 
land. Miss  Willard  is  now  (1891)  at 
the  head. 

The  National   Union   of  the  United     ^ 
States  has  taken  a  decided  stand  in  favor 
of  the  ballot  for  women,  'believing  that 

'  For  an  extended  account  of  her  work  (written  by 
herself),  see  the  Voice,  Dec.  18,  1890. 


W.  C.  T.  Union.] 


652 


[Wyoming. 


r  the  reform  can  never  be  entirely  success- 
\  ful  until  the  women,  who  suffer  most 
from  the  drink  traffic,  have  power  to  de- 
clare at  the  ballot-box  for  its  destruction. 
Founded  essentially  on  the  broad  prin- 
ciple that  Prohibition  is  indispensable, 
the  Union  has  naturally  shown  an  active 
interest  in  politics,  striving  for  the  adop- 
tion of  Constitutional  Amendments  and 
other  advanced  measures,  petitioning 
Legislatures,  Congress  and  the  executives, 
and  seeking  to  command  the  friendly 
action  of  parties.  The  principal  leaders, 
with  very  few  exceptions,  and  an  over- 
whelming majority  of  the  individual 
members,  became  convinced  that  the 
Prohibition  movement  required  faithful 
and  general  partisan  championship,  and 
accordingly  the  following  declaration  was 
made  at  the  St.  Louis  Convention  of  1884 : 

"  We  refer  to  the  history  of  ten  years  of  persis- 
tent moral  suasion  work  as  fully  establishing 
our  claim  to  be  called  a  non-political  society,  but 
one  which  steadily  follows  the  white  banner  of 
Prohibition  wherever  it  may  be  displayed.  "We 
have,  however,  as  individuals,  always  allied 
ourselves  in  local  and  State  political  contests 
with  those  voters  whose  efforts  and  ballots  have 
been  given  to  the  removal  of  the  dramshop  and 
its  attendant  evils;  and  at  this  time,  while  rec- 
ognizing that  our  action  as  a  national  soci- 
ety is  not  binding  upon  States  or  individuals, 
we  reaffirm  the  positions  taken  by  the  society 
both  at  Louisville  in  1883,  and  at  Detroit  in 
1883,  pledging  our  influence  to  'that  party,  by 
whatever  name  called,  wliich  shall  furnish  us 
the  best  embodiment  of  Prohibition  principles 
and  will  most  surely  protect  our  homes.'  And 
as  we  now  know  which  national  party  gives  us 
the  desired  embodiment  of  the  principles  for 
which  our  ten  years'  labor  has  been  expended, 


we  will  continue  to  lend  our  influence  to  ihe  na- 
tional political  organization  which  declares  in 
its  platform  for  National  Prohibition  and  Home 
Protection.  In  this,  as  in  all  our  progressive 
effort,  we  will  endeavor  to  meet  argument  with 
argument,  misjudgment  with  patience,  denun- 
ciation with  kindness,  and  all  our  difliculties  and 
dangers  with  prayer." 

The  attitude  thus  taken  has  been  ad- 
hered to  despite  the  vigorous  opposition 
of  an  element  of  dissenters;  and  its 
practical  effect  has  been  to  give  the  in- 
fluence of  the  Union  to  the  Prohibition 
party.  Notwithstanding  this,  the  nation- 
al organization  holds  itself  in  readiness  to 
indorse  any  other  political  party  so  soon 
as  creed  and  performances  may  justify 
indorsement. 

-^  The  element  that  objects  to  the  polit- 
ical attitute  of  the  W.  C.  T.  U.  has  cut 
adrift  from  the  parent  body  and  set  up  a 
distinct  society,  called  the  "J^on-Par- 
tisan  Woman's  Christian  Temperance  Un- 
ion." It  was  founded  in  1890,  chiefly 
through  the  efforts  of  Mrs.  J.  Ellen  Fos- 
ter, with  the  support  of  the  Iowa  State 
Union.  The  President  (1891)  is  Mrs. 
Ellen  J.  Phinney  of  Cleveland ;  Secreta- 
ry, Miss  Jennie  F.  Duty,  Cleveland. 
According  to  the  "  National  Temperance 
Almanac  for  1891,"  there  are  general  or- 
ganizations in  Maine,  Vermont,  Ohio, 
Pennsylvania,  Illinois,  Iowa  and  Minne- 
sota, and  the  District  of  Columbia,  and 
local  Unions  in  a  number  of  States  not 
here  named. 

Woman  Suffrage. — See  Index. 

Wyoming. — See  Index. 


INDEX. 


NOTE. — The  cross  references  in  the  Index  are  to  Index  titles,  not  necessarily  to  titles  of 

articles  in  the  body  of  the  book. 


Aarrestad,  Sven,  456. 

Abkari  act  (India),  243-3. 

Abolition  and  Prol:iibltlou  movements  compared,  30-3. 

Absinthe,  617. 

—  Epilepsy  from,  161. 
Absolute  alcohol,  615-16. 
Abstinence  (see  "Total  Abstinence  "). 
Abyssinia,  13. 

Acchioc,  a  Yucatan  intoxicant,  430. 

Acetic  acid,  18. 

Acid  matters  used  in  adulterating,  8-10. 

Acidulous  wines,  648. 

Acute  diseases  from  drink,  25. 

Adair  law.  The,  334-5. 

Adams,  John  Quincy  (President),  147. 

Adams,  Nehemiah  (Rev.),  Opposition  of  to  Abolition,  32. 

Addison,  Joseph,  on  wine  adulterations,  7. 

Adulteration,  7-11,  133,  2.34,  616-17,  647. 

—  Legislation  concerning,  9.    (See  also  digests  of  State 

laws,  275-360.) 

—  Phylloxera's  ravages.  Effects  of  upon,  479-82. 
Advent  Christian  Church,  11. 

Africa,  11-17. 

—  Liquor  traffic  with,  15-17,  240-1,  498  (note),  643. 
African  Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  17. 
African  Methodist  Episcopal  Zion  Church,  17. 
Agricultural  sentiment  (see  "  Farmers  "). 
Aguardiente,  a  spirituous  liquor,  16,  83. 
Alabama : 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  382,  383,  384. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  275-7. 

—  Prohibition  party,  Vote  of  in,  573,  577. 
Alaska,  Prohibitory  law  for,  277. 
Albucasis,  155. 

Alcohol,  Amylic,  18,  20, 155. 

Alcohol,  Butylic,  18,  155. 

Alcohol,  Ethylic  or  Common,  17-19,  615. 

—  Affinity  of  for  water,  20,  154. 

—  Arts,  manufactures,  sciences,  etc..  Quantities  of  used 

in  the,  18-19,  130-1,  255,  615. 
Physicians  favor  restriction  of  use  to,  424. 

—  Beverage  use  much  in  excess  of  legitimate  use,  19,  615 

(note). 

—  Chemical  constituents  of,  18,  20. 

—  Decomposition  a  necessary  antecedent  to  the  produc- 

tion of,  18. 

—  Derivation  of  the  word,  18. 

—  Distillation  of.  Process  of,  154-5. 

—  Early  distillation  of,  18,  155. 

—  Effects  of,  20-6.    (See  also  "  Medical  Testimony.") 

—  Fortifying  of  wines  with,  7-9,  12,  14,  481,  614,  647. 

—  Legitimate  uses  of,  18,  130,  255. 

—  Medicinal  use  of,  430-5,  632  (note). 

—  "  Neither  food  nor  physic,"  424. 

—  Percentages  of  In  liquors,  19,  414,  616,  647. 

—  Pure,  not  used  as  beverage,  19. 

should  be  preferred  to  alcoholic  liquors  for  medic- 
inal purposes,  19  (note),  424. 

—  Valueless  for  the  purpose  of  counteracting  cold,  83-3  ; 

or  heat,  83  ;  as  a  food,  179-80,  633  (note). 


Alcohol,  Melytic,  20. 

Alcohol,  Methyl,  18,  20,  616. 

Alcohol,  Propylic,  18,  155. 

Alcoholic  diseases,  25. 

Aldrich,  Wilbur,  Article  by,  272-360  ;  see  also  634  (note). 

Ale,  19,  414. 

Alexander,  J..mes  W.,  on  the  physiological  effects  of 
drink,  408. 

Algeria,  12. 

Allen,  Nathan  (Dr.),  on  the  hereditary  effects  of  drink, 
236. 

Allentown  (N.  J.),  The  Sober  Society  of,  30. 

Alliance  News,  The,  197. 

Almshouse-keepers  on  pauperism  and  drink,  466-7. 

Amendments,  Constitutional  (see  "  Constitutional  Pro- 
hibition "). 

American  Temperance  Society,  161,  207,  630. 

American  wines,  648. 

Amoy,  76. 

Amylic  alcohol,  18,  20,  155. 

Anaesthetics  used  as  inebriants,  79-80. 

Anarchists,  270-1. 

Ancients,  Drink  among  the,  220-32. 

—  Distillation  not  known  to,  364  ;  except  (probably)  the 

Chinese,  72. 
Anderson,  William  G.  (Prof.),  Article  by,  483-3. 
Angola,  17. 

Anisette,  a  liqueur,  618. 

Anti-License  provisions  of  Constitutions,  98, 106. 
Anti-Prohibition,  26-7. 
Anti-Saloon  Republicans,  27-30. 
Antiseptic  properties  of  alcohol,  19. 
Anti-Slavery  agitation.  The: 

—  and  the  Prohibition  agitation,  compared,  30-3. 

—  the  Republican  party  and,  585-7. 
Apothecaries,  159. 

—  Quantity  of  spirits  sold  by,  615  (note). 
Appetite,  Hereditary  transmission  of,  204-7,  235-6, 
Apple-jack,  617. 

Appleton,  James,  Biographical  sketch  of,  33-4. 
Applications  for  license.  Provisions  governing  (see  the 

digests  of  State  laws,  275-360). 
Aqua  vitse,  18. 
Aquinas,  St.  Thomas,  599. 
Arabia,  Early  distillation  of  alcohol  in,  155. 
Arak,  a  distilled  drink  of  the  East,  11,  482. 
Arctic  voyagers.  Experience  of,  24,  83,  180,  483. 
Ardent  spirits,  .34.    (See  "  Spirituous  Liquors.") 
Argentine  Republic,  612. 
Arguments,  Liquor,  401-3. 
Aristotle,  221,  230-1. 
Arizona  : 

—  Brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  383,  384. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  27? -8. 
Arkansas: 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  382,  383,  384. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  278-9. 

—  Local  Option  votes  in,  400  (note). 

—  Prohibition  party,  Vote  of  in,  577. 

—  Tobacco  to  minors,  Legislation  against,  630. 


Index.] 


654 


[Index. 


Armstrong,  Libbeus  (Rev.),  82. 

Armstrong,  William  H.,  99. 

Army  and  Navy  (United  States),  642-3. 

Arnold,  Arthur,  on  drink  in  Persia,  470. 

Arrack,  a  distilled  drink  of  the  East,  74,  618. 

Arrests  and  commitments: 

—  under  High  License  and  low  license,  210-11. 

Prohibition,    505-6,   508-9,    510-12,   517-18,   525-7, 

528-37. 
the  Gothenburg  system  (Christiania),  455. 


—  (See  also  the  different  foreign  countries.) 
Arthur,  Timothy  Shay,  Biographical  sketch  of,  34. 
Arts,  manufactures,  sciences,  etc.,  Alcohol  used  in  the, 

18-19,  130-1,  255,  615.     (For  discriminations  of  the 

statutes,  see  "  Legislation.") 
Aehenhurst,  J.  O.  (Rev.),  12  (note). 
Asthenia  from  alcohol,  25. 
Astringency  of  wines,  648  ;  how  imitated,  8. 
Asylums,  Inebriate,  247-8. 
Atchison  (Kan.),  Prohibition  in,  511-12. 
Atherton,  J.  M. : 

—  on  High  License  and  Local  Option,  218. 

"  Fine  "  whiskey.  The  comparative  insignificance 

of  the  production  of,  376-7. 
the  Internal  Revenue,  256. 


Atkinson,  Edward,  Estimate  by,  of  the  expenditure  for 

drink,  138. 
Atlanta,  Ga. : 

—  Local  Option  contests  in,  2.36, 368,  400. 

—  Prohibition,  Results  of  in,  534-5,  544-5,  554-6. 
Augur,  E.  P.,  Statistics  prepared  by,  526-7. 
Austin,  Henry  W.,  Biographical  sketch  of,  34-5. 
Australasia,  35-8. 

Austria,  38-9. 

—  Consumption  of  liquors  in,  134. 

—  Hop-yield  of,  334. 

—  International  regulations.  Action  of    regarding,   498 

(note). 
Ayer,  John,  on  Prohibition  in  Maine,  538. 
Azore  Islands,  12-13. 

Babcock,  D.  C.  (Rev.),  Article  by,  43;  see  also  vi. 

Bacchus,  39. 

Bacon,  Leonard  Woolsey  (Rev.  Dr.),  on  Prohibition  in 

New  Haven,  526. 
Bacone,  A.  C.  (Prof.),  vi. 
Baily,  Joshua  L.,  214  (note). 
Bain,  George  W.,  Article  by,  162-4. 
Baird,  Robert  (Rev.),Biographical  sketch  of,  40. 
Baker,  Mary  A.,  vi. 
Baldwin,  S.  C.  (Rev.),  72  (note). 
Baltimore  (Md.),  Arrests  in,  211. 
Bands  of  Hope,  37,  40-1,  58,  60. 
Bangor  (Me.),  Prohibition  in,  505,  506. 
Bankers,  Testimony  from,  538-9,  540,  541,  542. 
Baptist  Church,  41-2. 

—  Deliverance  in  Nebraska  concerning  High  License,215. 
Barbour,  John  Nathaniel,  Biographical  sketch  of,  42. 
Barley,  42. 

—  Quantities   of    used  in   making   malt  and   distilled 

liquors,  172. 
Barnes,  Albert,  Biographical  sketch  of,  42-3. 
Barnes,  Frances  J.,  650  (note). 
Barrett,  F.  N.,  Estimate  by,  of  the  expenditure  for  drink, 

137-8. 
Barrows,  Lorenzo  Dow  (Rev.  Dr.),  Biographical  sketch 

of,  43. 
Bartemeyer  v.  Iowa,  Case  of,  91,  645. 
Bartenders,  386. 
Bartram,  W.  H.  H.,  89  (note). 
Bascom,  John  (LL.D.),  Articles  by,  401-3, 496-9. 
Baautoland,  14. 


Bates,  C.  A.,  638-9. 

Bayard,  Thomas  P.  (Secretary),  and  the  liquor  traffic  in 

the  Pacific  Islands,  643. 
Beaconsfield  (Earl),  on  the  results  of  local  Prohibition,  536. 
Beauchamp,  L.  J.,  vi. 
Beaumont,  Ralph  J.,  264  (note). 
Beaver,  James  A.  (Governor),  123. 
Bechuanaland,  14-15. 
Bee,  The  Omaha,  217,  445,  447. 
Beecher,  Lyman  (Rev.   Dr.),  Biographical    Sketch   of, 

43-5. 
Beer,  413-14.    (See  "  Malt  Liquors.") 
Beer  act  (England),  366. 
Beer  Company  case,  91,  92,  93. 
Belgium,  45-6. 

—  Consumption  of  liquors  in,  134. 

—  International  regulations.  Action  of  regarding,    497 

(note),  498  (note). 
"  Bell-Punch  "  laws,  304-5,  348,  354. 
Benefits  of  Prohibition  (see  "  Prohibition,  Results  of  "). 
Benguela,  17. 

Berlin  Conference  (18841,  15-16. 
Beverage    consumption  of    spirits  much  in  excess    of 

legitimate  consumption,  19,  130-1,  136-7,  615  (.note). 
Bhang,  202. 
Bible  and  Drink,  46-8. 
Bible  Wines,  48-56. 
Biblical  Arguments : 

—  against  Prohibition,  26. 

Abolition,  32. 

Birney,  James  G.,  33. 
Bitters.  617. 

Black,  James,  Biographical  sketch  of,  56-7.  (See  also 
vi.  559  [note],  and  "  Prohibition  Party.") 

Blackmer,  John  (Dr.),  Article  by,  421-2. 

Blackstone,  William  (Sir),  on  natural,  civil  and  politi- 
cal liberty,  471,  473. 

Blade,  The  Toledo,  27,  401. 

Blaine,  James  G.: 

—  Defeat  of.  27,  32,  574. 

—  on  Prohibition  in  Maine,  502,  533. 

Prohibition  as  a  State  issue,  109. 

the  liquor  revenue,  593. 

the  origin  of  the  Republican  party,  586. 

Blair,  Henry  W.,  Article  by,  439-42. 
"  Blind  Pig  "  and  "  Blind  Tiger  "  laws,  279,  317,  349. 
Blood,  Diffusion  of  alcohol  through  the,  20-2. 
Blue  Cross,  45,  624. 
Blue  Ribbon,  57,  61,  110,  197,  456,  624. 
Blyth,  Governor  (Australia),  35. 
Bodwell  (Governor),  on  Prohibition  in  Maine,  504. 
Body,  Effects  of  alcohol  on  the,  20-6.     (See  also  "  Med- 
ical Testimony.") 
Bohemians  (in  America),  181. 
Bolag  system,  455,  623-4. 
Bolton,  R.,  Temperance  pledge  of,  484-6. 
Bonded  period.  Extension  of  the,  640. 
BonforVs  Wine  and  Spirit  Circular: 

—  on  changes  in  the  McKinley  hill,  640. 

the  character  and  policy  of  the  liquor- traders,  387. 

the  High  License  issue,  120. 

the  National  Protective  Association's  work,  116. 

the  Boutelle  reso'lution,  595. 

Boniface,  St.,  599. 

Booth,  William,  on  poverty  in  London,  467. 

"Bootleggers,"  508  (note). 

Booza,  a  malt  liquor,  11. 

Bordeaux  wines,  648. 

Boston  (Mass.) : 

—  High  License,  Results  of  in,  213. 

—  Prohibition,  Results  of  in,  528-9,  537. 
Boutelle  resolution,  The,  694-5, 


Index.] 


655 


[Index. 


Bouvier,  on  license  and  tax,  360  (note). 

Bowman  case,  646. 

Boyce,  F.  B.  (Rev.),  37  (note). 

Bradford,   S.  B.  (Attorney-General),  on  Prohibition  in 

Kansas,  510. 
Bradley,  D.  O.,  on  Prohibition  in  Kansas,  540. 
Brady,  E.  W.,  105  (note). 

Brain,  The,  Peculiarly  affected  by  alcohol,  21,  24,  25. 
Brandy,  10, 19,  480-1,  616-17. 
Brayton,  Charles  R.,  124, 126. 
Brazil,  612. 

Brewer,  David  J.  (Judge),  90-1,  93  (note). 
Brewers : 

—  Adulterations  by,  9-10. 

—  Frauds  on  the  revenue  by,  639-40  (note). 

—  Mortality  of,  404,  408. 

—  Number  of,  382-3 

Brewers'  Congresses  (see  "  United  States  Brewers'  Asso- 
ciation "). 

Brewers'  Journal,  Quotations  from  or  references  to, 
10,  213,  374,  414,  446,  507. 

Brewing,  ,^7-8.    (See  also  "Malt  Liquors.") 

Bribery,  Instances  of,  104,  120-3,  200,  445,  446-7,  572. 

Bridge,  J.  K.,  370  (note). 

Briggs,  George  N.,  58. 

Bright's  disease,  Caused  by  drink,  25. 

British  Columbia,  65,  66. 

British  Guiana,  612-13. 

British  Medical  Association,  Longevity  statistics  of  the, 
406-8. 

British  Women's  Temperance  Association,  58. 

Brooklyn  (N.  Y.),  Arrests  in,  211. 

Brooks,  John  Anderson,  Biographical  sketch  of,  58-9. 
(See  also  vi,  148  [note],  and  "Prohibition  Party.") 

Brooks  law,  120,  213-14,  339-41. 

Brougham  (Lord),  on  the  results  of  legislative  discrim- 
inations in  favor  of  beer,  366. 

Brown,  Ryland  T.,  vi. 

Brunton,  T.  Lauder  (Dr.)  on  the  effects  of  beerdrink- 
ing,  179. 

Brussels  Conference  (1890),  498  (note). 

Bryan,  Rollo  Kirk,  vi. 

Buchanan,  James  (President),  147. 

Buckham,  M.  H..  on  Prohibition  in  Vermont,  523. 

Buddhists  and  drink,  59-60,  222-3,  262.  (See  also  "In- 
dia.") 

Buell,  Caroline  B.,  vi. 

Buffalo  (N.  Y.),  Arrests  in,  311. 

Bulgaria,  633. 

Burgundy  wines,  19,  648. 

Burmah,  59-60. 

Burns,  Dawson  (Eev.  Dr.),  Contribution  from,  195 ;  see 
also  iv. 

Burns,  John,  266. 

Business,  Effects  of  Prohibition  upon.  537-45. 

Business  men  and  Prohibition.  447,  538-45. 

Butler,  Benjamin  F.,  on  Prohibition  in  Massachusetts, 
527-8. 

Butylic  alcohol,  18,  155. 

Cadets  of  Temperance,  60. 
Caine,  W.  S.  (M.  P.) : 

—  on  Compensation,  95. 

the  drink  traffic  in  India,  242-3. 

Calhoun.  John  C.  (Secretary),  on  the  spirit  ration  in  the 

army,  642  (note). 
CalifoHH*: 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  382, 383,  .384. 

—  Hop  culture  in,  234. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  279-80. 

—  Opium  Prohibition  in,  460. 

—  Prohibition  party,  Vote  of  In  564,  568,  573,  577. 


California  wines,  373-4,  648. 
Cambridge  (Mass,) : 

—  Local  Option  victories  in,  400. 

—  Prohibition  and  High  License  in,  532-3. 
Caiia,  a  South  American  intoxicant,  G13,  617. 
Canada,  60-7. 

—  Consumption  of  liquors  in,  134,  .364. 

—  License  and  Prohibition.  Results  of  in,  142,  533. 
Canadian  Commission,  62,  503-4,  505. 

Canary  wines,  12,  19,  648,  649. 

Candidates,  Presidential  and  Vice-Presidential,  of   the 

Prohibition  party,  56-7,   58-9,   146,   158-9,  176-7,  603, 

605,  610,  620,  626. 
Canterbury,  Province  of  (Eng  ),  Prohibition  in,  5.36. 
Cape  Colony    14. 
Cape  wines,  14,  19,  648. 
Capital  Invested 

—  in  the  liquor  business.  United  States,  374,  378,  379-81 ; 

Great  Britain,  95  (note). 

the  malting  business,  412. 

Capitol  Building,  Prohibition  in  the,  644. 

Caraca,  a  Mexican  intoxicant,  430. 

Carlisle,  John  G.  (Speaker),  149-50. 

Carlowitz  wines,  648. 

Carlyle,  Thomas,  90. 

Carpenter,  W.  B.  (Dr.),  on  the  hereditary  transmission 

of  alcoholic  diseases,  235. 
Carroll,  H.  K.  (LL.D.),  Plea   of  before  the  Republican 

Convention,  594. 
Carson  League,  The,  67. 

Carson,  Thomas  L.,  Biographical  sketch  of,  67. 
Cass,  Lewis,  96. 
Cassis,  a  liqueur,  618. 
L^atholic  Temperance  Societies,  68.    (See  also  "  Roman 
'^     Catholic  Church.") 

Cause  and  Consequence,  68-70. 

Central  America,  70. 

Cette  wines,  648. 

Ceylon,  242. 

Chablis  wine,  647,  648. 

Chamberlain  (Governor),  on  Prohibition  in  Maine,  504. 

Chambers,    John   (Rev.    Dr.),  Biographical  sketch   of, 

70-1. 
Champagne,  647,  648. 

—  Imitation  of,  8. 

—  Imports  of,  2.38-9. 

—  Vineyards  attacked  by  the  phylloxera,  479. 
Channing,    William   Ellery    (Rev.    Dr.),     Biographical 

sketch  of,  71-2. 
Character  of  liquor-traders,  387,  4S9. 
Charles  XII.  (Sweden),  Prohibitory  laws  of,  623. 
Charles  XIV.  (Sweden),  40. 
Charleston  (W.  Va.),  Prohibition  and  High  License  in, 

535. 
Chartreuse,  a  liqueur,  19, 618. 
Cheever,  George  B.  (Rev.  Dr.),  v. 
Cherokee  Nation,  Prohibition  in,  295. 
Chesterfield  (Lord),  Prohibition  speech  of,  617  (note). 
Cheves,  R.  S.,  Interview  of  with  H.  P.  Crowell,  120-2. 
Chica,  a  South  American  intoxicant,  613. 
Chicago  (HI.) : 

—  Citizens'  League  of,  267. 

—  High  License  in,  210,  212,  216-17. 

—  Saloons  of  owned  by  the  brewers,  379. 
Chickasaw  Nation,  Prohibition  in,  295. 
Chickering,  J.  W.,  vi. 

Chickering,  John  White  (Rev.  Dr.),  Biographical  sketch 

of,  72. 
Chili,  613. 
China,  72-9. 

Cbisholm,  John  B.,  265. 
Chloral,  79-80. 


Index.] 


656 


[Index. 


Chlorodyne,  79-80. 

Chloroform,  79-80. 

Cboate,  Joseph  H.,  and  the  brewers,  93. 

Choctaw  Nation,  Prohibition  in,  295. 

Christian  Church,  ho. 

Christian,  George  C,  Article  by,  474-6. 

Christians  as  corrupters  of  the  heathen,  11,  59,  75, 136, 

242-5,  246-7,  470,  607. 
Christiansen  case,  472-3,  646. 
Christ's  teachings,  Different  views  of,  26,  47-8,    55-6 > 

86-8. 
Chronic  diseases  from  alcohol,  25. 
Church,  Duty  of  tbe,  43,  44,  178,  457. 
Cliurch  of  England,  197, 198. 
Church  of  God,  80-1. 
Church  Temperance  Society,  81. 
Churcb,  The,  Charges  of  lukewarmness  against,  31-2. 
Church  Utterances  (see  "Religious  Denominations"). 
Cider,  649. 

Cigarettes,  Legislation  regarding,  630. 
Cincinnati  (O.),  Lawlessness  of  the  saloons  in,  268-70. 
Cirrhosis  from  alcohol,  25. 
Cities : 

—  Cost  of  supporting  tbe  police  in,  546  7. 

—  High  License  and  low  license,  Results  of  in,  210-14, 

270,  526. 

—  Local  Option  contests  in,  396,  398,  399, 403. 

—  Prohibition,  Results  of   in,  505-6,510-12,  517-18,  525-7, 

528-9, 530-7,  544  5. 
Civil  Damage  acts  (see  the  digests  of  State  laws,  275- 

.360). 
Claflin  (Governor),  on  Prohibition  in  Massachusetts,  528. 
Claret,  19,  647,  648. 

Clark,  Andrew  (Dr.),  on  the  effects  of  alcohol,  421. 
Clark,  Billy  James,  82. 
Clark,  Myron  H.  (Governor) : 

—  Election  of,  562. 

—  on  Prohibition  in  New  York,  530. 
Clarke,  Adam,  88. 

Clarkson,  J.  S.,  Attempt  of  to  bribe  St.  John,  573. 
Clay,  Henry : 

—  on  Father  Mathew's  work,  419. 

Slavery  and  the  Abolitionists,  32-3. 

Clement  of  Alexandria,  49,  87. 

Clergy,  The 

—  and  the  liquor  issue  (Instances),  104,  112,  116,  117, 119, 

122,  128,  189,  197-8,  237,  369,  432,  471,  478,  608.    (See 

also  "Religious  Denominations.") 

the  slavery  issue,  31,  32,  272. 

Cleveland,  Frances  F„  644. 

Climatic  influences,  82-3. 

Cocaiue,  79  80. 

Cocculus  Indicus,  used  in  adulterating,  8,  9,  10. 

Cockburn  (Lord  Chief -Justice),  on  Compensation,  94. 

Coffee-Houses,  81,  83-4,  153. 

Cognac  brandy,  Supply  of  practically  exhausted  by  the 

phylloxera's  ravages,  480- 1. 
Cold,  Fatal  effects  of  expedited  by  alcohol,  24,  82-3. 
Coleman,  Julia,  vi. 

Coleridge  (Lord  Chief -Justice),  on  drink  and  crime,  365. 
Colfax,  Schuyler,  96,  644. 
Collier,  William,  Biographical  sketch  of,  84. 
Cologne  spirit,  615-16. 
Colombia,  United  States  of,  613. 
Colonial  legislation  (see  "  Legislation  "). 
Colorado : 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  882,  383,  384. 

—  Farmers  of.  Resolutions  by,  171. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  280-1. 

—  Prohibition  party.  Vote  of  in,  .57.3,  577. 
Coloring  matters  used  in  adulterating,  8,  616,  618. 
Colquitt,  A.  H.  (Senator),  110,  114,  153. 


Columella,  49. 

Cortimercial  Gazette,  The  Cincinnati,  107,  574,  593-4,  595. 

Commercial  prosperity.  Influence  of  Prohibition  on,  447, 

537-45. 
Commercial  spirits,  614-16. 
Commercial  Temperance  League,  84-5. 
Commission  of  Inquiry,  640. 
Common  Law,  85-6. 
Communion  Wine,  86-8. 
Compensation,  88-96. 

—  Provided  for  in  Australia,  36  ;  in  Switzerland,  624. 
Compensation  for   slaves.  Proposed  by  President  Lin- 
coln, 587  (note). 

Compromise,  Efforts  in  behalf  of,  27-30,  33,  207-20,  362-7, 

390-400. 
Conger,  E.  H.  (Congressman),  on  Prohibition  in  I-:  .va, 

542. 
Congo,  Rum  on  the,  15-16,  498  (note). 
Congregational  Church,  96. 
Congress,  Temperance  measures  in,  640-4. 
Congressional  Temperance  Society,  96-7. 
Connecticut : 

—  Constitutional  Prohibition  movement  in,  102, 103, 127-8. 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  382,  383,  384. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  281-5. 

—  Local  Option  votes  in,  .398. 

—  Prohibition  and  license  in,  526-7. 

—  Prohibition  party,  Vote  of  in,  564,  566,  568,  573,  577. 

—  Tobacco  to  minors.  Legislation  against,  630. 
Connor  (Governor),  on  Prohibition  in  Maine,  504. 
Consolidation  of  the  liquor  interests,  374-9. 
Constantia  wine,  frl8. 

Constitntion,  The  Atlanta,  534,  544,  557-8  (note). 
Constitutional  Prohibition: 

—  National,  439-42. 

—  State,  97-128,  44.3-50. 

—  (See  "  Religious  Denominations.") 
Constitutionality    of   Prohibition  (see  "Judicial  Decis- 
ions "). 

Constitutions,  Provisions  of  • 

—  Anti-License  articles,  98. 

—  License  Amendments,  proposed  but  not  adopted,  101, 

108,  445. 

—  Local  Option  articles,  288,  348. 

—  Miscellaneous,  276,  290,  291,  305. 

—  Prohibitory  Amendments  or  articles,  adopted,  100-2  ; 

proposed  but  not  adopted,  99,  100-2,  445  ;  adopted, 
but  annulled  by  Supreme  Court,  106  ;  repealed,  102. 

Consular  reports,  9,  10,  12,  16,  17,  39,  479-82,  494,  613,  614, 
624,  647. 

Consumption  of  liquors,  128-35. 

—  How  affected  by  High  License  and  Prohibition,  122, 

210-20,  502-37. 

—  (See  also  the  various  foreign  countries.) 
Conventions: 

—  National  Temperance,  631. 

—  Prohibition  party,  561-2,  563-4,  565-6,  507-8,  569,  570-2, 

575-G. 
Convicts,  Appeal  of  to  the  voters  of  Tennessee,  114-15. 
Cook,  Joseph,  Article  by,  360-2. 
Copiah  County,  Prohibition  in,  557-8. 
Cordials,  617-18. 
Corea,  135-6. 
Corn,  Quantity  of  used  in  the  manufacture  of  spirituous 

liquors,  172, 
Cornell,  John  Black,  Biographical  sketch  of,  136. 
Coroners,  Testimony  from,  26,  436. 
Corruption  (gee  '•  Poltical  Corruption  "). 
Cost  of  the  drink  traffic  (United  States),  136-40,  546-7. 

(See  also  the  various  foreign  countries.) 
Cotton,  C.  B.,  on  adulterations,  7-8. 
Crafts,  Wilbur  F.  (Rev.),  Article  by,  495-6. 


Index.] 


657 


[Index. 


Crafts,  W.  F.  (Mrs.),  vi. 

Craig,  W.  H.,  Biographical  sketch  of,  140-1. 

Cramer,  M.  J.,  153  (note). 

Crampton,  C.  A.,  Report  by  on  adulterations,  234. 

Cranfill,  J.  B.,  41,  112  (note). 

Cranmer,  S.  H.,  126  (note). 

Creosote,  Used  in  adulterating,  8,  10. 

Crime,  Relations  of  drink  to,  141-3. 

—  Beer-drinkers  and  whiskey-drinkers.  Offenses  of  com- 

pared, 365. 

—  Estimates  of  the  percentage  of  crime  due  to  drink,  45, 

139,  141-2,  163-4,  365,  529  (note),  546-7. 

—  Expenditure  on  account  of  139,  546-7. 

—  Physicians,  English,  on,  423. 

—  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  on,  93,  473. 

—  under  High  License  and  low  license  systems,  210-14, 

521. 

Prohibitory  systems,  502-37. 

Crogman,  W.  H.,  451. 
Crosby,  Howard  (Rev.  Dr.): 

—  Articles  by,  26-7,  48-50. 

—  Important  references  to,  216,  385,  446,  494. 
Crothers,  T.  D.  (Dr.),  Articles  by,  204-7,  247-8. 
Crouch,  G.  J.,  36. 

Crowell,  Harry  P.,  Revelations  by,  120-2. 

Crozier,  O.  R.  L.,  vi. 

Crusade,  The  Woman's,  143-.5. 

Cumberland  Presbyterian  Church,  145. 

Curacoa,  a  liqueur,  19,  618. 

Cures  of  inebriates.  Percentage  of  in  inebriate  asylums, 

248. 
Cushing,  Henry  Dearborn,  Biographical  sketch  of,  145-6. 
Cushing,  Volney  B.,  Article  by,  471-4. 
Cuyler,  Theodore  L.  (Rev.  Dr.),  Article  by,  263-4. 

Dakota  Territory,  Liquor  legislation  in,  235-6. 

Dalmatian  wines,  648. 

Danforth,  Charles  (Jusiice),   on  Prohibition  in  Maine, 

548. 
Daniel,  William,  Biographical  sketch  of,  146. 
Davenport  (la.).  Prohibition  in,  517. 
Davis,  Jefferson,  112-13. 
Davis,  Noah.   Estimate  by  of  the  percentage  of  crime 

due  to  drink. 
Davis,  N  S.  (Dr.),  on  the  medicinal  nse  of  alcohol.  421. 
Davitt,  Michael,  on  the  consequences  of  drink  in  Ire- 
land, 266. 
Death  penalty  inflicted  on  liquor-sellers  and  users  in 

China  13,  74  ;  on  opium-vendors,  76. 
Death-rates  of  total  abstainers  and  drinkers  compared, 

404-9. 
Deaths  from  drink,  4:35-7. 
Decisions,  Judicial  (see  '•Judicial  Decisions  "). 
Decomposition  essential  to  the  production  of  alcohol,  18. 
Deems,  Charles  F.  (Rev.),  560. 
Deering,  E.  J.,  on  diseases  due  to  drink.  4.37. 
Defeats  of  Prohibition,  101-4,  111-126,  127-8,  443-50. 
Defective  persons,  139. 
Defiance  of  law,  268-72. 
Delagoa  Bay,  15. 
Delano,  H.  A.  (Rev.),  vi. 
Delano,  William  H.  (Rev.  Dr.),  Biographical  sketch  of, 

140-7. 
Delavan,    Edward  Cornelius,   Biographical    sketch  of, 

147. 
Delaware : 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in.  382,  383, 384. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  286-7. 

—  Prohibition  party.  Vote  of  in,  573,  577. 
Delirium  tremens,  147-8. 

Democratic  party,  148-53.    (See  also  31,  32,  449,  585-6.) 
Demorest  medal  contests,  631-2. 


Denmark,  153-4. 

—  Consumption  of  liquors  in,  133-4. 

—  International  regulations.  Action  of    regarding,  497 

(note)  ;  498  (note). 
Dee  Moines  (la.).  Prohibition  in,  517. 
Dewey,  A.  M.,  264  (note). 
Dickie,  Samuel  (Prof.),  Ill  (note),  574. 
Dike,  S  W.  (LL.D.),  Article  by,  15,5-6. 
Dingley  (Governor),  on  Prohibition  in  Maine,  504. 
Dionysus,  39. 
Dioscorides,  229. 
Dipsomania,  154. 
Direct  Veto,  36,  196  259,  608. 
Disciple  Church,  154. 
Discriminations   in  favor  of  light  liquors   (see  "  Light 

Liquors  ;  "  also  the  digests  of  State  laws,  275-360;. 
Disease,  The  treatment  of  with  alcohol,  420-5. 
Diseases    from    drink,    25,   147-8,    154,    161.    (See   also 

"  Medical  Testimony.") 

—  Hereditary  transmission  of,  204-7. 

Disorder  vSocial),  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States 

on  the  relations  of  drink  to,  93,  473. 
Disorderly  conduct  (see  "  Arrests  and  Commitments"). 
Diopensatory  (United  States),  17-18,  615  (note). 
Disraeli,  Benjamin,  on  the  results  of  local  Prohibition, 

536. 
DistillMtion,  154-5. 

—  in  ancient  China,  72. 

Distilled  liquors  (see  "  Spirituous  Liquors  "). 
Distilleries,  Regulations  for  (Federal),  636-7. 
Distillers 

—  and  the  Internal  Revenue,  256. 

—  Frauds  Committed  by,  639. 

—  Number  of,  :38-i-3. 

Distress  warrants  in  Atlanta,  555-6. 
District  of  Columbia  : 

—  Brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  .383. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in.  641  42. 

—  Prohibition  of  sales  of  liquor  to  soldiers,  370-1. 

—  Tobacco  to  minors.  Legislation  against,  630. 
Divorce,  155-6. 

Doctoring  of  diinks  (see  "Adulteration"). 

Dodge,  Albert,  vi. 

Dodge  City  (Kan. >,  Prohibition  in,  512. 

Dodge,  William  Earl,  Biographical  sketch  of,  156-7. 

Dorchester,  Daniel  (Rev.  Dr.),  454. 

Dougall,  John,  Biographical  sketch  of,  157-8. 

Dow,  Neal: 

—  Articles  by,  109,  411-12. 

— -  Biographical  sketch  of,  .502. 

—  (See  also  "  Prohibition  Party.") 
Dow  law  (Oliio),  .335. 

Dow  riut^i.  The,  271-2. 
Downing  High  License  law,  .59,209,  320-1. 
Dracut  (Mass.),  Novel  license  experiment  in,  550. 
Drink  Bill 

—  of  the  United  States,  136-40. 
Great  Britai  n ,  195. 

Drink  Traffic  (see  "  Liquor  Traffic"). 
Dropsy  from  alcohol,  25. 
Druggists,  159. 

—  Legislation    governing  tales  of  liquor   by  (see  the 

digests  of  State  laws,  27.5-360). 

—  Quantities  of  spirits  sold  by,  615  (note). 
Drugs  used  in  adulterating  (see  "  Adulteration  "). 
Drunkenness,  Arrests  for  (see  "Arrests  and  Commit- 
ments "). 

Dry  wines,  648. 
"Dual  Basis,"  81,  197. 
Duffleld.  D.  Bethune.  Ill,  176. 
Dumfermline  Association,  83,  607. 
Duniway,  Abigail  Scott,  115. 


Index.] 


G58 


[Index. 


Drunkards ,  187. 

L»uulop,  John,  423,607. 

Dnpetiaux,  M.,  on  drink  in  Belgium,  45. 

Dutch  Reformed  Church,  160. 

Dutton  (Governor),  on  Prohihition  in  Connecticut,  536. 

East  India  Company,  76,  77. 
Eau  de  vie,  618. 
Economic  Aspects 

—  of  Proliibilion,  537-57. 

the  drink  traffic,  385-7. 

Eddy,  Richard  (Rev.  Dr.),  vi. 

Edgar,  John,  Biographical  sketch  of,  IfiO. 

Edgewortli,  Maria,  on  Father  Mathew's  work,  418. 

Edkins  (Dr.),  72, 75. 

Edwards,  Justin,  Bioi:raphical  sketch  of,  161. 

Effects  of  alcohol,  20-6.  (See  also  "  Medical  Testimony.") 

Effervescing  wines,  648. 

.  ii-12.  ;See  also  "  Historical  and  Philosophical."  ) 

,:    \,  19. 

jbiiectliin  day,  Prohibition  of  sales  on  (see  digests  of 

StairlawH,  275-360). 
Elgin  J, Old",  "^6. 

Emmons,  Francis  W.  (Rev.),  527  (note). 
Employes  of  the  liquor  traffic,  .384-6. 
"  Encyclopaedia  Britannica  " 

—  on  adulterations,  7,  9,  617  (note). 
. hops  used  in  beer,  172. 

Wine  production  in  Portugal,  493  (note). 

Enforcement  of  law,  266  8. 
iiingland : 

—  Coffee-house  movement  in,  84. 
~  Compensation  struggle  in,  94-6. 

—  Consumption  of  liquors  in,  131-2,  365. 

—  .  Drink  Bill  of,  105. 

—  ■  India,  Excise  policy  of  in,  242  4. 

—  Internalional  regulations.   Action  of  regarding,  497, 

498  (note). 
-Legislation  (Liquor)   in,  9,  170,  195-6,  231  2,  272-4,  366. 

—  Longevity,  Comi)arative,  of  abstainers  and  drinkers 

in,  404  9. 

—  Mortality  from  drink  in,  25  6,  435-6. 

—  Opium  traffic.  Responsibility  of  for  the,  76-8,  244-5. 

—  Prohibition  (Local),  Results  of  in,  536, 

—  Right  of  petition  in,  475. 

—  Sumptuary  laws  of,  622. 

Temperance  organizations  and  movement  in,  40-1,  57, 
58,  196  7,  389-90. 

English,  J.  B.  (Rev.),  vi. 

English  brewery  syndicates,  374-5. 

Epilepsy  from  drink,  25,  161. 

Episcopalians  (see  "  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  ". 

Equal  Suffrage,  162-7. 

Essenes,  The,  47. 

Ether,  79  80. 

Ethics  of  license,  167-9. 

Eusebius,  47. 

Evangelical  Adventist  Church,  169. 

Evangelical  Church,  169  70. 

Evans,  Thomas,  Jr.,  573. 

Evans,  Walter  (Commissioner),  and  the  hrewers,  6.39. 

Evening  Post,  The  New  York.  489  (note),  .587. 

"Evil,  and  only  evil,  and  that  continually,"  385. 

Ewing,  Emma  P.,  vi. 

Excise,  170. 

Expenditure  for  drink  (see  "  Cost  of  t'je  Drink  Traf- 
fic"). 

Exports  (see  "  Imports  and  Exports  "). 

Fall  River  (Mass.),  Prohihition  and  High  License  in,  533. 
Falsehoods  (instances),  119,  123,  511,  553-4. 
Faleification  of  wines,  7-9,  133,  647. 


Farm  Herald,  The,  388,  446. 

Farmers  and  the  drink  issue,  35,  111,  122,  126,  170-4,  448. 

Faroe  Islands,  154. 

Favrar  (Archdeacon),  iv,  13-14  (note),  198. 

Faxon,  Henry  H.,  on  the  employment  of  detectives,  268. 

Federal  Government,  The,  634-46. 

"  Federal  permits  "  in  Prohibition  States,  257,  504-5,  507, 

513,  520,  522,  524. 
Federation  and  concentration  of  the  liquor  intere8tp,372-9. 
Fermentation,  174-5. 
Fermented  Liquors  : 

—  Nearly  the  entire  product  of  used  as  beverage,  19. 

—  Not  produced  among  the  Chinese,  72. 

— -  (See  "Malt  Liquors"  and  "Vinous  Liquors.") 

Fernald,  Henry  B.,  634  (note). 

Fernald,  J.  C.  (Rev.),  Articles  by,  2.37-  41,  268-72. 

Fernald,  Nettie  B.,  vi. 

Fictitious  wines,  7-9. 

Field,  Kate,  122,  363. 

Field,  Stephen  J.  (Justice),  93  (note),  472-3. 

Field,  W.  W.,  on  Prohibition  in  Iowa,  516-  17. 

Fillmore.  Millard  (President),  147. 

Finch,  John  B. : 

—  Biographical  sketch  of,  175-6. 

—  on  High  License  in  Nebraska,  215. 

"  Fine  "  whiskey.  Comparative  insignificance  of  the  pro- 
duction of,  376-7. 

"Fire  and  brimstone,  clubs,  pitchforks  and  butcher- 
knives,"  574. 

risk  campaign,  575-8. 

Fisk,  Clinton  B.,  Biographical  sketch  of,  176-7.  (See  also 
"Prohibition  Party.") 

Fisk,  Wilbur,  32,  177-8. 

Flick,  James  F.  (Congressman),  on  Prohibition  in  Iowa, 
517. 

Florida  : 

—  Brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  383,  384. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  287-8. 

—  Prohibition  party.  Vote  of  in,  573,  577. 
Flournoy,  Josiah,  Biographical  sketch  of,  178-9. 
Food,  Alcohol  not  a,  179-  80. 

Foote  (Rear-Admiral).  371. 

Foraker,  Joseph  B.,  29,  107. 

Foreigners,  180-2. 

Foresters,  Order  of.  Longevity  statistics  of.  404. 

Fortifying  of  wines,  7-9,  12,  14,  481.  614,  647. 

"  Forty  cents  a  line,"  446  (note). 

Foster,  Charles  (Governor),  106. 

Foster,  J.  Ellen  (Mrs.),  454,  652. 

Four-Mile  law  (Tennessee),  347. 

Fraizer,  Samuel,  Biographical  sketch  of,  182, 

France,  183-6. 

—  Adulterations  in,  132-3,  647. 

—  Consumption  of  liquors  in,  1.32,  184,  364. 

—  International  rejrulations.  Action    of   regarding,    497 

(note),  498  (note). 

—  Phylloxera,  Ravages  of  in,  478-81. 

—  Tyrannical  action  of  in  the  Sandwich  Islands,  607. 
Franklin,  Benjamin,  30,  264. 

Frauds  in  the  interest  of  the  liquor-traders  (instances), 

108,  111-12,  115  16,  375  (note). 
Frauds  on  the  revenues,  639. 
Frederick  William  III.  (Prussia),  40. 
Free  Baptists,  186. 
Free  Methodists,  186. 
Free-Soil  party,  33. 
Frelinghuysen,  Theodore,  96. 
French,  The  (in  America),  181. 
French  spirits,  616. 
Friends,  186,  246. 
Frontignan  wines,  648. 
Frost,  WDliam  Goodell  (Prof.),  Article  by,  166-7 


Index.] 


659 


[Index. 


Frost,  Walter  B.,  Statistics  prepared  by,  526,  543-1. 

Fruit  distilleries,  375. 

"  Fruit  of  the  vine,"  46,  48,  49,  55,  86,  87,  88. 

Frye,  William   P.  (Senator),  on  Prohibition  in  Maine, 

502-3,  538. 
Fugitive  Slave  law,  32. 
Funk,  I.  K.  (Rev.  Dr.),  573,  597. 
Fusel  oil,  8,  10,  18,  20,  155. 

Galen,  229. 

Gambling,  Naturally  allied  to  liquor-selling,  361,  372. 

Gambrell,  Roderick  Dhu,  Biographical  sketch  of,  186-7. 

Gambrinus,  187. 

Ganja,  202. 

Gardner,  Mills,  on  the  failure  of  the  non-partisan  plan, 

453. 
Generous  wines,  648. 
Geneva,  617. 
Georgia  : 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  382, 383,  384. 

—  Flournoy  movement  in,  178. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  288-91. 

—  Oglethorpe's  Prohibitory  law,  247,  288-9. 

—  Prohibition  party.  Vote  of  in,  573,  577. 

—  Tobacco  to  minors.  Legislation  against,  630. 
German  Baptists,  187. 

German  Reformed  Church,  187. 

Germans  (in  America),  100,  105, 106-7,  182,  365,  590-1. 

Germany,  187-91. 

—  Consumption  of  liquors  in,  133. 

—  Hop-yield  of.  234. 

—  International  regulations.  Action  of    regarding,  497, 

498  (note),  643  (note). 

Gibbud,  n.  B.,  vi. 

Giddings,  Joshua  R.,  3'. 

Giflord,  George  (Consu   .  on  adulterations,  10. 

Gillette,  Walter  R.  (Dr.),  on  the  physiological  eflfects  of 
drink,  408-9. 

Gin,  19,  617. 

Gin  acts,  273-4. 

Gipps,  Governor  (Australia),  35. 

Gladstone,  W.  E.,  95-6,  196. 

Gladwin,  Wallace  J.,  242  (note). 

Golden  Cross,  United  Order  of  the,  631. 

Goodell,  D.  H.  (Governor),  117. 

Goodell,  William,  Biographical  sketch  of,  191-3. 

Good  Templars  (see  "  Independent  Order  of  Good  Tem- 
plars "). 

Gooseberry  wine,  19. 

Gospel  Temperence,  192. 

Gothenburg  system,  455,  623-4. 

Gottheil  (Rabbi),  on  Passover  wines,  465. 

Gougar,  Helen  M.,  Article  by,  164-6. 

Gough,  John  B..  Biographical  sketch  of,  192-4. 

Governors,  Testimony  from,  504,  510,  516,  526,  528,  530, 
538,  5.39,  540,  541-2,  551. 

Grady,  Henry  W.,  on  Prohibition  in  Atlanta,  534,  545, 
554-6. 

Graham,  Robert,  Article  by,  81. 

Grain  distilleries,  .375-8. 

Grain,  Quantities  of  used  in  the  manufacture  of  spirituous 
and  malt  liquors,  172. 

Grange.  The,  and  Prohibition,  170-1. 

Gray,  Charlotte  A.,  Article  by,  45-6. 

Gray,  C.  M.,  37  (note). 

Greacen,  Robert  A.,  137  (note). 

Great  Britain,  194-7.    (See  "  England.") 

Greece,  22CV-1.  (See  also  "Historical  and  Philosophi- 
cal.") 

Greeley  (Col.),  Prohibition  in,  5.3.^6. 

Greeley,  Horace,  198  200.  466,  591. 

Greene,  H.  E.  (Dr.),  on  the  medicinal  use  of  alcohol,  412. 


Greene,  Jacob  L.,  on  the  effects  of  beer-drinking,  408. 
Greenhut,    J.    B.,    Statements     from,    concerning    the 

Whiskey  Trust,  377,  378,  449  (note). 
Greenland,  154. 
Greenock  Society,  607. 
Gregson,  James  G.  (Rev.),  83,  244. 
Grier  (Justice),  on  Prohibition,  645. 
Griffin,  Albert: 

—  Anti-Saloon  Republican  movement  of,  27-30. 

—  Statistics  prepared  by,  363. 

Griffis.  William    Elliott  (Rev.  Dr.),  Articles  by,  135-6, 

260-2,  4:33-4,  632-3. 
Grog,  616. 

Grog  ration  in  the  navy,  642-3. 
Guernsey,  Alice  M.,  650  (note). 
Gastafson,  Axel : 

—  Article  by,  35-7. 

—  on  the  London  Temperance  Hospital,  425. 

—  (See  also  iv,  vi.) 

Guthrie,Thomas  (Rev.  Dr.),  Biographical  sketch  of,  200-1. 

Habitual  drunkards,  intoxicated  persons,  etc..  Legisla- 
tion concemini,'  sales  of  liquor  to  (see  the  digests 
of  State  laws,  27.5-360). 

Haddock,  George  C.  (Rev.  Dr.).  Biographical  sketch  of, 
201-2. 

Haiiht.  J.  Masou,  Letter  of  Abraham  Lincoln  to,  370. 

Haines,  S.  A.,  Article  by,  84-5. 

Hale,  Eugene  (Senator),  on  Prohibition  in  Maine,  503. 

Hale,  John  P..  .33. 

Hale,  Matthew  (Chief  Justice),  on  the  relatione  of  drink 
to  crime,  141. 

"Half-a-Loaf,"  168,  169,  360. 

Hale,  J.  A.  (Consul),  on  adulterations  of  sherry.  614. 

Hall.  John  (Rev.  Dr.),  vi. 

Halstead,  Murat,  574. 

Hamilton.  Alexander,  on  E.xcise  laws,  251-2. 

Hamlin,  Hannibal,  on  Prohibition  in  Maine,  503. 

Hamilton,  J.  W.,  on  Prohibition  'n  Kansas,  510. 

Hammond.  C.  A.,  vi. 

Hammond.  William  A.  (Dr.),  10.  83,  179. 

Hanbal,  Ibn,  69. 

Hardy,  H.  W.,  on  High  License  in  Nebraska,  215. 

Hargreavea,  William  (Dr.),  vi,  139. 

Harlan  (Justice).  93. 

Harper,  Frances  E.  W.,  451. 

Harper  law,  209. 

Harris,  Elisha  (Dr.),  on  the  relations  of  drink  to  crime 
141  2. 

Harris,  F.  McC.  (Mrs.),  vi. 

Harrison.   Benjamin  (President),   on  Prohibition,    593, 

644. 
Hart,  Coleridge  A..  Article  by,  272. 
Hartwell,  C,  (Rev.),  72  (note). 
Hasheesh,  202-3. 
—  in  Egypt,  11. 

India.  244-5. 

Hawaiian  Islands,  606-7. 

Hawkins.  John  Henry  Willis,  Biographical  sketch  of 

203. 
Hawley,  Joseph  R.  (Senator),  128. 
Hayes,  Lucy  Webb.  Biographical  sketch  of,  203-4. 
Hebrews  (see  "  Jews  "'). 
Heckeivelder,  John  (Rev.),  246. 
HeUvig,  J.  B.  (Rov.  Dr.),  vi. 
Hemp,  Indian.  11,  79,  202. 
Henry,  S.  M.  I.  (Mrs.),  vi. 
Heredity  of  the  alcohol  habit  and  its  effects,  24-5,804-5. 

(See  also  "  Idiocy.") 
Hermitage  wines,  648. 

Herndon.  W.  H.,  on  Lincoln's  temperance  record,  368-9. 
HeroJotus,  49,  227. 


Index.l 


6G0 


[Index. 


Hftwit,  Nathaniel  (Rev.  Dr.),  Biographical  sketch  of,  307 
High  License,  207-20. 

—  StateB  charging  comparatively  high  fees  (1880) ;  Ar 

kansas,  378  ;  Colorado,  280  ;  Florida,  288  ;  Georgia 
Ulinoia,  292;  Massachusetts,  313;  Michigan,  315 
Minnesota,  317 ;  Mississippi,  319 ;  Missouri,  320 
Montana  (Territory),  321;  Nebraska.  322,  .323;  Ongon 
337;  Pennsylvania,  340,  341:  Rhode  Island,  342-3 
Texas,  349;  Utah  (Territory),  350;  Wasliington  (Ter- 
ritory), 356  ;  West  Virginia,  357  ;  Wyoming  (Terri 
tory),  360. 

—  Antagonism  of  Prohibitionists  to,  209-10. 

—  Claims  for.  208.  ' 

—  Consolidation  of  the  liquor  traffic  promoted  by,  379. 

—  Democratic  party,  The,  and,  151-2. 

—  Enforcement    of   law    under,  Unsatisfactory  results 

of,  269. 

—  English  precedents,  274. 

—  France,  Instructive  experience  of,  1834. 

—  "  High  or  low,  vicious  in  principle,  and  powerless 

as  a  remedy,"  436. 

—  India,  Experience  of,  2424. 

—  Liquor  traders.  Cheerful  acceptance  of    by,  180,  122, 

126,  218-20. 

—  Obstructive  effects  of,  104,  111,  118,   119,  120,  121,  122, 

215-16,  362. 

—  Political  influence  of  the  rum  power  not  diminished 

by,  490. 

—  Press,  The  daily  and,  216-18. 

—  Republican  party  and,  592  4. 

—  Results  of,  216-18,  518-21,  526,  531-5,  548  50. 

—  Sandwich  Islands,  607. 

—  (See  also  the  various  religious  denominations.) 
High  proof  spirits,  19,  616. 

High  wines,  616. 

Hill,  David  B.  (Governor),  152. 

Hill,  Eliza  Trask,  Article  by.  434-5. 

Hill.  Gershom  F.,  on  Prohibition  in  Iowa,  516. 

Hippocrates.  228-9. 

Historical  and  Philosophical  Notes  on  Intemperance, 

220-32. 
Hoar,    George   F.  (Senator),  on  Prohibition  and  High 

License  in  Worcester,  532. 
Hock,  19,  647,  648. 

Hotfman,  Clara  C,  Article  by,  143-5. 
Hogarth's  "  Gin  Lane,"  273. 
Holbrook,  M.  E.  (Dr.),  vi. 
Holiday  Prohibition  in  Boston,  537. 
Holland,  2.32-3. 

—  Consumption  of  liquors  in,  134. 

—  International  regulations,  Action  of  regarding,   497 

(note),  498  (note). 
Holland,  J.  G.  (Dr.),  on  Lincoln's  temperance  record,  369. 
Hollanders  (in  America),  181-2. 
Home  Protection  party,  232,  569. 

—  in  Victoria,  37. 
Homer,  226-7. 

Honest    whiskey,    Comparative   insignificance  of   the 

quantity  produced,  .370-1. 
Hooker,  George  W.,  on  Prohibition  in  Vermont,  523. 
Hopkins,  A.  A.,  573. 
Hops.  233-4. 

—  Quantities  of  used  in  the  manufacture  of  malt  liquors, 

172. 

—  Substitutes  for,  9, 10,  234. 
Hornady,  W.  T.: 

—  Article  by,  182-3. 

—  on  free  rum  on  the  Congo,  15-16. 

Horton,  Albert  H.  (Chief-Justice),  on  Prohibition  in  Kan- 
sas, 548,  554. 
Hospital,  The  London  Temperance,  424-5. 
Hovas,  Prohibition  among  the,  13. 


Howe,  J.  G.  (Dr.),  Report  by  on  idiocy  235. 

Hoxie,  C.  De  F.  Article  by,  128-35. 

Hoyle,  William,  195. 

Hudson,  George  G.  (Rev.),  262  (note). 

Hudson,  Henry  B.  (Rev.),  vi. 

Hudson,  R.  E.,  vi. 

Hughes,  Charles  H.  (Dr.),  on  diseases  due  to  drink,  437. 

Humphrey,  Heman  (Rev.  Dr.),  Biographical  sketch  of, 

2;i4. 
Hungarians  (in  America),  181. 
Hungary  (Lee  Austria). 

—  Phylloxera,  ravages  of  the  in,  481. 
Hunt,  Mary  H.  (Mrs.),  vi.  607. 

Hunt,  Thomas  Poage  (Rev.),  Biographical  sketch    of, 

234-5. 
Hunter,  Governor  (Australia),  .35. 
Huntington,  D.  W.  C.  (Rev.  Dr.),  vi. 
Huss,  Magnus,  623. 

Hutchins,  E.  R.,  on  Prohibition  in  Iowa,  515-16. 
Hyde,  William  De  W.,  on  Prohibition  in  Maine,  503. 
Hypertrophy  from  alcohol,  25. 

Iceland,  154. 
Idaho: 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  383,  384. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  291. 

—  Tobacco  to  minors.  Legislation  against,  630. 
Idiocy,  235-6.    (See  also  '•  Heredity.") 
Ignorance : 

—  Not  a  sufficient  explanation  for  the  prevalence  of  the 

drink  habit,  69-70. 

—  (See  •'  Illiteracy.") 

Her,  Peter  E.,  on  High  License  in  Nebraska,  219.    (See 

also  445,  449.) 
Illinois: 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  383,  384. 

—  High  License,  Results  of  in,  210,  212,  219. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  291-3. 

—  Prohibition  party.  Vote  of  in,  564,  566,  568,  573,  577. 

—  Tobacco  to  minors.  Legislation  against,  630. 
Illiteracy,  236-7. 

—  in  Portugal,  493. 
Imports  and  Exports,  23741. 
— Brandy  from  France,  480-1. 

—  Duty,  Rates  of,  6.37-8. 

Independent  Order  of  Good  Templars,  241-2. 

—  Prohibition  party.  Part  played  by  the  Good  Templars 

in  the  organization  of  the,  560,  561. 

—  (See  Constitutional    Amendment   campaigns,  104-88, 

445.'* 

—  Foreign  countries:  Australasia,  37;  Belgium,  45;  Can- 

ada, 61;  Denmark,  1.5:3;   England,  197;   Ireland,  259  ; 

Norway,  456  ;  Russia,  605  ;    Scotland,  608  ;    Sweden, 

624. 
Independent  Order  of  Rechabites,  37,  582. 
India,  222-3,  243-5. 
Indiana: 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  383,  384. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  293-5. 

—  Prohibition  party,  Vote  of  in,  5(56,  573,  577. 

—  Tobacco  to  minors,  Legislation  against,  630. 
Indian  Territory,  Prohibition  in,  295. 

Indians  (North  American),  245-7,  295,  641-2.     (See  also 

the  digests  of  State  laws,  375-360.) 
Inebriate  asylums,  247-8. 
Ingalls,  John  J.  (Senator),  on  Prohibition  in  Kansas, 

509-10,  539. 
Injunction  law,  248-51. 

—  States  having  Injunction  provisions  (1889):  Iowa,  298; 

Kansas,  300,  301  ;    New  Hampshire,  .325-6  ;    North 
Dakota  (1890),  333  :  South  Dakota  (1890),  613  ;   Ver- 
mont, 353. 
Inquiry  bill,  The,  640. 


Index.] 


661 


[Index. 


Insanity  from  drii.k,  15,  45,  139,  153,  184,  189. 

—  Proliibition  State,-,  Testimony  from  insane  asylums  in, 

503,  516. 

—  (See  also  "Idiocy.") 
Insurance  statistics,  404-9. 

"  Intemperate  temperance  "  men,  95,  574. 
Inter-Collegiate  Prohibition  Association,  574. 
Juternal  Revenue  system,  251-7,  373-2,  583,  635-7. 

—  Tobacco  regulations,  629-30. 
International  aspects,  15-16,  496-9,  643. 
Iowa: 

—  Constitutional  Prohibition  in,  99-100,  102,  105-6. 

—  Farmers  of.  Resolutions  by,  171. 

—  "  Federal  permits  "  in,  383,  384,  51.3. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  295-9. 

—  Prohibition  party.  Vote  of  in,  566,  568.  573.  577. 

—  Prohibition,  Results  of  in,  513-22,  541-3,  548-50. 
Ireland,  25^-9,  417-20. 

—  Davitt,  Michael,  on  the  consequences  of  drink  in,  266. 
Ireland,  John  (Archbishop),  68,  181,  216,  598-9,  000. 
Irish,  The  (in  America),  181,  365. 

Irish  Whiskey,  19.  42,  616. 
Israelites  (see  '"Jews  "). 
Italy: 

—  Consumption  of  liquors  in,  1.34. 

—  International    regulations.  Action  of   regarding,  498 

(note). 
Iti,  72. 

Jackson,  Andrew  (President),  147. 

Jamaica,  259-60. 

Jamaica  Rum,  10,  35,  260. 

Japan,  260-2. 

Jeffries,  Julius,  Medical  declaration  drawn  up  by,  422-3. 

Jewell,  Benjamin  R.,  Article  by,  611-12. 

Jewett,  Charles  (Dr.),  Biographical  sketch  of,  262-3 

Jews,  12,  263.  470,  605.  (See  also  '•  Bible  and  Drink." 
"  Bible  Wines,"  "  Historical  and  Philosophies.)," 
"  Palestine  "  and  "Passover  Wines.") 

Joachimsen.  P.  J  ,  on  Passover  wines,  464-5. 

Johnson.  Andrew  (President),  147. 

Johnson,  Herrick  (Prof.),  on  High  License,  361. 

Johnson,  William  E.,  Letters  of  liquor  men  to,  220  (note). 

Johnston,  W.  A.  (Justice),  on  Prohibition  in  Kansas,  540. 

Joliet  (III.),  High  License  in,  210,  212. 

Journal.  The  Indianapolis,  594. 

Journal,  The  Providence,  110. 

Joy,  Benjamin,  Biographical  sketch  of,  263-4. 

Judges,  Testimony  from: 

—  on  the  results  of  High  License,  519-20. 

the  results  of  Prohibition,  507-9,  514-15,  539-40,  548, 

,  551,  .554. 

Jy  Judicial  decisions,  90,  91,  92  4,  106,  250-1,  472-3,  644-6. 
Jukes  family,The,  142,  205  (note). 
Junior  Prohibition  Clubs,  .574. 
Jury  trials.  Refusal  of  under  certain  Prohibitory  laws, 

248-51. 
Juvenile  Temperance  Societies,  40-1,  60,  68,  71,  409. 

Kama  (Chief),  15. 
Kansas: 

—  Constitutional  Prohibition  in,  100  102,  104-5. 
— "  Federal  permits  "  in  38:3,  384,  507. 

—  Injunction  law  of,  249-51. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  299.  302. 

—  Prohibition  party.  Vote  of  in,  566,  573,  577. 

—  Prohibition,  Results  of  in.  .560,  519-20,  539  41,  548  50.    1 

—  Tobacco  to  minorij,  Legislation  against,  6:30. 
"  Kansa.  cases,"  92  4,  249-51. 

Kansas  Cit;-  (Mo.),  High  License  in,  210. 
Kansas-Nebraska  bill,  The,  .586. 

Kell  y,  Harrison  (Cou'^ressman),  on  Prohibition  in  Kan- 
sas, 510. 


Kennedy,  J.  F.  (Dr.),  on  Prohibition  in  Iowa,  516. 

Kent,  Prof.,  ill. 

Kentucky: 

—  Crime  and  illiteracy  in  the  mountain  counties  of,  237, 

558. 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  383,  384. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  302-4. 

—  Tobacco  to  minors,  Lv,gislation  against,  630. 

—  Whiskey  production  in,  376-7. 
Keokuk  (la.),  Prohibition  in,  517. 

Kephart.  B.  F.  (Rev.),  on  the  liquor  traffic  with  Africa, 

16-17. 
Kerr,  J.  G.  (Dr.),  on  drink  in  China,  74,  75. 
Kerr,  Norman  (Dr.),  vi. 

—  on  chloral,  etc.,  80 

Mortality  from  drink,  436-6. 

Narcomania,  438-9. 

Kidd  V.  Pearson,  645-6. 

Kimball,  Lucia  F.  E.,  650  (note). 

Kincaid,  William  (Rev.  Dr.),  Article  by,  430-2. 

King's  Daughters,  84. 

Kirk,  L.  K.,  on  Prohibition  in  Kansas,  539. 

Kirschwasser,  a  liqueur,  618. 

Kirsebaer.  a  liqueur,  G18. 

Kloster,  Apbjiirn,  456. 

Knights  of  Labor.  123,  265-6. 

Knights  of  Temperance,  264. 

Koran,  The,  and  drink.    (See  "  Mohammedans.") 

Koumiss,  an  intoxicant  from  mares'  milk,  618. 

Kiimmel,  a  liqueur,  618. 

Labor  and  Liquor,  204-6,  384-6,  447-8,  536,  544,  .554-7. 

Labouchore,  Henry,  197. 

Lacbrymse  Christi.  647,  648. 

Lalor,  J.  J.,  Article  by,  251-5. 

Lambert,  T.  S.  (Dr.),  200. 

Lamon,  Ward  H.,  on  Li..coln'8  temperance  record,  369. 

La  Monte,  George,  vi. 

Lancet,  The  London,  on  beer  adulterations,  910. 

Landlords: 

—  Jointly  responsible  with  saloon-keepers  for  damage 

done  (see  "Civil  Damage  Acts"). 

—  Prohibition  by,  195,  5.36. 

Lankester,  Edwin  (Dr.),  on  mortality  from  drink,  25  6. 

Larrabee  (Governor),  on  Prohibition  in  Iowa,  516,  &I1-2, 
551. 

La^hrap,  Mary  T.,  vi,  650  (note). 

Laurie,  T.  (Rev.),  72  (notr>. 

Law  and  Order  Leagues,  67,  266  8. 

Law,  Due  process  of,  90-4. 

Lawlessness  of  the  liquor-sellers,  268-72,  378-9. 

Lawrence  (Mass.),  Prohibition  and  High  License  in,  532. 

Lawson,  Albert  G.  (Rev.  Dr.),  vi. 

Lawson,  Wilfrid  (Sir),  1%. 

Leavenworth  (Kan.),  Prohibition  in  511,  512,  553-4. 

Leavitt,  Mary  Clement,  Articl"  by,  59-60.  (See  also  vi, 
13  [note],  37.  75,  24'*  [note],  262  [note],  607,  660 
[note],  651.) 

Lecky,  W.  E.  H  ,  on  the  cflfect  of  gin-drinking  in  Eng- 
land. 273. 

Leech.  Caroline  A.,  650  (note). 

Lee  ,  F.  R.  (Dr.): 

—  Article  by,  46-8 ;  see  also  iv. 

—  on  the  pledge,  484. 
Legal  Suasion.  272. 
Legge  (Dr.).  72.  73. 
Legislation  (Liquor  : 

—  United  States  : 

Colonial,  274,  281,  286,  288-9,  305-«,  309-10,  310-11, 

324,  326,  .328-9,  331,  338,  .341,  344-5,  353. 

Federal,  635-46. 

State,  276-360. 


Index.] 


662 


[Index. 


—  other  countries  (see  the  separate  countries). 
Legislation  (Tobacco),  629-30. 

Leisy  case,  646. 

Leo  XIFI,  (Pope),  46,  68,  598-9. 

Leonard,  A.  B.  (Kev.  Dr.),  vi. 

LeoD&rd  campaign,  .575. 

Letheby,  Henry  (Ph.  D.),  on  adulterations,  7. 

Lever,  The,  5t3. 

Lewis,  Dio  (Dr.),  143,  144,  176. 

Liberia,  161T. 

Liberty  party,  30-3. 

License : 

—  Distinction  between  license  and  tax,  624-5. 

—  General  principles,  167-9,  .360-2,  402-3. 

—  Legislation  (see  "  Legislation"). 

—  Restriction  without,  597. 

—  (See  also  the  various  religious  denominations.)  \ 
"  License  cases,"  90. 

Liebig  (Baron  von),  180. 

Life  insurance  statistics,  404-9. 

Light  liquors,  362-7. 

—  Appetite  for  spirits  created  by,  70,  366-7. 

—  Di.scriminations  in  favor  of  (see  digests  of  State  laws, 

275-.360). 

—  Experience  of  England,  .365,  366. 
France,  18.3-6,  364. 

Germany,  187  91. 

•  Norway,  454-5. 

—  Insurance  officials  on,  408-9. 

—  Pharmacopoeia,  The  United  States,  on  the  dangers  of 

wines,  648. 

—  (See  also  "  Malt  Liquors"  and  "  Vinous  Liquors.") 
Lin  (Commissioner),  Seizure  of  opium  by,  76. 
Lincoln,  iNeb.),  High  License  in,  210,  215. 
Lincoln,  Abraham  (President),  147,  367-71,  587. 
Lincoln,  Allen  B.,  127  (note). 

LinniEUS,  623. 
Liqueurs,  317-18. 
Liquor  dealers  : 

—  Mo-tality  of,  404-408. 

—  Number  of,  ,383-4. 
Liquor  Traffic,  371-89. 

Liquors  (see  "Malt  Liquors,"  "  Spirituous  Liquors"  and 

"Vinous  Liquors"). 
Liquors,  Adulterations  of  (see  "Adulterations"). 
Lisbon  wines,  19.  648. 
"  Livelihood,  To  sell  rum  for  a,"  199. 
Livermoro,  Mary  A.,  Article  by,  477-8;  see  also  vl. 
Liverpool  (Eng  ),  Prohibition  in,  536-7. 
Livesey,  Joseph,  Biographical  sketch  of,  389-90. 
Local  Option,  300^00. 

—  Contrasted  with  Constitutional  Prohibition,  98. 

—  Democratic  party  and,  1.50  1. 

—  Legislation  : 

United  States  (see  the  digests  of   State  laws,  275, 

360). 
Australasia,  38;  Canadi-.  62  3;  England  (movement 

for),  196;  Norway,  4.54  5;    Scotland    (movement  for), 

608 ;  Sweden,  623-4. 

—  Obstructive  tendency  of.   118,  119,  392  4. 

—  Prohibition,  Results  of  under,  580-7,  544-5,  554-6,  601. 

—  Republican  party  and,  591  2. 
—Votes  on,  396  400. 

Locke,  David  Ross,  Biographical  sketch  of.  4001. 

Locke,  Joseph  A.,  on  Prohibition  in  Maine,  5;i8. 

Locke,  Zoe  M.,  633  (note). 

Logic.  Liquor,  401-3. 

London  Temperance  Hospital,  424  5. 

Longevity,  404-9. 

—  Franci',  Instructive  facts  from.  185. 

"  Lonk  not  on  tlie  wine  when  it  is  red,"  234. 
Lossing,  Benson  J.,  vi. 


Lottery,  Louisiana  State,  305. 
Louisiana: 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor  dealers  in,  383,  384. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  304-5. 

—  Prohibition  party.  Vote  of  in,  573,  577. 
Low  License  ; 

—  States  charging  comparatively  low  fees  (1889):    Ala- 

bama, 276;  Arizona  (Territory),  277;  California,  279  ; 
Connecticut,  283  ;  Delaware,  287  ;  Idaho  (Territory), 
291  ;  Indiana,  294;  Kentucky,  302  ;  Louisiana,  305  ; 
Maryland,  310;  Nevada,  .32.3-4;  New  Jersey,  .326;  New 
Me.xico  (Territory),  327;  New  York,  330;  North  Caro- 
lina, .3.31-2;  Ohio,  3;35;  South  Carolina,  .345  ;  Tennes- 
see, 347;  Virginia,  .3.54-5;  MMsconsin,  :358. 

—  Results  of  compared  with  High  License  results,  210- 

14. 
Low  proof  spirits,  616. 
Low  wines,  616. 
Lowell  (Mass.),  Prohibition  and  High  License  in,  213, 

533. 
Loyal  Temperance  Legion,  409-10. 
Lucas,  Margaret  Bright,  Biographical  sketch  of,  410. 
Lutheran  Church,  410-11. 
Lyman,  H.  S.,  115  (note). 
Lynch,  John  (Congressman),  on  Prohibition  in  Maine, 

503. 
Lynn  (Mass.),  High  License  in,  213. 
Lyons,  J.  A.,  on  Prohibition  in  Iowa,  542. 

McClees,  Sarah  A.,  6.34  (note). 

McCulloch,  Hugh  (Secretary),  and  the  whiskey  men,  640 
McKinley  TarifE  act,  changed  in  the  interest  of  the  liquor- 
traders,  640. 
McLagan,  Peter  (M.  P.),  608. 
McLean  (Justice),  on  Prohibition,  645. 
Macon  wines,  648. 
Madagascar,  13. 
Madeira  Islands,  12. 
Madeira  wines,  8,  9,  12,  647,  648. 
Madison,  James  (President),  147. 
Mail  and  Express.  The  New  York,  28,  29,  594. 
Maine: 

—  Constitutional  Prohibition  in,  101,  102,  109. 

—  "Federal  permits"  in,  ;383.  384,  504-5. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  305  9. 

—  Prohibition  party.  Vote  of  in,  568,  573,  577. 

—  Prohibition  Results  of  in,  411-12,  502-6,  538-9,  548. 

—  Republican  and  Democratic  parties  as  champions  of 

Prohibition  in,  588  (note). 

—  Tobacco  to  minors.  Legislation  against,  630. 
Maine  Law,  1.58-9.  .306-9.  411-12. 

Malaga  wines,  19,  647,  648. 

Malagasy,  The,  13  (note). 

Maiden  (Mass.),  ProhilMtion  in,  531. 

Malins,  Joseph,  vi,  154  (note),  3.32  (note),  603  (note),  624 

(note). 
Malmroc.  Oscar,  Report  of  on  the  phylloxera,  480. 
Malmsey  wines,  19,  648. 
Malt,  412-13. 

—  Brv-wing  of  the,  57-8. 

—  Substitutes  for,  9,  10. 
Malt  Liquors,  413-14. 

—  Adulterations  of,  9-10. 

—  Alcoholic  strength  of,  19. 

—  Brewing,  Process  of,  .57-8. 

—  Consumption  of,  128-;i5. 

—  Discriminations  in  favor  of  (see  "Legislation  "). 

—  Entire  prod'-ct  of  used  as  beverage,  19. 

—  Expenditure  for,  137. 

—  Exports  of,  240. 

—  Imports  of,  238-9. 

—  Insurance  officials  on,  408-9. 


Index.] 


663 


[Index. 


—  Materials  used  in  the  manufacture  of,  172-3. 

—  Nutritive  purposes,  Valueless  for,  179-80. 

—  Railroad  employes  required  to  abstain  from,  632  (note). 

—  Revenue  from  (Federal),  254. 

—  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  on  the  relations 

of  to  crime,  pauperism,  etc.,  93. 

—  Taxes  on  (Federal),  636. 
Manila  Charta,  272. 
Mandamus  act  (New  York),  .330. 
Manitoba,  6.5,  66. 

Mann,  Horace,  Biographical  sketch  of,  415-16. 
Manning,  Cardinal,  94  (note),  198,  599. 
Manufacturers  of  liquors: 

—  Regulations  for  (Federal),  636-7. 

Manufactures,  arts,  sciences,  etc.,  Quantities  of  spirits 

used  in  the,  18,  19,  130-1,  615. 
Maraschino,  a  liqueur,  618. 

Marble  (Governor),  on  Prohibition  in  Maine,  504. 
Marc  of  grapes,  647,  648. 
Marsala  wine,  19,  647,  649. 

Marsh,  Joh..  (Rev.  Dr.),  Biographical  sketch  of,  416. 
Marshall,  Thomas,  96. 
Martin.  John  A.  (Governor),  on  Prohibition  in  Kansas, 

510.  .5.39. 
Martindale,  William,  79  (note). 
Marty  n,  Carlos,  Article  by,  625-6. 
Martyrs  of  the  Prohibition  cause,  186-7,  301-2. ' 
Maryland: 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  383,  384. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  309-10. 

—  Prohibition  party.  Vote  of  in,  .566,  .573,  577. 

—  Tobacco  to  minors.  Legislation  against,  630. 
Masai,  Prohibition  among  the,  13. 
Massachusetts: 

—  Constitutional  Prohibition  movementin,  102, 103,117-19. 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  38.3,  384. 

—  High  License  and  Prohibition  in,  Results  of,  212-13, 

527-33. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  310-14. 

—  Local  Option  votes  in,  396-8,  400. 

—  Pauperism  in,  due  to  drink,  46.5-6. 

—  Prohibition-party,  Vote  of  in,  562,  563,  564,  566,568,  573, 

577. 

—  Tobacco  to  minors.  Legislation  against,  630. 
Materials  used  in  the  manufacture  of  distilled  and  malt 

liquors,  172-3. 
Mathew,  Theobald,  Biographical  sketch  of,  417-20. 
Mauritius,  13. 

Maynard,  L.  A.,  on  Prohibition  in  Kansas,  540. 
Meaden,  J.  W.,  Contribution  from,  37-8. 
Medford  rum,  617. 
Medical  Testimony,  20-6,  83, 148,  179-80,  235-6,  367,  407-9, 

420-5,  435-7,  482-3,  486,  583-4,  608-9,  632  (note),  648. 
Medicinal  purposes: 

—  Ancient  medical  writers.  Views  of,  229. 

—  Legislation  concerning  (see  the  digests  of  State  laws, 

275-360). 

—  Pure  "-Icohol  should  be  used  in  preference  to  alcoholic 

liquors,  19  (note). 

—  Quantity  of  spirits  used  for,  615  (note). 
Medicine,  Use  of  liquor  as  a,  420-5. 
M^doc  wines,  647,  649. 

Melytic  alcohol,  20. 
Mennonites.  425. 

Merrill,  Selah  (Rev.  Dr.),  Article  by,  461-2. 
iMerson,  J.  D.,  37  (note). 
Mescal,  a  Mexican  intoxicant,  429. 
Metcalf,  Henry  B.,  vi. 
Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  61,  215,  425-8. 
Methodist  Protestant  Church,  428. 

Method^  of  the  aiiti-Pvohihitionists.  104-28,  121-3,  186  7, 
200-1,  2CS-;J,  368,  371-89,  443-50,  488-90. 


Methyl  alcohol,  18,  20,616. 

Metropolitan  Police  laws:  Kansas,  301;  Massachusetts, 

314. 
Mexico,  428-30. 
Michigan: 

—  Anti-License  article  of  the  Constitution,  98-9. 

—  Constitutional  Prohibition  movement  in,  101,  102,  10-3, 

111-12. 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  383,  384. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  314-16. 

—  Local  Option  victories  in,  399. 

—  Prohibition  party,  Vote  of  in,  562,  564,  566,  568,  573, 

577. 

—  Tobacco  to  minor?.  Legislation  against.  630. 

Miller,  George  L.,  Letter  of  on  the  anti-Prohibition 
campaign  in  Nebraska.  449. 

Miller,  Walter  (Prof.),  Article  by,  187-91. 

Mill-feed,  Quantity  of  used  in  the  manufacture  of  spirit- 
uous liquors,  172. 

Mills,  Roger  Q,.  (Congressman),  113. 

Milwaukee  (Wis.),  Arrests  in,  211. 

Mind,  Effects  of  alcohol  on  the,  22-3,  25. 

Minneapolis  (Minn.),  High  License  in,  210,  521. 

Minnesota: 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  383,  384. 

—  High  License,  Results  of  in,  519,  521. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  316-18. 

—  Prohibition  party.  Vote  of  in,  564,  566,  568,  573,  577. 

—  Tobacco  to  minors.  Legislation  against,  6.30. 
Minor  (Governor),  on  Prohibition  in  Connecticut,  526. 
Minors: 

—  Sale  of  liquor  to.  Provisions  against  (see  the  digests  of 

State  laws,  275-.360). 

Tobacco  to,  630. 

Mishia,  a  Yucatan  intoxicant,  430. 
Missionaries,  12,  1.3,  17,  75,  78-9,  244. 
Mississippi: 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  383,  3&4. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  318-20. 

—  Prohibition  party.  Vote  of  in,  577. 
Missouri: 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  383,  384. 

—  High  License,  Results  of  in,  212,  518-19. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  .320-1. 

—  Local  Option  votes  in,  399. 

—  Prohibition  party.  Vote  of  in,  566,  573,  577. 
Mitchell,  E.  R.  (Dr.),  on  the  hereditary  effects  of  drink, , 

236. 
Moderation,  430-3. 

—  Longevity,  comparative,  of  moderate  drinkers    and 

abstainers,  404-9. 

Mohammedans,  11,  12,  70,  242,  433-4,  461-2,  469-71,  633. 

Mohler,  M.,  on  Prohibition  in  Kansas,  5.39. 

Molasses,  Quantitjcs  of  used  in  the  manufacture  of  spirit- 
uous liquors,  172. 

Molasses  distilleries,  375. 

Monopolization  of  the  liquor  interests,  374-9. 

Montana : 

—  Brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  383,  384. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  .321-2. 

—  Prohibition  party.  Vote  of  in,  577. 
Moonshine  distilleries,  .376,  .377. 
Moore,  R.  W.  (Prof.),  624  (note). 

Moraka  (Chief),  Prohibitory  decree  of,  14-15. 
Moral  suasion,  4.34  5. 

—  Gough,  John  B.,  on,  193-4. 

—  Greeley,  Horace,  on,  199. 

Morals,  Everything  prejudicial  to  may  be  removed,  90. 
Moravian  Church,  435. 

Moreau  (N.  Y.),  Temperance  Society  at,  31,  82. 
Morel,  H.  (Dr.),  on  the  effects  of  alcohol,  235-6. 
Morgan,  Tullie,  Article  by,  119-24. 


Index.] 


664 


[Index, 


Morgan,  Thomas  J.,  Article  by,  345-6. 

Morocco,  12. 

Morrill,  Lot  M.  (Senator),  on  Prohibition  in  Maine,  503. 

Morse,  S.  A.  (Rev.),  vi. 

Mortality  from  drink,  435-7. 

Morton,  Levi  P.  (Vice-President),  644. 

Moselle  wines,  19,  647,  649. 

Moshesh  (Chief),  Prohibitory  decree  of,  14. 

Mott,  Lucretia,  Biographical  sketch  of,  437-8. 

Mugler  case,  91  (note),  92-4. 

Mulhall,  Statistics  from,  12,  19,  .39,  42,  134, 184. 

Murray,  William,  on  pauperism  and  drink,  466-7. 

Muscatel  wines,  647,  649. 

Must  of  grapes,  646. 

Narcomania,  438-9. 
Narcotics,  4.38-9. 
Natal,  14. 
National  Conventions: 

—  Democratic,  149,  585. 

—  Prohibition  party,  561-2,  063-4,  565-6,  567-8,  569,  570-2, 

575-6. 

—  Republican,  586,  590,  594. 

—  Temperance,  631. 
National  Government,  635-46. 
National  Prohibition,  439-42. 
National  Prohibition  Bureau,  574. 

National  Protective  Association,  103,  114,  116,  119,  121, 

381-2,  387-8,  446. 
National  Befoiiner,  The,  573. 
National  Temperance  Advocate,  The,  442. 
National  Temperance  League  (England),  197,  442. 
National  Temperance  Society,  442-3. 
Native  races.  The  liquor  traffic  with,  13-17,  38,  497,  498 

(note),  643. 
Natural  liberty,  471-2. 
Navy,  Rejjulationsfor  the,  642-3. 
Nazaritea,  443. 
Nebraska : 

—  Constitutional  Prohibition  movement  in,  89.  443-50. 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in.  383,  384. 

—  Hi'ih  License,  Results  of  in,  212,  219,  518-21,  548-50. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  322  3. 

—  Prohibition  party.  Vote  of  in,  564,  566.  5T3,  577. 

—  Tobacco  to  minors.  Legislation  against,  630. 
Negroes,  450-1. 

—  Legislation  concerning   sales    of   liquor  to    (before 

emancipation),  275,  276,  278,  287,  289,  290,  302,  304, 
318,  320,  326.  331,  345,  346,  347,  .3.^4. 

—  Prohibition,  Happy  results  of  among,  557-8. 
Nelson,  Francis  G.  P.,  Statistical  tables  prepared  by, 

404-5. 
Netherlands  (see  "  Holland  '"). 
Neutral  spirits,  615,  616. 
Nevada : 

—  Brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  .383,  .384. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in.  ;;23  4. 

—  Proliibition  party,  Vote  of  in,  .577. 

—  Tobacco  to  minors,  Legislation  against,  630. 

New  Bedford  (Mass.),  Prohibition  and  High  License  in, 

532. 
New  Brunswick,  64,  fi6. 
Newburyport  (Mass.i,  High  License  in,  531. 
New  England  rum,  617. 

—  for  tlie  heathen,  IP,  17,  240-1. 
New  Era,  The,  573. 

New  Hampshire : 

—  Constitutional  Prohibition  movement  in,  102,  103, 117. 

—  "  Federal  peimits  "  in,  .383,  384,  524. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  .324-(i. 

—  Prohibition  party,  Vote  of  in,  562,  563,  564,  566,  568, 

673,  577. 


—  Prohibition,  Results  of  in,  524. 

—  Tobacco  to  minors,  Legislation  against,  630. 
New  Jersey : 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  383,  384. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  326-7. 

—  Proliibition  party.  Vote  of  in,  566,  568,  573,  577. 

—  Tobacco  to  minors.  Legislation  against,  630. 
New  Mexico: 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  383,  384. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  327-8. 
New  South  Wales,  38. 

New  York : 

—  Constitutional  Prohibition  idea  originated  in,  99. 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  383,  384. 

—  Hop-yield  of,  234. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  328-31. 

—  Local  Option  votes  in,  399. 

—  Opium  proliibition  in,  460. 

—  Prohibition  in,  .530,  562-3  (note). 

—  Prohibition  party,  Vote  of  in,  562,   563,  564,  566,  568, 

573,  577. 

—  Tobacco  to  minors.  Legislation  against,  630. 
New  York  City : 

—  Arrests  in,  211. 

—  Pauperism  in,  due  to  drink,  468. 

—  Rum  power,  The,  in,  488-9. 

—  Saloons  of,  owned  by  the  brewers,  .379. 

—  Sunday  law.  Enforcement  of  the,  in,  537. 
N.w  Zealand.  38. 

Neics,  The  Chicago,  216. 

Nicholas,  Emperor  (Rus^^ia),  40,  003. 

Noble,  William,  57. 

Nolan,  Philip  A.,  Article  by,  68. 

No-License  (see  "  Local  Option  "). 

Non-Partisan  campaigns,  104-28,  443-50. 

Non-Partisan   Woman's  Christian   Temperance   Union, 

652. 
Non-Partisanship,  451-4. 
Northampton  (Mass.),  High  License  in,  531. 
North  Carolina: 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  38-3,  384. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  .331-2. 

—  Prohibition  party.  Vote  of  in,  573,  .57". 
North  Dakota: 

—  Constitutional  Prohibition  movement  in,  102,  126-7. 

—  Prohibition  in,  a33-3.  523. 

—  Tobacco  to  minors.  Legislation  against,  6.30. 
North  Sea,  Prohibition  of  spirits  in,  497. 
>iorway,  454-6. 

—  International  regulations,  Action    of    regarding,  498 

(note). 
Norwegians  (in  America),  181. 
Nott,  Eliphalet  (Rev.  Dr.),  456-8. 
Nova  Scotia,  64,  66. 
Noyau,  a  liqueur,  618. 
Nuisance  acts,  248-51  ;  Iowa,  298  ;  Kansas,  300,  301  ;  New 

Hampshire,    325-6 ;     North     Dakota,    333 ;    South 

Dakota,  613  ;  Vermont,  353. 
Numerical  strength  of  the  rum  power,  382-5. 
Nutrition: 

—  Alcohol  possesses  no  elements  of,  25,  179-80. 

—  Effects  of  alcohol  on,  22. 

Oats,  Quantity  of  used  in  the  manufacture  of  spirituous 

liquors,  172. 
Octroi  duties  (France),  185. 
O'Donnell,  John,  Article  by,  467-9  ;  see  also  vi. 
Oglethorpe,  Prohibitory  law  of,  against  spirits,  347,  288-9. 
Ohio: 

—  Anti-License  article  of  the  Constitution,  98-9. 

—  Constitutional  Prohibition  movement  in,   100-1,   102, 

106-8. 


Index.] 


G65 


[Index 


—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liqnor-dealers  in,  383,  384. 

—  Farmers  of.  Resolutions  by,  171. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  333-7. 

—  Prohibition  party.  Vote  of  in,  562,  563,  564,  566,  568, 

573,  577. 

—  Tobacco  to  minors.  Legislation  against,  630. 
~  Woman's  Crusade  in,  14:^-5. 

Oklahoma  : 

—  Attempted  suspension  of  Prohibition  in,  641  (note). 

—  Prohibition,  Results  of  in,  524-5. 

Olin,  John  M.,  Suffrage  plank  oilered  by,  576  (note). 

Omaha  (Neb.),  High  License  in,  210,212,  217. 

O'Malley  case,  92. 

Ontario,  65,  66. 

Opium,  458-61  ;.in  China,  75-9  ;  India,  244-5  ;  Persia,  471. 

—  Recommended  by  Dr.  Rush,  602-3. 
Oregon : 

—  Constitutional   Prohibition  movement  in,  101-2,   103, 

115-16. 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  383,  384. 

—  Hop  culture  in,  234. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  3.37-8. 

—  Opium  prohibition  in,  460. 

"  Original  Package  "  decision,  647. 

—  Effects  of,  512,  517-18. 

Oswald,  Felix  L.  (Dr.),  Articles  by,  38,  68-70,  82-3,  141-3, 
147-8.  183-4.  235-6,  420-1,  485-7,  490-3,  580-1,  583-4, 
613-14,  620-1. 

Out-Still  system  (India),  242. 

Owen,  Isambard  (Dr.),  on  the  comparative  longevity  of 
abstainers  and  drinkers,  407. 

Owen  Sunday  law  (Ohio),  268-9. 

Pacific  Islands,  The  liquor  traffic  with  the,  643. 
Packard,  Samuel  W.,  Article  by,  85-6. 
Palestine,  461-2. 

Palmer,  Henry  W.,  on  the  defeat  of  Prohibition  in  Penn- 
sylvania, 122-3. 
Paraguay,  613. 

Paralyzing  effects  of  alcohol,  23,24,  25. 
Paresis,  caused  by  alcohol,  21. 
Parker,  B.  F.,  Article  by,  -'41-2. 
Parkes,  E.  A.  (Dr.) : 

—  Medical  declaration  drawn  up  by,  423-4. 

—  on  the  chemical  constituents  of  beer,  414. 

the  effects  of  alcohol,  482,  486. 

Parties : 

—  Democratic,  148-53. 

—  Prohibition,  559-80. 

—  Republican,  585-95. 
Passover  wine,  462-5. 

Pauperism  and  drink,  465-7;  see  also  139,  153, 189  90,259. 

—  -  Physicians,  En^^lish,  on,  423. 

—  Prohibitory  laws.  Effects  of.  .504,  508-9, 514-1.5,  531,  535. 

—  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  on,  93,  473. 
Paxton,  Andrew,  267. 

Pearson,  John  (Rev.),  on  law  defiance  in  Cincinnati, 

268-9. 
Penalties,  467-9. 
Peninsular  Herald,  The,  573. 
Penitentiary  statistics,  505,  509,  516,  520-1,  528. 
Penn,  William,  246. 
Pennsylvania : 

—  Constitutional  Prohibition  movement  in,  89,  102,  103, 

119-24. 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  .380,  .334. 

—  High  License,  Results  of  iu.  213-14,  269. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  .3.38-41. 

—  Prohibition  party,  Vote  of  in,  563,  564,  566,  568,  573, 

577. 

—  Tobacco  to  minors,  Legislation  aL-ainst,  630. 
Pepper,  George  W.(Rev.),  Father  Mathew's  letter  to,  420. 


Peppermint  liqueur,  618. 

Per     capita     consumption     (see     "Consumption     of 

Liquors  "). 
Percentages  of  alcohol  in  liqucirs,  19.  616,  647. 
Perham  (Governor),  on  Prohibition  in  Maine,  504,  538. 
Perry,  19,  649. 
Persia,  469-71. 

—  International  regulations.  Action  of  regarding,  498 

(note). 

—  (See  also  '•  Historical  and  Philosophical.") 
Personal  Liberty,  471-4. 

Peru,  613. 

Peters.  John  A.  (Congressman),  on  Prohibition  in  Maine, 

503. 
Petitions.  474-7. 
Pharmacopoeia,  The  United  States,  on  the  dangers  of 

wines,  648. 
Philadelphia  (Pa),  High  License  in,  211,  21.3-14,  218. 
Phillip^  Wendell : 

—  Biographical  sketch  of,  477-8. 

on  the  political  power  of  the  liquor  traffic,  488-9. 

Phtisis  from  alcohol,  25. 

Phylloxera,  478-82,  493  (note). 

Physical  training,  482-3. 

Physicians  (see  '•  Medical  Testimony  "). 

—  Atlanta,     Testimony    concerning    Prohibition     and 

license  in.  556. 

—  Prescriptions  of  alcohol  by,  159,  420-.5.    (See  also  the 

digests  of  State  laws,  275  360.) 

Physiological  effects  of  drink,  20-6.  (See  also  "  Medical 
Testimony.") 

Pickler,  J.  A.  (Congressman),  on  Prohibition  in  Okla- 
homa, 52.5. 

Pierce,  Edwin  C  469. 

Pierce,  Franklin  (President),  147. 

Pierpont,  John  (Rev.  Dr.),  Biographical  sketch  of, 
4H3— 4. 

Pioneer,  The,  ,573. 

Pioneer  Piess,  The  St.  Paul,  594. 

Pike,  Frederic  A.,  vi. 

Piper  Hi  idsick,  how  imitated,  8. 

Pitman,  Robert  C.  (Judge),  iv,  v. 

—  Candidacy  of,  56;i,  566. 

—  on  idiocy,  2.35. 
pauperism,  465-6. 

the    results    of    Prohibition    in   Massachusetts, 

528  9. 
Pittsburgh  (Pa.).  High  License  in,  217-18,  270. 
Plain  spirit,  616. 
Plastering  of  wines,  1.3.3,  647. 
Platforms : 

—  Democratic,  149,  152,  585-6. 

—  Prohibition  party,  562,  563-4,  565-6,  567-8,  560,  570-2, 

575-6. 

—  Republican.  .586,  590,  594. 
Plato,  220-1,  229-30. 
Plebiscit<'S  in  Scotland,  608. 
Pledge.  434-5. 

—  of  the  Bands  of  Hope,  40 :  R.  Bolton,  484  5 ;   Cadets 

of  Temperance,  60 ;  Catholic  Total  Abstinence 
Union,  68  ;  Commercial  Temperance  League,  85  ; 
Good  Templars,  241 ;  Greenock  Society,  607  ;  Knights 
of  Temperance,  264  ;  Joseph  Livesey,  .389 ;  Father 
Mathew,  417 ;  Moreau  Society,  82;  Washingtonians, 
649;  Woman's  Christian  Temperance  Union,  6.51. 

Plenary  Council  decrees,  597-8. 

Pliny,  49,  54,  41.3. 

Plumb,  P.  B.  (Senator),  on  Prohibition  in  Kansas,  510 

Plumley,  Frank,  on  Prohibition  in  Vermont,  523. 

'•  Poisoners-general,"  650. 

Poisons,  48.5-7. 

—  Used  iu  adulterating  (see  "  Adulteration  "). 


Index.] 


66G 


[Index. 


Poles  (in  America),  181. 

Police,  Cost  of  supporting  the,  54H-7. 

Polic;  Power  of  the  States,  93-4. 

Police  returns  (see  "  Arrests  and  Commitments"). 

Policy  of  the  liquor  traffic,  387-9.    (See  also  "  Methods 

of  tlie  aiiti-Prohibitioiiists") 
Political  corruption.  487-90.     See  also  107-8,  110,  111-13, 

11.5,  116,  120-3,  126,  217,  .381-2,  445-7,  448-9,  501,  572. 
Polk,  James  K.  (President),  147. 
Pond  law  (Ohio),  107,  .3:^5. 
Pope.  The,  46,  68,  598-9. 
Poiiofl",  Peter,  603  (note). 
Popular  fallacies,  490-3. 
Population,  Increase  of,  how  affected  by  Prohibition, 

551-4. 
Port,  19,  494,  647,  649. 

—  How  imitated,  8. 
Porter,  19,  414. 

Portland  (Me.),  Prohioition  in,  505-6. 
Portugal,  493-4. 

—  Consumption  of  liquors  in,  134. 

—  International    regulations,  Action  of  regardinfif,  498 

(note). 

—  Phylloxera,  ravages  of  the  in,  481. 
Potato  spirits,  :.'0,  614. 

Potheen,  618. 

Pottinger,  Sir  Henry.  76. 

Poverty,  Relations  of  drink  to  (see  '■  Pauperism  "). 

Powderly,  Terence  V.,  on  the  relations  of  labor  and 

drink,  2(15-6  (note). 
Powell,  A.  M.,  634  (note). 
Prentice,  G.  H.  (Rev.),  214. 
Presbyterian  Church.  61,  494-5. 

—  Deliverance  in  Nebraska  on  High  License,  215. 
Presidential  and    Vice-Presidential    candidates  of   the 

Prohibition  party,  Biographical  sketches  of,  56-7, 
58-9,  146,  1.58-9,  176-7,  603,  605,  610,  630,  626. 

Presidential  declaration,  147. 

Press,  The  hostility  of  the,  28,  104,  111,  113,  114,  115,  116, 
117,  118-19,  121-3,  128,  446-7. 

Preston,  The  seven  men  of.  389. 

Price,  J.  C.  (Rev.  Dr.),  Article  by,  450-1. 

Prince  Edward  Island,  64,  66. 

Prison  officials,  Testimonies  from,  142,  6.32  (note). 

Probate  Judges  of  Kan -as.  Testimony  from,  507-9. 

Production  of  liquors,  128-35. 

Profits  of  the  brewers,  374. 

Prohibition,  International  aspects  of,  496-9. 

Prohibition,  National,  439-42. 

Prohibition  party,  5.5C-80. 

—  and  the  Anti-Saloon  Republicans,  29. 
the  Abolition  party,  coTipared,  30-3. 

Woniau    Suffrage,  16:1 4,  166,   167,    564,  565,  568- 

,569,  .571,  576. 
Woman's  Christian  Temperance  Union,  652. 

—  Constitutional  Prohibiticm  contests.  Influence  of  in, 

11.5.  116,  118,  120,  127,  441,  445. 

—  Phillips,  Wendell,  on  the  necessity  of,  477. 

—  Presidential     and   Vice-Presidential    candidates    of. 

Biographical  sketches  of,  56-7,  58-9,  146,  158-9, 176-7, 
603,  605,  610,  620,  626. 

—  Ross,  William,  Resolution  of,  600-1. 
Prohibition  party  (Australia),  37. 
Prohibition  party  (Canada),  66. 
Prohibition  party  (England),  196. 
Prohibition,  Principle  of,  495-9,  618-20. 

—  Advocacy  of,  by  Gen.  James  Applcton,  34  ;  Dr.  Albert 

Barnes,  43;  Lyman  Beecher,  44-5  ;  business  men, 
447 ;  W.  E.  Chauning,  D.D.,  72  ;  Lord  Chesterfield, 
617  (note)  ;  J.  W.  Chickering,  D.D.,  72 ;  W.  E. 
Dodge,  15T  ;  educators,  104,  448;  farmers,  104,  170-1, 
448 ;  John  B.  Gough,  193-4  ;   Horace  Greeley,  198- 


200  :  Thomas  Guthrie,  D.D.,  201  ;  Heman  Hum- 
phrey, D.D.,  iSi;  Labor  leaders,  123,  265  6,447-8; 
Abraham  Lincoln,  .368,  .369;  Horace  Mann,  415-16; 
Father  Mathew,  420;  Dr.  Eliphalet  Nott,  458  ;  Sen- 
ator Reagan.  112-13  ;  Dr.  Francis  Wayland,  650. 

—  Democratic  party.  The,  and,  148-.53. 
--  Republican  party.  The,  and,  587-95. 

—  Upheld  by  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States, 

90-4,  473. 

—  Votes  on,  99,  100-28,  396-400. 

—  (See  also  the  various  religious  denominations.) 
Prohibition,  rteasons  against,  26-7 
Prohibition,  Results  of,  499  .559. 

—  Opium  consumption  not  increased  under  Prohibitory 

laws,  461. 
Prohibitory  laws,  general  (includinir  measures  against 
spirits  only,  and  other   rude  acts,  but  not  Local 
Option  statutes) : 

—  United  States: 

Federal:  Alaska,  277  ;  Indians,  295,  641-2;  Okla- 
homa, 3.37  ;  Army  and  Navy,  642-;i. 

State  and  Territorial :  Connecticut,  282;  Delaware, 

286:  Georgia  (Oglethorpe's),  288-9;  Illinois,  292; 
Indiana,  294  ;  Iowa,  296-9  ;  Kansas,  299  302  ;  Maine, 
306-9;  Massachusetts,  311,  312;  Michisan,  315; 
Mississippi  (sales  in  quantities  less  than  a  gallon, 
1839),  318;  Nebraska,  .322;  New  Hampshire,  324-6; 
New  York,  329  ;  North  Dakota,  332-3  ;  Ohio  (against 
consiuiiption  on  the  premises),  334-5  ;  Oregon,  3.37  ; 
Rhode  I.-land,  341-2  ;  Sioux  Lands  (Minnesota),  316  ; 
South  Dakota,  613;  Tennessee  (persons  whose 
principal  object  was  the  selling  of  liquor  were  not 
to  be  licensed,  1823).  :M7  ;  Vermont,  351-3. 

Against  distillation  only,  276,  288,  290,  318,  329, 

331,  338,  345.  348,  :554. 

Constitutional,  100-2. 

Federal    regulations.   Interference    of  with  the 


success  of,  2.57. 
Soundness  of,  upheld  by  the  higest  Courts,  90-4. 

—  Other  countries:   Ancient,  73-4  (see  also  "  Historical 

and  Philosophical");  Africa,  13-15,  16,498  (note); 

Mohammedan    countries    (see  "Mohammedans"); 

North  Sea,  497 ;  Norwny.  4.54  :  Samoan  Islands,  497  ; 

Sandwich  Islands,  606-7  ;  Sweden,  623. 
Proof  spirit,  616. 

Property  rights.  The  claim  of,  89-96. 
Propyl ic  alcohol,  18,  1.55. 
Prostitution,  naturally  allied  to  liquor-selling,  361,  372. 

—  Practically  licensed  in  Omaha,  362. 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  81,  .580. 

ovidence  (R.  I.),  Prohibition  and  license  in,  525,  543-4. 
Public  sentiment,  580-1. 
Pugh,  Esther,  vi. 

Pullman  (Ill.t  Prohibition  in,  536. 
Pulque,  a  Mexcan  intoxicant,  428-9. 
"  Pulverize  the  rum  power  1  "  401. 
Pure  spirits,  616. 

Quakers,  .30,  186,  246. 

Quay,  Matthew  S.,  29,  121,  122. 

Quebec,  64,  66. 

Queen's  Bench,  Decisions  by  the,  94. 

Queensland,  38. 

Quincy  (Mass.),  Prohibition  in,  531. 

Race  troubles,  5,57-8. 

Railroad  companies,  Regulations    of  concerning  the  use 

of  liquor  by  employes,  632  (note). 
Raleigh  (N.  C).  Prohibition  and  High  License  in,  535. 
Ramaba:,  Pundita,  244. 
Ranavalona  (Queen).  13. 
Raster  Resolution,  The,  590-1,  594. 


Index.] 


667 


[Index. 


Ratafia,  a  liqueur,  618. 

Raum,  Green  B.  (Oommissioner),and  the  brewers,  639. 

Reagan,  John  H.  (Senator),  112-13. 

Real  estate  agents,  Testimony  from,  555-6. 

Rechabites.  581. 

Rechabites,  Independent  Order  of,  582. 

—  in  foreign  countries  :  Australasia,  37  ;    England,  197  ; 

Ireland,  259. 

—  Longevity  statistics  of,  404-6. 
Rectification,  583-3. 

Red  Ribbon,  .57.  175. 

Red  wines,  648. 

Reformed  drinkers,  5S3-4. 

Reformed  Episcopal  Church,  584. 

Reformed  Presbyterian  Church,  584-5. 

Reid,  William  (Rev.),  vi. 

Reimestad,  T.  S.  (Prof.),  Article  by,  454-6. 

Religious  denominations,  11,  17,  41-2,  61,  81-2,  96,  145, 

1.54,  160,  169-70,  186,  187,  26.},  410-11,  425-8,  494-5,  580, 

584-5,  597-600,  608,  6.34,  646,  650. 
Rents  paid  by  saloon-keepers,  606. 
Repeals  (notable  instances),  63,  134-6,  588,  589-90,  591. 
Republican  party,  585-95. 

—  Anti-Saloon  movement  in,  27-.30. 

—  Constitutional  Prohibition  contests.  Behavior   of  in, 

104-28,  444-5,  449-50. 

—  Declaration  of  concerning  the  Internal  Revenue,  256. 

—  Foreign-born  voters.  Influence  of  upon,  182. 

—  Intolerance  of,  ,574. 
Resources  or  the  rum  power,  381  -2. 
Restriction,  595-7. 

—  Anti-Prohibition  view  of,  27. 

—  Distinction  between   restriction  and  license   or  tax. 

207-8. 
Retailers,  .371-2,  378-9,  38.3-4. 

—  Legislation  relating  to  (see  "Legislation"). 
Revenue  (Liquor): 

—  Federal,  251-4,  6.38. 

Frauds  of  the  liquor-makers,  375  (note). 

—  Great  Britain,  195;  France,  181;  Germany,  191  ;  India, 

242-3;    Ireland,   258-9;    Jamaica,  260;    Japan,  261; 

Norway,  456  ;  Persia,  470  -1 ;  Russia,  604  ;  Sweden,  624. 
Revenue  (Tobacco),  629. 
Revenue  argument.  The,  121,  122,  215-16,  493-3. 

—  Emperor  of  China,  The,  Noble  words  of,  76. 

—  Grier  (Justice)  on,  90. 

—  Loss  of  revenue  is  more  than  made  good  by  the  advan- 

tages of  Prohibition,  545-51. 

—  Madagascar,  The  Queen  of,  E.xample  of,  13. 
Rhine  wines,  19,  647,  649. 

Rhode  Island  : 

—  Constitutional  Prohibition  in,  101,  102,  103,  109-11. 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  383,  .384. 

—  Hizh  License  and  Prohibition,  Results  of  in,  124-6, 

269,  525-6,  543-4. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  341-4. 

—  Prohibition  party.  Vote  of  in,  566,  568,  573,  577. 
Ribbon  movements,  57. 

Rice,  Helen  G.,  Article  by,  409-10. 
Richardson,  A.  M.  (Rev.),  104  (note). 
Richardson,  B.  W.  (Dr.),  iv. 

—  Article  by,  20-6. 

—  on  alcoholic  epilepsy,  161. 

the  maximum  strength  of  fermented  liquore,  614. 

the  valuelessness  of  alcohol  as  a  food,  179. 

Richmond,  T.  C,  Article  by,  476-7  ;  see  also  vi. 
Riley,  Ashbel  Wells,  Biographical  sketch  of,  597. 
Ritter,  Eli  F.,  6:54  (note). 
Robbins,  Alonzo,  Table  prepared  by,  615. 
Robie  (Governor),  on  Prohibition  in  Maine,  504. 
Rockford  (111.),  High  License  and  Prohibition  in,  210, 212, 
535. 


Roman  Catholic  Church,  .597-600. 

Romans,  The  (see  "  Historical  and  Philosophical  "). 

Roosevelt,  George  W.,  Report  of  on  the  phylloxera,  479. 

Root,  H.  G,,  on  Prohibition  in  Vermont,  523. 

Rosewater,  Edward,  445. 

Ross,  William,  Biographical  sketch  of,  600-1. 

Rough  wines,  648. 

Roumelia,  633. 

Roussillon  wines,  649. 

Rowan  County  (Ky.),  Murders  in,  558. 

Royal  Templars  of  Temperance,  61,  601. 

"  Rub  a-dub  agitation,"  .33. 

Rum,  19,  619. 

—  Exports  of  from  the  United  States  to  Africa,  840-1. 

—  on  the  Congo,  1.5-16.  498  (note). 
Rum  Power,  The,  .384-5,  601. 

Rush,  Benjamin,  Biographical  sketch  of,  601-3. 

—  Inebriate  asylums  advocated  by,  247. 
Russell,  Frank  D.,  Article  by,  582. 

Russell,  John  (Rev.),  Biographical   sketch  of,  603;  see 

also  vi. 
Russia,  603-5. 

—  Consumption  of  liquors  in,  1.34. 

—  International    regulations.   Action  of  regarding,    498 

(note). 

—  Phylloxera,  Ravages  of  the  in,  482. 
Ryder,  Emma  Brainerd,  242  (note),  244. 

Sabine,  Henry,  on  Prohibition  in  Iowa,  542. 

Sack.  649. 

St.  Croix,  1.54. 

St.  John,  John  P.,   Biographical    sketch  of,    605;  see 

also  vi. 
St.  John  campaign,  570-4. 
St.  Louis  (Mo  1,  High  License  in,  210,  212,  217. 
St.  Paul  (Minn.),  High  License  in,  521. 
Sake,  a  Japanese  distilled  drink,  260-2. 
Salem  (Mass.),  Results  of  High  License  in,  210,  531. 
Salisbury,  Lord,  94-5. 
Saloon,  60.5-6. 

"Saloon,  Never  try  to  defend  the,"  122. 
Saltaire  (Eng.),  Prohibition  in,  5:36. 
Samlag  system.  4.55. 
Samoa,  Prohibition  in,  497. 
Samshu,  a  Chinese  distilled  drink,  74-5. 
Samson,  G.  W.,  Articles  by,  50  7,  86-8,  220-32,  462-5.    , 
Sanborn,  B.  T.,  on  Prohibition  in  Mtine,  503. 
Sandwich  Islands,  60b  7. 
Satter'ee,  W.  W.  (Rev.),  vi. 
Saumur  wines,  649. 
Sauterne  wines,  649. 
"Save  the  Boys."  2()7. 
Scandinavians  (in  America),  127,  181. 
Scheltema.  Adema  von  (Kev.  Dr.),  232. 
Schmidt  Bros.,  Case  of ,  92. 
Schnapps,  618. 
Schweigaard  (Prof.),  454. 
Sciences,  manufactures,  arts,  etc..  Spirits  uge(j  in  tlie, 

18,  19,  i;!0-l,  615. 
Scientific  Temperance  Educational  laws.  607. 
Scieptiflc  testimony  (see  "  Medical  Testimony  "). 
Scomp,  H.  A.  (Prof.),  Article  by,  390-6. 
Scotch  whiskey,  19,  42. 
Scotland,  607-8. 
Scott,  George  R.,  573. 
Scott  act  (Canada),  62. 
Scott  Tax  law  (Ohio),  107,  335. 
Scottish  Temperance  League,  608. 
Screen  laws . 

—  Connecticut,  285 ;  Delaware,  287  ;  Massachusetts,  313; 

Michigan.  316;  Nebra.ska,  323;   Rhode  Island,  »14; 
South  Carolina  (1839),  345. 


Index.] 


668 


[Index. 


Sedwardp,  Jeffery,  257. 

Sentiment,  Strength  of.  102. 

Seven  men  of  Preston.  389. 

Seven;,!!  Day  Adveiitists,  COS. 

Sewall.  Thomas  iDr.),  608-9. 

Seymour  Horatio,  149. 

Shaftesbury  Park  (Eng.),  Prohibition  in,  536. 

Sherbet,  .51. 

Sherlin,  Chnrles  A.,  vi. 

Sherman,  John  (Senator),  168,  593. 

Sherry,  19,  614,  647,  (i49. 

—  How  imitated,  8. 
Shu-King.  Book  of,  IH. 
Sibley,  Frank  J.,  vi,  SM  (noteK 

Sickness,  Abstainers  less  liable  to  than  drinkers,  2fi. 
(See  also  "  Longevity.") 

/S'ig'wa;,  The  Delaware.  57.3. 

Slices,  J   R.  (Rev.),  122. 

Sims,  Williain.  on  Prohibition  in  Kansas,  540. 

'•  Sin,  It  can  never  be  legalized  without,"  426. 

Sin  per  se,  609. 

Singleton,  W.  F.,  vi. 

Sioux  City  da.).  Prohibition  in,  517. 

"  Six  Sermons  on  Intemperance,"  44. 

Slavery  Issue,  Aspects  of  the,  30-.3,  585-7. 

Sloan,  William  H.  (Rev.),  Article  by,  428-30. 

Slocumb  law  (Nebraska),  209,  .322-3. 

Smith,  Gerrit,  Biographical  sketch  of,  610. 

Smith,  Green  Clay,  Biographical  sketch  of,  610.  (See 
also  vi,  and  "  Prohibition  Party.") 

Smith,  James  (Rev.),  Discourse  by,  369. 

Smith,  James  H.  (Consul),  Report  of  on  the  phylloxera, 
481-2. 

Smith,  Sidney,  on  the  results  of  legislative  discrimina- 
tions in  favor  of  beer,  366. 

Smith  Sunday  law  (Ohio),  107,  335. 

Smollett,  Tobias  G.,  on  the  effects  of  gin-drinking  in 
England,  273. 

Sobieski,  John,  Article  by,  180-2. 

Social  Purity,  610-11. 

Soldiers  and  Sailors,  Regulations  concerning  the  sale  of 
drink  to,  642-3. 

Solidarity  of  the  rum  power,  370-89. 

Somali,  13. 

Somerville  (Mass.),  Prohibition  in,  531. 

Sons  of  Jonadab,  631. 

Sons  of  Temperance,  611-12. 

—  Death-rate  of,  405. 

—  Lincoln,  Abraham,  a  member  of  the  Order,  36S,  370. 

—  in  Australasia,  37  ;  Canada,  61. 
South  Africa,  14-15. 

South  America,  612-13. 
South  Carolina: 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  383,  384. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  344-6. 

—  Tobacco  to  minors.  Legislation  against,  630. 
South  Dakota : 

—  Constitutional  Prohibition  in,  101,103,  109,  126-7. 

—  Prohibition  in,  523. 

—  Prohibitory  law  of,  613. 

—  Tobacco  to  minors.  Legislation  against,  6.30. 
Southern  problem.  How  affected  by  the  drink  system, 

236-7,  557-8. 
Southwick,  Thomas  S.,  Article  by,  606-7. 
Spain,  613-14. 

—  Consumption  of  liquors  in,  134. 

—  International  regulations.   Action  of    regarding,  498 

(note). 

—  Phylloxera,  ravages  of  the  in,  481. 
Sparkling  wines,  648. 

Sparta,  198,  621-2. 
Special  taxes,  257,  636. 


Spence,  F.  S.,  Article  by,  60-7. 

"  Spies,"  The  liquor-sellers'  denunciations  of,  268. 

Spirit  of  wine,  616. 

Spirit  ration  in  the  army,  642. 

Spirits,  614-18. 

—  Used  in  fortifying  wines,  7-9,  12,  14,  481,  614,  647. 
in  the  arts,  manufactures,  sciences,  etc.,  18,  19 

130-1,  61.5. 
Spirituous  liquors,  614,  616- 18. 

—  Adulterations  of,  10,  616. 

—  Alcoholic  strength  of,  19,  616. 

—  Consumption  of,  128-35. 

—  Discriminations  against  (see  "Light  Liquors;"  also  the 

digests  of  State  laws,  275-360). 

—  Distillation  of,  Process  of,  154-5. 

—  Expenditure  for,  1.36-7. 

—  Eipjrts  of,  240-1. 

—  "Fine"  vhiskey.  Comparative  insignificance  of  the 

producti(  ii  ^f,  376-7. 

—  Imports  of,  238-7. 

—  Manufacturing  interests,   Different  branches  of  the, 

376-8. 

—  Materials  used  in  the  production  of,  172. 

—  Presidential  declaration  against,  147. 

—  Revenue  from  (Federal),  254. 

—  Taxes  on  (Federal),  636. 

Springfield  (Mass.),  High  License  and  Prohibition  in,  210, 
5S2. 

Stalker,  M.,  ~n  Prohibition  in  Iowa,  542. 

Stanley,  Henry  M.,  on  the  fatal  effects  of  strong  drink,  15. 

Starch  of  grain,  converted  into  sugar  by  malting,  58. 

State,  The,  and  Prohibition,  618-20. 

estates,  Powers  of  the,  635,  645-6. 

Statutory  Prohibition  as  distinguished  from  Constitu- 
tional Prohibition,  97-8. 

Stearns,  John  N.,  vi,  99  (note). 

Stevens,  A.  A.,  vi. 

Stevens,  Thomas,  on  drink  in  Russi.'i,  604. 

Stewart,  E.  D.  (Mrs.),  143. 

Stewart,  Gideon  T.,  Biographical  sketch  of,  620.  (See 
also  vi,  and  "  Prohibition  party.") 

Still  wines,  648. 

Stimulants,  620-1. 

Stone  V.  Mississippi,  Case  of,  93,  645. 

Stopping  suddenly,  No  danger  from,  632  (note). 

Stout,  414. 

Stratton,  Joel,  193. 

Strength  of  alcoholic  liquors,  19,  615,  616,  647. 

Strength  of  the  body.  How  affected  by  alcoholic  drink, 
22-4,  491. 

Strong  drink,  621. 

Stuart,  Moses,  Biographical  sketch  of,  621. 

Stubbs,  H.  S.,  Statistics  prepared  by,  505-6. 

Sudder  still  system  (India),  242. 

Suffrage  plank,  564,  565,  568,  569,  571,  576. 

Suicide  and  drink,  45,  365. 

Sumner,  Charles,  31-2,  33. 

Sumptuary  laws,  621-2. 

—  Democratic  party.  The,  and,  149-50. 
Sunday-closing,  622-3. 

—  Beneficial  results  of,  537. 

—  Legislation  concerning  (see  digests  of  State  laws,  275- 

360). 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  644-6.     (See  also 

"Judicial  Decisions.") 
Swartz,  Joel  (Rev.  Dr.),  Article  by,  167-9. 
Sweden,  623-4. 

—  Consumption  of  liquors  in,  133-4. 

—  International   regulations,  Action  of  regarding,  496 

(note). 
Sweet  wines,  648. 
Switzerland,  624. 


Index.] 


GG9 


[Index. 


Switzler,  W.  F.,  Estimates  of,  373. 
Syndicates,  Englisli  brewery,  374-5. 

Tammany  Hall,  152,  489. 
Taney  (Chief  Justice),  on  Prohibition,  645. 
Tao  Kwang  (Emperor),  Noble  words  of,  76. 
"  Taperini?  oflF"  plan,  The,  632  (note). 
Tariff  duties : 

—  on  liquors,  238-9,  637-8. 
tobacco.  629-30. 

Tariff  issue.  Effects  of  upon  the  Prohibition  movement, 
575. 

Tasmania,  .38. 

Tattler,  The,  on  wine  adulterations,  7. 

Tax,  as  distinguished  from  license,  168,  624-.5. 

Taxes  (General),  How  affected  by  Prohibition,  545-51. 

Taxes  (Liquor),  levied  by  the  Federal  Government,  254, 
636-8. 

Tax-rates  under  Prohibition  and  High  License  com- 
pared, 548-50. 

Taylor,  Zachary  (President),  147. 

Teachers  and  Prohiliition,  448. 

Temperance,  Definitions  of,  35,  221 ,  599,  625. 

Temperance  Hospital,  The  London,  424-5. 

Temperature : 

—  of  distillation,  18,  20,  155. 
fermentation,  8,  58. 

the  body,  How  affected  by  alcohol,  23-4. 

Templars  of  Honor  and  Temperance,  625. 
Temple,  Frederick  (Bishop),  442. 
Temptation,  625-fi. 
Teneritfe  wines,  649. 
Tennessee : 

—  Constitutional  Prohibition  movement  in,  101,  102, 

10:^,  114-15. 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  383,  384. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  346  S. 

—  Prohibition  pany,  Vote  of  in,  573,  577. 
Tequila,  a  Mexican  intoxicant,  429. 

Territories,  The,  634,  641.    (See  also  "  Alaska,"  •'  Ariz- 
ona," "  New  Mexico,"  •'  Oklahoma"  and  "  Utah.") 
Texas : 

—  Constitutional    Prohibition   movement  in,  101,  102, 

103,  112-13. 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  383,  384. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  348-50. 

—  Proliibition  party.  Vote  of  in,  573,  577. 
"  Third  "  parties,  Charles  Sumner  on,  32. 
Thomas',  John  Lloyd,  vi,  .386  (note). 

Thomas,  W.  H.,  on  the  dishonesty  of  fruit  distillers,  375 

(note). 
Thompson,  G.  B.,  vi. 

Thompson,  H.  A.  (Rev.  Dr.),  Biographical  sketch  of ,  62;3. 
Thompson  Thomas,  R.,  vi. 
Three-Mile  law  (Arkansas),  278-9. 
Thwing,  E  P.  (Dr.),  Article  by,  626-9. 
Tied  houses,  379. 
Tilden.  Samuel  J.,  149. 
Times,  The  London : 

—  on  the  liquor  traffic  in  the  Pacific  islands.  643  (note). 
the  results  of  legislative  discriminations  in  favor 

of  beer,  366. 
Tinling,  J.  F.  B.,  197  (note). 

Tisdel,  W.  P.,  on  the  liquor  traffic  in  Africa,  16,  17. 
Title-deeds,  Prohibition  by,  536. 
Tobacco,  626-30  ;  see  also  254. 
Toddy : 

—  a  fermented  drink  of  India.  649. 

—  a  spirituous  preparation,  616. 
Tokay  wines,  19,  647,  649. 
To'.stoi,  Leo  (Count),  605, 

Tomlinson,  W.  P.,  on  Prolubition  in  Topeka,  511. 


Topeka  (Kan.),  Prohibition  in,  511. 
Total  abstinence,  630-2. 

—  Bible,   The,    and  (see   ''Bible    and   Drink,"    "Bible 

Wines,"  and  •'  Historical  and  Philosophical  "). 

—  Death-rate    among    abstainers    as    compared    with 

drinkers,  26,  4(M-9. 

—  Enjoined  by  the  great  religions  of  the  East,  47.     (See 

also  "  Historical  and  Philosophical.") 

—  Fundamental    principles    (notable    arguments),  71-2, 

265-6  (note),  368,  457-8,  598-9,  650. 

—  Longevity,  Comparative,  of  abstainers  and  drinkers, 

404-9. 

—  Movement  and  organizations  in  the  United  States,  57, 

60.  68,  «,  96,  161,  203,  241-2,  262-3,  264.  265-6,  409-10, 
416,  419,  582,  601,  611-12,  625,  630-2,  649,  650-2. 

in  other  countries  :  Australasia,  35,  37  ;    Burmah, 

59-60;  Canada,  61;  Denmark,  153;  Germany,  190; 
Great  Britain  and  Ireland,  57,  58,  83,84,  161,  197.  257-9, 
389-90,  417-20,  607-8:  Holland,  232-3;  India.  244  ;  Nor- 
way, 455-6  ;  Persia,  470-1 ;  Sandwich  Islands,  607-8  ; 
Sweden,  624  ;  Switzerland.  624. 

—  Pope  Leo  XIII.  on,  598-9. 

—  Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  Exceptional  attitude  of, 

81. 

—  (See   also    "Medical    Testimony"    and    "  Religioub 

Denominations.") 
Tovey,  A.  E.  J.,  374  (notes). 
Trade,  Effects  of  Prohibition  upon.  537-45. 
Trappistine,  a  liqueur,  618. 
Treating,  633-3. 

Treaty  with  China,  respecting  opium  and  liquors,  79. 
Tribune,  The  Chicago,  362,  593. 

Tribune,  The  New  York,  198-200,  218,  256,  487,  577,  593. 
Tripoli,  12. 
Tuck,   Henry  (Dr.),   on   the   comparative    longevity    of 

abstainers  and  drinkers,  409. 
Tunis,  12. 
Turkey,  633. 

—  International  regulations,    Action  of   regarding,  498 

(note). 
Turner,  C.  C,  122. 
Tyler,  John  (President),  147. 

Ulung,  a  Mexican  intoxicant,  430. 

Unfermented  Wines  (see  "Bible  and  Drink,"    "Bible 

Wines,"    "Communion     Wines"    and    "Passover 

Wines  "). 
Union  Prohibitory  League,  The,  453. 
Union  Signal,  The,  651. 
Unitarians,  634. 
United  Brethren  Church,  634. 

United  Kingdom,  Consumption  of  liquors  in,  131-2. 
United  Kingdom  Alliance,  196,  197. 

—  Father  Mathew's  approval  of  the,  420. 
United  Presbyterian  Church,  634. 

United  States  Brewers'  Association,  10,  92,  111.  113,  114, 
163,  202,  256-7,  372-3,  381,  388,  560.  591,  638-9. 

United  States  Dispensatory,  615  (note). 

United  States  Government  and  the  liquor  traffic,  634-46  ; 
see  also  16,  90,  91-4,  245-6,  251-7,  372-3,  439-42,  475-6, 
497,  498  (note). 

Universalists,  646. 

Uraguay,  613. 

Usquebaugh,  616. 

Utah : 

—  Brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  383,  384. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  350. 

—  Tobacco  to  minors,  Legislation  against,  630. 

Vail,  Lewis.  D.,  214  (note),  267. 

Valentine,  D.  M.  (Justice),  on  Prohibition  in  Kansas, 

539,  551. 


Index.] 


670 


[Index. 


Van  Buren,  Martin  (President),  147. 

Venezuela,  613. 

Vermont: 

—  "  Federal  permits  "  in,  383,  384,  522. 

—  Legislation  (Liquori  in,  350-3. 

—  Prohibition  party,  Vote  of  in,  573,  517. 

—  Prohibition,  Results  of  in.  522  3. 

—  Toliacco  to  minors,  Lesiislatiou  against,  630. 
Vermouth,  a  liqueur,  19,  618. 

Vernon,  Leroy,  M.  (Rev.  Dr,\  2.';9. 

Vest,  George  G.  (Senator).  91  (note),  92. 

"  Vested  Rights,"  90.  91-2,  93,  94.  473. 

"  Vicious  in  principle  and  powerless  as  a  remedy,"  426, 

Victoria,  38. 

Vidal.  A.,  62. 

Villars.  I.  (Rev.  Dr.),  585  (note). 

Vinegar,  18.  174,  175. 

Vinous  fermentation,  174-5. 

Vinous  Liquors,  ti-16-9. 

—  Adulterations  of.  7-9,  132  3,  647,  648. 

—  Alcoholic  strength  of,  19,  647. 

—  Consumption  of,  128-35.  (See  also  the  various  coon- 

tries.) 

—  Expenditure  for.  137, 

—  Exports  of,  2411. 

—  Imports  of,  238  9.  ^ 

—  Materials  used  in  the  manufacture  of,  173. 

—  Not  taxed  by  the  Federal  Government,  630. 

—  Pharmacopoeia,  The  United  States,  on  the  dangers  of, 

648. 

—  Phylloxera,  Ravages  of  the,  Effects  of,  478-82. 
Virginia : 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  383,  384. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  353-5. 

—  Proiiibition  party,  Vote  of  in,  573,  577. 
Viticultural  Commission  (California),  374. 
Vizetelly,  M.,  9  (note). 

Vodka,  a  Russian  Intoxicant,  604. 

Voice,  The,  v,  573. 

Vote: 

—  Constitutional  Prohibition,  100-28,  4.50. 

—  Local  Option,  396  400. 

—  Prohibition  jiarty,  33,  562,  563,  564,  566,  568,  573,  577. 
Voters'  Union,  The,  4.53. 

Wade,  Thomas  (Sir),  on  opium  in  China,  79. 
Wage-workers,  The  diink  trat  c  and,  264-6,  386,  447-8, 

536,  544,  554-7. 
Walker,  Francis  A.,  on  the  unreliability  of  statistics  of 

capital  Invested  in  manufacturing  industries,    380 

(note). 
Walker,  George  (Consul),  on  the  adulteration  of  wines, 

9,647. 
Walruff  case,  91. 
M'alsh  (Archbishop),  259.  ' 
Walworth  (Chancellor),  a3. 
Ward,  Henry,  D.D  ,  Article  by,  96  7;  see  also   vi,  634 

(note). 
Warmth,  Deceptivencss  of  the  increase  in,  caused   by 

alcohol,  22-3,  ^3. 
Washington  (D.  C),  The  liquor  traffic  in,  641. 
Washington  (State  of) : 
~  Brewers  and  liquor  dealers  in.  383,  384. 

—  Constitutional  Prohibition  movement  in,  102,  103, 127. 

—  Hop  culture  in,  234. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  355-6. 

—  Tobacco  to  minors.  Legislation  against,  630. 
Washingtonians,  The,  20'J,  649. 

—  Lincoln,  Abraham,  as  a  i)romoter  of  their  agitation, 

:^68-9. 
Water,  Strong  affinity  of  alcohol  for,  20,  154. 
Watterbon,  Henry,  149. 


Wayland,  Francis.  Biographical  sketch  of,  649-.50. 
Webb,  James  A.  &  Son,  Estimate  by  of  the  quantity  of 

spirits  used  in  the  arts,  etc.,  19. 
Webb,  R.  C,  on  Prohibition  in  Iowa,  542. 
Webb,  W.  C.  (Judge),  on  Prohibition  in  Kansas,  510. 
Webster,  Daniel,  on  the  Anti-Slavery  agitation,  33. 
Welch,  M.  M.,  on  Prohil)ition  in  Atlanta,  544-5. 
Wells,  David  A.,  Report  by  on  the  use  of  spirits  in  the 

arts,  etc.,  1.30-1. 
Wenngren,  C.  A.,  Article  by,  623-4. 

Wescott,  W.  Wynne  (Dr.),  on  mortality  from  drink,  4.36. 
Wesley,  John,  88,  6.50. 
Wesleyan  Methodist  Church,  650. 
West,  Mary  Allen,  vi. 
West  Virginia: 

—  Constitutional    Prohibition    movement   in,    102,    103, 

116-ir. 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  383,  384. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in,  3.56-8. 

—  Prohibition  party.  Vote  of  in,  573,  577. 

Wheat,  Quantity  of  used  in  the  manufacture  of  spirituous 

liquors,  172. 
Wheeler,  E.  J.,  Articles  oy,  609,  618-20;  see  also  iv,  138, 

437,  503-4,  505  (note),  527  (note). 
Whig  party,  30,  32,  33,  585-6. 
Whiskey,  19,  616. 

—  Adulterations  of,  10,  616. 

—  "  Fine,"  Comparative  insignificance  of  the  production 

of,  376-7. 
Whiskey  frauds,  639. 
Whiskey  Power  (see  "  Liquor  Traffic  "). 
Whiskey  Rebellion,  252,  268. 
Whiskey  Trust,  377-8,  449  (note). 
White,  John  F.  (Judge),  123. 
White  Cross,  The,  611. 
White  House,  Wine  in  the,  203-4,  644. 
White  Ribbon,  57,  651. 
White  wines,  8,  12,  648. 
Wholesalers,  383-4,  636.    (See  also  the  digests  of  State 

laws,  275-360.) 
Whyte,  James.  Article  by,  404-6. 
Wieseigren  (Archdeacon),  623. 
Wilberforce  (Canon),  198. 
Wilder,  D.  W.,  on  Prohibition  in  Kansas,  540. 
Wilkinson,  W.  C.  (Prof.),  vi. 
Willard,  Frances  E.: 

—  Article  by.  610-11 ;  see  also  vi,  650  (note). 

—  Plea  of  before  the  Republican  Convention,  594.  9 

—  Suffrage  plank,  Championship  of  by,  576  (note). 
Willey,  Austin,  31. 

Williams,  C.  F.  (Rev.),  on  Prohibition  in  Iowa,  516. 

Williams,  E.  T.  (Rev.),  72  (note). 

Williams,  James  W.,  Article  by,  109-11. 

Williams,  S.  Wells  (Dr.),  72.  77. 

Wilson,  Henry  (Vice-President),  Biographical  sketch  of, 

6.50. 
Wilson,  James  F.  (Senator),  on  Prohibition  in  Iowa,  516. 
Wilson.  Samuel  G.  (Rev.),  Article  by,  469-71. 
Wilson  bill.  The,  646. 
Windom,  William  (Secretary),  28,  644. 
Wine  and  Spirit  Traders'  Society,  640. 
Wine-manufacuirers,    Strength,    capital  invested,    etc. 

(see  "  Liquor  Traffic  "). 
Wines,  19,  646-9.  (See  also  "  Vinous  Liquors.") 
Wines,  Fred.  H.,  Estimates  by,  139. 
Wisconsin : 

—  Distillers,  brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  383,  384. 

—  Legislation  (Liquor)  in.  3')H-60. 

—  Prohibition  party,  Vote  of  in,  564,  .566,  568,  573,  577. 
Witness,  The,  573. 

Woburn  (Mass.),  Prohibition  and  High  License  in,  5.33. 
"  Woe  unto  him  that  giveth  his  neighbor  drink,"  225. 


Index.] 


671 


[Index, 


Wolfe  campaign.  130.  575. 
Woman  Suffrage; 

—  General  principles.  163-7. 

—  Prohibitioa  party,  The.  and.  564,  565.  ,568,  569,  571,  .576. 
Woman's  Christian  Temperance  Union,  650-2. 

—  and  the  Internal  Revenue,  257. 

the  Prohibiiion  party.  569.  572,576  (note),  652. 

—  Juvenile  department  of,  409-10. 

—  Work  of    in   Constitutional   Amendment  campaigns, 

99,  128,  445;  amonr  foreigners,  182;  for  social  purity, 
610-11;   for  scientific  temperance  education,  607. 

—  Foreign  countries:  Australasia.??;  Burmah,  59;  Canada, 

61;    China,  75;  Holland,  232-3;  India,  24);  Sandwich 

Islands,  007. 
Women's  Temperance  Association,  British,  58. 
Wood.  D.  W..  202. 
Woo  1  spirit,  18,  30.  616. 

Woodbrldge,  Mrs   Mary  A.,  106  (note),  107  (note). 
Woodbury.  Charlotte,  F.,  vi,  633  (note). 
Woodruflf,  C.  S.  (Rev.),  vi. 
Woods,  Leonard  (Rev.  Dr.),  630. 


Worcester  (Mass.),  Prohibition  and  High  License  in,  5.32. 

Wort,  .58. 

Wright,  B.  P.,  99,  100,  105  (note). 

Wright,  Carroll  D.,  Statistical  reports  of, 

—  on  divorce,  1.55  6. 

the  percentage  of  crime  due  to  drink,  539  vDote). 

Wright,  Edwin  V.  (Prof.),  vi. 

Wu  Wang.  73. 

Wyatt.  Francis,  10,  172. 

Wyiiehamer  case,  90. 

Wyoming: 

—  Brewers  and  liquor-dealers  in,  383,  384. 

—  L  'gislation  (Liquor)  in,  360. 

Xenophon,  220-1,  228. 

Yeast,  a  product  of  fermentation,  10,  58,  174-5. 
Youn?  Crusaders.  81. 

Young  Men's  Prohibition  Association,  C71. 
Yucatan,  4.30. 

Zanzibar,  14. 


/ 


OF  T. 

iTBE 


\ 


'>~\ 


m 

RETURN       CIRCULATION  DEPARTMENT                        1 
TObbi^       202  Main  Library                                                | 

LOAN  PERIOD  1 
HOME  USE 

2 

1 

4 

5 

1 

m 

ALL  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAYS                  | 

1 -month  loans  may  be  renewed  by  calling  642-3405                      1 

6-month  loans  may  be  recharged  by  bringing  books  to  Circulation  Desk     1 

Renewals  and  recharges  may  be  made  4  days  prior  to  due  date            | 

DUE   AS  STAMPED   BELOW                         | 

a 

"^c.  oiH.    AUG  2  2 

DUE  NRLF 

-^AN2l  1986 

^£CCIRC   JAM  24  ].q 

?p 

ncp  1  A  io<^ 

II  IKI    A   O    '^nnc 

JUN  W  JJ  2005 

1 

ST 

FORM  NO.  DD  6,  40m 

10 '77      UNIVERSITY  OF 
BERKEi 

CALIFORNIA,  BERKELEY      p^; 
.EY,  CA  94720 

YD  01580 


^^,\^?^ii-<i^ 


'  <■  -'  ■..'■"''''"^''"' 


:p 

m 

''  :' 

'm^V' 

m 

f   :■ 

i 

1 

m 

